Meaningless, meaningless, all is meaningless... including this blog.

Bill Nye the Science-Only Guy Wednesday, January 15, 2025
Eleven years ago, evolutionary scientist Bill Nye publicly debated creation scientist Ken Ham, which can be viewed below or here. At the time, I was excited about this debate and interested in both sides but, like so many who watched, I was disappointed. However, the primary issue I had with the debate was Bill Nye's hangup about Noah's ark, which he couldn't seem to let go for the 2-1/2 hour time period and, for a relatively brief debate, there were too many topics and too much information to discuss. Bill Nye said during the debate that he found it unsettling that some believe the Bible to be more accurate than natural laws, and he is absolutely right about that — 1 Corinthians 1:20-22 says, "Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified." Add to that the fact that scientists demand observable data and there is no debating what they cannot perceive spiritually. I'd go even further to say that it is a lost cause, as would the scientific community who criticized Bill Nye for even committing to having a debate of this nature and thus giving credence to Creationism. I side with Ken Ham, Creationism, and a young earth viewpoint, which puts me in a small minority. However, this isn't to say that it's wrong — it's not popular, which is why I also believe that it should not be taught in government-funded public schools but should at least garner special mention along with Intelligent Design as a scientific counter-argument to the prevailing theory of Evolution, which cannot be proven observationally, historically, experimentally, or otherwise. In the end, Bill criticized Ken about being satisfied with the Bible's answers, such as God simply creating the stars. For Bill, this is not satisfactory, but what is satisfactory is finding out the answers for himself. For Ken's ten-year follow-up, go here. Bill and Ken's second meeting can be viewed here or below, wherein Bill calls Ken's scientists incompetent, his students simplistic, belief in Adam and Eve a betrayal of intellect, ancient people living to be three-hundred years old an impossibility, creation timelines to be miraculous, Creationism to be supernatural and unscientific, and his museum to be a waste of money. Along with that, Bill also implied that viral mutations are a form of short-term evolution. Following are some of the many counterpoints to creationism which Bill Nye mentioned in the debate that I finally got around to considering ten years later because I was busy doing other stuff:

Layered Ice Samples: Bill Nye talked about ice core samples from glaciers and deep ice sheets which reveal hundreds of thousands of layers of snow ice which in turn represent hundreds of thousands of years because the individual layers are formed during each seasonal cycle or roughly one layer per year. Ken Ham didn't really address this until the second meeting over ten years later and challenged the number of layers which can be created annually, insisting that more layers can be created than just one per year based on factors like storms, rain, and other climate-related events or even natural disasters like oceanic volcanoes. Problems with accuracy emerge the farther down the ice core is sampled because of compaction, even when other methods are included like radiometric dating, volcanic ash layer comparisons, ice flow models, and ratios of stable oxygen and hydrogen isotopes.

Old Trees: Bill mentioned trees dated older than 10,000 years based on their ring count. Again, Ken Ham didn't really address this until the second meeting when he challenged the reliability of tree ring dating, pointing out that some can be misleading. This can be true if relying only on the number of rings and isolated trees which cannot be cross-referenced with other samples in the same environment. There are no individual trees considered to be older than 6,000 years. I don't know which trees specifically Bill was referring to, unless he was speaking off-hand about clonal trees.

Variety of Humanoid Skulls: Bill showed a slide picturing a host of different human-like skulls as an example of evolutionary steps in the eventual formation of Homo sapiens. He criticized Ken for not addressing this in the limited time available during the debate and brought it up again during their second encounter, criticizing Ken as well for his museum's depiction of Adam and Eve as Caucasians. The problem with Bill's variety of skulls is that there are relatively few in existence and most are pieced together from small fragments, any one of which may appear non-Homo sapiens due to deformities of various kinds (mutational, intentional, accidental, in-breeding, cross-breeding with other species, etc.). Based on AI-generated calculations of data from Population Reference Bureau (PRB) and other demographic studies, approximately 100 billion people have walked the Earth since 6,000 BC — looking around at all the weirdos in any modern metropolitan city, it's not hard to imagine how many throughout human history had misshapen heads.

Isolated Animals After the Flood: Bill Nye briefly talked about kangaroos in Australia being nowhere else in the world. So, how did they get there after the flood from the Middle East? There is no evidence of a land bridge ever existing between Asia and Australia during this period. Ken's rebuttals were more along the line of the rarity of fossils, but I posit that people may have transported various animals across great distances early in the repopulation of the Earth after the great flood. Sure, there weren't that many people, but then there wouldn't have been that many animals within a given species (or kind) to relocate. Since the first debate, remains have been discovered of more than one kangaroo-like species in Papua New Guinea. Also, the Sahul land bridge connected mainland Australia, Tasmania, New Guinea, and the Aru Islands during the Pleistocene ice age, which ended sometime between 11,000-18,000 years ago.

Biblical "Kinds": Bill argued that there is not enough time for the number of species known today to have originated from the limited kinds of animals and creatures proposed by the Bible and Creationism, particularly those on the ark. Since the flood, countless animals, birds, insects, and fish would have to be appearing daily through cross-breeding based on how many different species variations exist today. But what if there was a speciation explosion somewhere over the past few thousand years? Even so, I claim that there should be exponentially more people today if we started out 50,000 years ago without a great flood, regardless of pandemics, wars, and natural disasters.

Noah's Ark: Bill Nye's biggest hangup was about Noah's ark, which he couldn't seem to let go because he couldn't understand how a primitive man and his small family managed to successfully build such a giant ship and save so many animals, then repopulate the earth after the flood. The answer to that, of course, is recorded synoptically in Genesis 6:14-22. Granted, these are not Ikea furniture instructions written in different languages and may not be considered as scientific evidence. On his visit to Ken's reproduction of the ark, Bill criticized him for not building the ark in the same manner as Noah, since the replica was built with the addition of steel, concrete, bolts, screws, and with the aid of power tools. Not only that, but Ken's version of the ark is not even sea-worthy. To whit, Bill is correct that lack of evidence for the ark outside of the Bible disqualifies it from any kind of scientific testing and verification. Then again, there is plenty of evidence for the great pyramids in Egypt and no one really knows how they were built. Still, it takes more faith to believe that the Earth is over four billion years old. (Bill asked students visiting the creation museum to try to wrap their heads around a billion.)

Universe Expansion: Bill argued that the distance of the stars is the greatest proof that the universe is 13.7 billion years old. This is measured using the parallax stellar method, or measuring the apparent change in a star's position during the year. Farther stars are generally measured by their light spectrum. What has changed since is that astronomers can use the Hubbel space telescope to measure some of the farthest known globular star clusters with trigonometric parallax. However, difficulties with these methods include not knowing the location of where the Big Bang occurred, relying on the Earth as the starting point for all measurements, the unknown density and composition of the universe, whether or not the theory of general relativity needs to be modified to include a cosmological constant, and calculating an accurate expansion rate of the universe. According to Nasa, "The tiny wobbles of these cluster stars were only 1/100th of a pixel on the telescope's camera, measured to a precision of 1/3000th of a pixel. This is the equivalent to measuring the size of an automobile tire on the moon to a precision of one inch." It's hard to argue with the math, but maybe the answers are somewhere beyond the stars.

Big Bang Background Noise: Bill Nye mentioned that astronomers have both predicted and detected residual cosmic background noise from the Big Bang, primarily in the form of microwave radiation, which is supposedly the result of the universe cooling as it expanded over time and which is pervasive throughout the entire celestial sphere. Although Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson won the 1978 Nobel Prize in Physics for this finding, as a simpleton with no scientific background or credentials whatsoever, I still have to ask: Is this background noise instead caused by dark matter (which makes up nearly 85% of all space) or even something else yet unknown in the universe? For those who believe that God may have created all of matter with a Big Bang, this theory is incompatible with Genesis 1, which states that God first created the heavens and the earth, then light, then the sun and the moon, then the stars. So, not only was the universe not all created at once, but the stars were created after the sun, which cosmologists claim is younger than the universe by 9 billion years. Even so, Genesis 1 says all this was created on day one, but the Big Bang theory claims that light was created first, then it took around 380,000 years before stars were formed, and the Earth was formed last approximately 4.6 billion years ago.

Radiometric Dating: Ken Ham pointed out discrepancies with dating rocks and biological matter using radiometric dating techniques, citing an example where a rock and a tree in the exact location underground were dated several thousand years apart. Bill suggested that maybe the rock layer moved into where the tree layer was, to which Ken replied that the tree was actually inside the rock. Ken mentioned a few times that there are several radiometric dating methods, all of which result in different data and therefore different ages for rocks. He also pointed out that the age of the earth (4.5 billion years) is based on meteor dating, not earth rock dating. In their second meeting, Bill accused Ken of believing that radioactive decay rates were somehow different in ancient times, but Ken argued that Bill was relying on a steady, unadulterated decay rate with no accelerators. Bill maintained that rocks are clearly "labeled" with dates (i.e., radioactive particles), but Ken argued that those so-called labels are open to interpretation.

Natural Laws Cannot Change: Bill got the impression from Creationism that natural laws were different in the post-flood world and somehow changed after the flood, yet he doesn't believe there even was a great flood to begin with because it has yet to be proven. However, there is proof of large-scale flooding around this time, as this example shows. There are also great flood accounts from just about every major civilization of that same epoch, although they apparently weren't employing the scientific method in those days so their accounts are just coincidental myths and legends. Prior to the great flood, as Creationist reasoning goes, the global climate was much different than after, having a water vapor canopy overhead which maintained higher levels of oxygen, greater atmospheric pressure, less severe seasonal variance, and larger and more diverse forms of life. This does not imply that the laws of nature were different, just that the laws had different effects.

Accuracy of the English Bible: Bill mentioned over and over that the English Bible has been translated from several other translations going back over three millennia and therefore cannot be reliable as to its original meanings and should not take precedence over natural laws and the observable universe. To most believers whose faith is based on Abrahamic scripture, just because it's old and translated doesn't mean it's outdated and erroneous. For more about this topic, go here, here, and here. Bill is correct in asserting that the Bible is not a book of science, but I do not see where science has disproven the Bible.

Other Religions: Bill pointed out that there are quite a few Christians who do not believe in Creationism, as well as billions of other people who believe in other religions along with science. He kept making two assumptions that science is outside the Bible and that Creationism precludes technology and modern medicine. He also touched on the apparent ubiquity among scientists that they can all agree on the facts and that whatever is proven wrong can easily be disregarded. The short answers to these points are yes, no, and no. First of all, there are billions of people who believe in all kinds of things and I'd dare say most of them don't do enough research and thinking of their own. Second of all, Creationism adheres to science and the scientific methods. Thirdly, scientists of Bill's ilk do not all agree on everything. Scientific theories are continually changing but the Word of God remains the same.

Predictive Science: Bill continually asked Ken if his science can accurately predict anything. The problem with this is that Ken's science is the same science as Bill's science. It's just interpreted differently when it comes to historical matters.

Literal Interpretation of the Bible: Bill also made two erroneous assumptions that Ken picks and chooses which parts of the Bible to interpret literally and that Christianity is judgmental of anyone and everyone who doesn't believe. Not only did Ken not say any of this, but Bill brought these to the table as presumptions. As one who myself takes the Bible literally, I can also say that the Old Testament was directed at a small nation of chosen people whom God used as an example of what He expected of mankind. In the New Testament, He introduces His Son as a means of overcoming our inability to appease God, not just for Jews but for Gentiles, which is good news for everyone. Obviously, Bill Nye rejects Jesus Christ because, to him, the concept of a savior does not fit his notion of science, even if it is logical.

Etcetera: Bill Nye provided more scientific examples that seemed to support old earth theories, including layered fossil types, Grand Canyon rock layers, and isolated examples of fish that may have filled in a fossil gap. Ken Ham attempted to address the Grand Canyon rock layers during round two but was simply dismissed by Bill Nye. This topic alone would require its own debate between opposing teams in each camp. However, Bill Nye's greatest criticism came from those who accused him of damaging his own credibility by even debating with a creationist in the first place and giving it legitimacy. There should be more of these types of debates but there will be even fewer, since most evolutionary scientists don't consider Creationism to be scientific enough, if at all. Bill's accusations against Ken Ham last year included miracles and the supernatural, which excludes Creationism from science. However, remove the miracles and the supernatural from Creationism and there's still enough scientific support for a young earth. For evolution, the supernatural is countless beneficial mutations and the miracle is time.

Bill Nye the Pseudo Science Guy Saturday, January 11, 2025
Last week, outgoing President Joe Biden awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom to, among others, Hillary Clinton, George Soros, Nancy Pelosi, Jens Stoltenberg, Cecile Richards, and Bill Nye the Science Guy. Now, say what you want about these recipients of such a prestigious award, but I am going to say something about Bill Nye. Rather, let the following YouTube videos do the talking, in which he explains on his Netflix series Bill Nye Saves the World how people all have a cacophony of gender traits which makes sexuality a lot more interesting — without any scientific data whatsoever, as well as misusing an abacus. Several YouTube talking heads have had rebuttals to this diatribe, including Steven Crowder, No B.S., E Pluribus Unum, and Prince Asbel, to name a few of the less cringe-worthy. Along with Bill Nye's staunch position on climate change and global warming, I believe this was the award-winning episode that earned him the Medal of Freedom. The first three videos are from his "Social Justice Warrior" stance on the sliding gender scale where he advocates a small sample of chromosomal abnormalities as a healthy benefit to society at large, whereas the last video was his original two-gender stance in his 90's television series, which Netflix edited out. I agree we are allowed to change our positions on any and all subjects, but Bill Nye changed his point of view without any change to scientific fact. He merely changed his interpretation of sexual genetic mutation and mixed in a cacophony of modern social ideals — basically: anything goes. Granted, he is not a scientist; rather, he's a science guy.

Lucian of Antioch Tuesday, January 7, 2025
Today we take a brief look at Lucian of Antioch (A.D. 240-312), who skirted the fence of heresy and got off on a technicality: he was martyred under Emperor Maximinus Daia in Nicomedia after being imprisoned and tortured for nine years due to his unwavering confession of Christ. Although a Hebrew scholar and Christian teacher who helped make spelling corrections to the Greek Septuagint and included comments which Jerome later found helpful in preparing the Vulgate, as a teacher of Arius and Eusebius, he was also accused of being the father of the Arians, who believed that Christ was a creation of God and therefore distinct from God; a belief that was not in line with the Trinity of the Nicene Creed just a couple decades later. Because of this, the Roman Catholic Church distanced themselves from him and rejected his scriptural translations. However, the Orthodox Church accepted him on the grounds that he was as good a saint as any. Not much has survived of his writings, if there were any, but he was recorded as answering his accusers the same statement when asked his name, his profession, his astrological sign, his favorite soccer team, which was smarter - an elephant or a horse, what deity caused genital warts, and whether a tomato was a fruit or a vegetable: "I am a Christian." His battered and broken body was thrown into the sea, where dolphins played with it and tossed it around for thirty days before returning it to land. When asked where to bury his body, he only responded, "I am a Christian." Learn more about Lucian here, here, here, herer, and here.

Kong, King of the Jews Sunday, January 5, 2025
The year is 2025 and many of the Kaiju have converted to Islam. Those which haven't were killed in the Titan Intifada upon the ancient grounds of Har Megiddo, including Mothra and Shimo, who were both raped and beheaded by a mob of Islamic Kaijin. The only remaining infidel is King Kong, who has been circumcised with an atomic plate of flint that has infused him with invincible powers of hutzpah. After Godzilla charges up at a secret Iranian nuclear power plant, the two will meet in Jerusalem to battle it out atop Mount Zion. The whole world will be watching as monster religions clash for one final battle of Abrahamic ideals. The Israelis have a few surprises, including an army of copyright lawyers, which will surely work to Kong's benefit. However, the skies are filled with terror drones and members of ISIS have tunneled to Hollow Earth to kidnap Jia with the intent of raping and beheading her on the Temple Mount unless Kong surrenders. With assistance from U.S. and Chinese scientists, the World Health Organization will deliver a virus that is sure to kill all remaining Titans, however, the residual damage to humans could mean a population reduction on par with the Bubonic Plague of the fourteenth century. Also, the extraterrestrial reptilians from the Alpha Draconis star system have decided that now is the best moment in human history to finally reveal themselves — but is it to help or to hinder mankind? Will the mysterious appearance of a swine Kaiju prove an unexpected ally for the Jews? Will the Al-Aqsa Mosque remain standing? And will Kong use the Muslim call to prayer as an opportunity to attack? Toho Entertainment Ltd., in conjunction with Warner Brothers Pictures and Legendary Pictures, team up to bring you Kong, King of the Jews. Directed by Adam Wingard. Starring Rebecca Hall, Fala Chen, Ben Kingsley, Awkwafina, Jeff Goldblum, and Samuel L. Jackson. Image by Grok. This ad was sponsored by The Goonies 40th Anniversary, in theaters this month.

Lebanese Sid Caesar may be absolutely right about a few things, including application of the antediluvian word "retarded" to postmodern academic progressives.
Book Review: The Parasitic Mind Wednesday, January 1, 2025
Most conservatives on social media have heard of Dr. Gad Saad by now, if not already following him on YouTube or Twitter/X. Over the holidays I finished reading his popular book The Parasitic Mind: How Infectious Ideas Are Killing Common Sense (©2020 Regnery Publishing), from which I concluded that nothing should be above reproach, criticism, scientific analysis, or public scrutiny in a society that covets and upholds freedom of speech. Everything should be able to withstand epistemological examination in order to substantiate its veracity, particularly when weaponized to subjugate the masses and keep people in check. In the end, all I could reasonably criticize the author for and — more directly, the editor — was the use of commas. My biggest complaint about reading the English language these days is punctuation, of which I believe there is a nomological network of cumulative evidence in support of proper punctuation and in most American universities it is called English 101. Beginning sentences with multiple conjunctions notwithstanding (e.g., And yet), a general rule of thumb is to separate independent clauses with a comma, including those which use a coordinating conjunction, which can be rather confusing. Here are but a few examples of possible punctuation abuse from the paperback book:
"My goal is to defend the truth, and today it is the left's pathogenic ideas that are leading us to an abyss..." (page xv) A single, unanticipated comma like this can prevent the reader from continuing on with the rest of the book. I was stuck here for an hour before I was finally able to move on. It might as well have been a semi-colon (S&WII-5). This is a case of Unexpected Punctuation Syndrome (UPS).
"Nasser's Pan-Arabism (unification of the Arab world) had made him a hero in the region, and as often happens in the Middle East, thousands of people took to the streets..." (page 2) The comma could go after the "and" which in turn ties the two segments together. This is a case of Displaced Comma Dysphoria (DCD).
"The militiamen rejected my father's plea, and we proceeded on our precarious journey." (page 6) Yet another example of Unexpected Punctuation Syndrome (UPS). Here, the comma is as useless as a transgender male's penis.
"Regrettably, a devastating injury coupled with other life obstacles ended my soccer career, and so, I dove into my studies." (page 8) The misuse of "and so" is common among the conservative elite, who believe that grammar is secondary to the scientific method.
"Perfumes are hedonic products, and as such they must engage our emotions." (page 24) Should be: "...and, as such, they must..." Similar to "and so," "and as such" is another tool of the conservative elite.
"...they should have the right to do so, and of course their criticisms are themselves open to criticism..." (page 28) This should instead read as "...they should have the right to do so and, of course, their criticisms are themselves open to criticism..." The author has extensively used "and yet" throughout his book, which is not necessarily a literary violation, however, it has now crossed over into "and of course," which will not be tolerated and therefore criticized.
"They are equally worthy winners, and if you think otherwise you are a racist." (page 31) This sentence should read: "They are equally worthy winners and, if you think otherwise, you are a racist." Otherwise, the second part is a dependent clause and not in need of a comma (S&WII-4). Regardless of whether you think otherwise, "They are equally worthy winners and you are a racist." Both statements are intrinsically true according to unhinged progressives.
"They constitute the largest voting bloc of the United Nations, and as such it is perhaps no surprising that Israel..." (page 51) We already touched on "and as such" which we shall now refer to as a faux-conjunction.
"Totalitarian ideologies insist on conformity, and there are many ways to impose a herd mindset on a population." (page 63) Totalitarian ideologies insist on commas and there are many ways to impose a comma as punctuation.
"We must renew our commitment to freedom of speech, and fight against the left's idea pathogens..." (page 68) Freedom of speech is not freedom of comma placement. This is chaos, akin to a WWII Nazi Blitzkrieg in which thousands of explosive commas were dumped upon allied cities. Besides, the second remark is a dependent clause (S&WII-4).
"Cut off one of its heads, and several new ones will grow." (page 76) This is yet another of many examples of an unnecessary comma. By now, this has developed into a fascist habit which we shall refer to as Meine Komma. Adolf Hitler was fond of commas and used them liberally in all of his written speeches and correspondence. He also prohibited the use of commas by Jews, which may be a reason the author over-compensates with them in such places.
"...I self-identify as an octogenarian, and as such I'd be competing against skinny elderly people." (page 80) Faux-conjunction; something akin to Stage 2 of the five-stage Language-Change Index, according to the Columbia Journalism Review.
"The brains of adolescents continue to develop well into their twenties, and as such, to punish an adolescent murderer is "cruel" and hardly progressive." (page 84) Faux-conjunction, unless the second MTP comma is surgically removed.
"Feminism, throughout its history, has ameliorated the lives of innumerable women around the world, but, like any ideology or institution, it seeks to perpetuate itself, and that now requires maintaining a manufactured victimhood narrative." (page 85) This is an example of Death by a Thousand Commas.
"Men are repeatedly lectured about stepping up to serve as allies to women in the workplace, but if they do so, they are engaging in benevolent sexism." (page 86) Technically, this is not incorrect, however, it feels better to say, "but, if they do so," in which the two statements could then be combined without the useless transgender comma.
"...such as the thickness of a specific cortical area, and voilà, male and female brains become indistinguishable." (page 90) According to Word Hippo, this is acceptable, however, "area and, voilà," is preferable because, otherwise, the comma effectively masks the conjunction.
"Our bodies and minds expect exposure to novel and unfolding situations, but when it comes to our critical thinking faculties, we are shutting them down." (page 96) If the ass-end of this sentence is indeed a dependent clause, then it should be: "situations but, when it comes..." Even so, there are two camps of comma ideology here: 1. Independent sentence clauses must make sense when combined without anything enclosed in commas; 2. Commas are commas, and as such, who gives a shit?
"Of course, there are unique situations that require humane and gentle care, and in such instances, a caring and kind professor should consider..." (page 97) When done enough times, the average reader is conditioned to consider this normal, like insisting that a transgender woman can menstruate.
"He was a college dropout, with a short career as a martial artist, and a longer career as a stand-up comedian..." (page 173) The only thing more liberal than Social Justice Warriors is the use of three — count them, three — commas here.
"Granted, most people who self-publish or start a YouTube channel will not find an audience of hundreds of thousands, but in the battle of ideas, every voice counts..." (page 174) If not for Displaced Comma Dysphoria (DCD), this should be: "thousands, but in the battle of ideas every voice counts..." Arguably, it could also be "thousands but, in the battle of ideas, every voice counts..." According to The Punctuation Guide, there must be a compromise, however, the author is unwilling with his liberal use of commas.
"One sting causes unimaginable pain, and yet the inductees must withstand the suffering..." (page 180) "And yet" is redundant. It is obvious the author is padding words to bulk up the word count.
"There isn't a sacred belief that I'm unwilling to critique, and yet whenever I implore people to get engaged..." (page 181) Three whole pages would be eliminated from this book if all instances of "and yet" were reduced to just "yet."
"It is difficult to beat me in the Oppression Olympics, and accordingly I utilize my royal flush of victimhood... This is the proverbial kryptonite against these charlatans of faux-justice, and so unsurprisingly she went away." (page 184) "Oppression Olympics and, accordingly, I utilize... faux-justice and so, unsurprisingly, she went away." Again, it could be either way, but the writer is unwilling to compromise with the reader, and it is the reader who must succumb to the grammatical whims of the author.
With that said, the ideas which were delivered with academic parlance, reinforced with scientific evidence, and seasoned throughout with a pinch of sarcasm were as understandable as common sense; of which there isn't much of these days, unfortunately. During the first seven chapters, I silently accused Dr. Saad of preaching to his own audience, wondering what the point was. However, the final chapter was a call to action for the informed reader to not remain silent when truth and reason are under assault. I couldn't agree more.

TwitterX

[ 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | HTT | E-mail | Gospel of Martha | LWoS | About ]