Intelligent Reasoning

Promoting, advancing and defending Intelligent Design via data, logic and Intelligent Reasoning and exposing the alleged theory of evolution as the nonsense it is. I also educate evotards about ID and the alleged theory of evolution one tard at a time and sometimes in groups

Thursday, November 29, 2012

The NCSE is Totally Clueless

The NCSE has written a blurb about Montana because apparently there is a bill that may have ID taught in their public schools. However the NCSE proves it is run by clueless dolts with the following entry:
As such, the bill would presumably conflict with the decision in the 2005 case Kitzmiller v. Dover, in which requiring the public schools to teach "intelligent design" was held to be unconstitutional.
Exuse me, morons, but that decision pertains to that school district only and has no weight outside of that smal, insignificant school district. It means nothing to Montana. Heck it means nothing to the rest of Pennsylvania. So why are evolutionists so freaking stupid that they do not understand the basic facts about how the Law works? And why don't they realize tat by their own "logic" the teaching of unguided evolution is unconstitutional?

Tuesday, November 27, 2012

DNA and Common Ancestry- The Evo Fraud Exposed

Just when you thought evoTARDs couldn't be as dishonest as they are being exposed as, we expose their lies about DNA evidence and common ancestry.

That's right. Part of the alleged evidence for universal common descent and the sharing of a common ancestor is DNA evidence. This DNA evidence is alleged to be the same as DNA evidence that demonstrates paternity/ maternity. But is it? (No)

The DNA evidence for a common ancestry via universal common descent uses patterns of pseudogenes and ERVs. Paternity/ maternity tests do NOT use those DNA sequences. They use other genetic markers. Evolutionists have been lying to us, as usual.

Both Alan Fox and Nick Matzke were called out on this over on Uncommon Descent and both fled like the cowards they are. That tells us volumes about evos and their dishonesty.

Thursday, November 15, 2012

Kevin R. McCarthy- Still Spewing His Ignorance, and Proud of it

Kevin is at it again. This time he expsoes his ignorance about Creationism and Gene Duplication.

Kevin spews:
For a long time, creationists have insisted that evolution can’t add information to a genome. 
That is incorrect. Creationists have said that blind and undirected chemical processes cannot increase the biological information in an organism. And just copying something does not increase the information. Two copies of the same dictionary does not double the information.

So then Kevin lies:
 In general, they never defined (and stuck with said definition) information.
All one has to do is read Gitt's "In the Beginning- Information" to prove Kevin is a liar. So he makes up another lie:
But, creationists have long been asked “what about duplication?”. To which the creationists have replied, “there’s no evidence”. 
Once again Kevin does not cite the source of his spewage, which should tell you something.

I have a book titled "Not By Chance", by Dr Lee Spetner, a Creationist. It was released in 1997. In it he discusses gene duplication.

Dr Spetner explains that there isn't any justification in calling gene duplication a blind and undirected process. IOW just as I have been telling Kevin for years, and he ignores, both Creation AND ID are OK with evolution. Creationists and IDists say it dioesn't happen by chance.

Kevin sez:
Well, in the case of this lab experiment, the end result was that evolution not only produced genes that were good at producing histidine and tryptophan, it also resulted in bacterial species with multiple genes.
What kind of "evolution" produced them Kevin? Do you have any evidence that unguided evolution didit? No.

So what we have is Kevin's willful ignorance on display, again, as usual. And he really thinks his willful ignorance means something.

Sunday, November 11, 2012

Of Creationism and Hyper-Evolution

EvoTARDs are such a clueless lot. They do not dare to actually try to understand their opponents' positions. That way theuy can just make shit up and believe it. The latest bit of evoTARD comes again from Kevin R. McCarthy who cannot fathom the fact that Creationism requires hyper-evolution in order to get the diversity of life observed from the animals on the Ark.

Earth to Kevin- directed mutations and a globe of open niches. IOW the information was already present and only had to be rearranged per the genetic programming that runs organisms.

So no, Kevin, Creationists do NOT rely on random mutations doing it. Although given that stress increases mutation rates in some organisms, it may have done so with the humans on board the Ark and even the first generations after they got off. Increased targeted mutations designed to bring about rapid diversity.

Also different/ new alleles can occur in every offspring- especially given directed mutations. So a few thousand different alleles is not a problem, especially given the population size.

As for the time frame of 6,000 years, well even Young Earth Creationists say between 6,000-12,000 years.

Friday, November 09, 2012


Taxonomy is our way to classify organisms. Linnean taxonomy is the one used most of teh time. Cladistics is another way to classify organisms.

Linnean taxonomy was invented by a CREATIONIST named Karl von Linne, aka Carolus Linnaeus. He set up the system when he was trying to determine what were the Created Kinds. The system he used he based on a COMMON DESIGN. Yes, that means the observed objective nested hierarchy amongst metazoans is also based on a common design.

The strange part is many people do not realize any of what I just posted. That is because the high priests of evolutionism have done a good job at hiding that fact. Ya see they stole Linne's idea, changed "archetype" to "common ancestor" and used Linne's system as their very own.

So the next time you see some evo spewing nonsense about taxonomy, please let them know the reality behind the system.

Thursday, November 08, 2012

How I Would Change the Presidential Election Process

Another Presidential election has come and gone. This time I couldn't help but notice that President Obama won the electoral college vote by a landslide and the popular vote by a small margin. Other elections we have seen Presidents win the electoral college and lose the popular vote.

I do NOT want to get rid of the electoral college- I understand the value in the United STATES. I also understand the value of "WE THE PEOPLE" and "every vote counts". However some people feel ripped off because they are the minority party in their State and, given the current system, nothing short of a miracle will get their State to vote for their candidate. This is where my solution comes in.

No longer should we have a "winner take all" with respect to any State's delegates. The new system will have State delegates split depending on the popular vote of that State. Any fractions get rounded up in favor of the popular vote winner. The minimum % to get a delegate would be 15%. Meaning if you don't get 15% then you don't get anything.

I think this will get the two voting institutions more in line with each other, meaning the electoral college vote will better reflect the popular vote.

Wednesday, November 07, 2012

"The World Celebrates Obama's Victory"?

The world is celebrating Obama's re-election. Yeah because the world understands that 4 more years of Obama and the US will be a third-world country.

IOW the world is celebrating our demise.

Really, how fucking stupid are we? 4 years ago we elect a President that doesn't have any qualifications for the job, he makes a bad situation worse and we re-elect him. What the fuck are people thinking?

Well now we will get 4 more years of lies, bullshit and excuses. Way to go guys...

Monday, November 05, 2012

Denialist Kevin R. McCarthy- Ignorant of Quote-Mining

Yup Kevin is at is again- meaning he is spewing his ignorance again. This time in a post he titled Denialism, which is strange because Kevin lives in denial, Kevin sez:

Quotemining is a favorite in the creationist and climate denialist camps. Of course, the creationists pretty much invented the concept of science denial, so they have all the tricks. My favorite example of the quotemining comes from this very web site where an ID Proponent was using a document penned by 28 Nobel prize winners to support his claim. Of course, the very next paragraph of that letter contains the phrase that “ID is not science.”
Umm how was what I posted a quote-mine Kevin? You do realize by not making a case that you come off as an ignorant coward.

So let's take a look at what I posted, how it relates to what I left out and if it is a quote-mine:

Logically derived from confirmable evidence, evolution is understood to be the result of an unguided, unplanned process of random variation and natural selection.

That is what I posted to support my claim the the ToE posits blind and undirected processes. The following is what I left out because it has absolutely no bearing on that fact:

As the foundation of modem biology, its indispensable role has been further strengthened by the capacity to study DNA. In contrast, intelligent design is fundamentally unscientific; it cannot be tested as scientific theory because its central conclusion is based on belief in the intervention of a supernatural agent.
Ya see, nothing in what I left out demonstrates I quote-mined anything. Kevin is just an ignorant asshole. Not only that  ID is both testable and falsifiable and does NOT require the intervention of any supernatural agent. In true evoTARD fashion those Nobel laureates are completely ignorant of ID. But that does not mean I quote-mined. And also we can study DNA without the framework of an unguided, unplanned process of random variation and natural selection.

So Kevin's accusation is false and proves that he is a clueless loser.

That said, let's look at Kevin's bullshit:

 Since science says that there are natural processes that allow for the creation of stars, planets, and life, the creationists think that science is trying to destroy God (of whatever flavor) and instead deny that the science is correct.
1- Natural processes cannot create nature

2- There isn't any evidence that blind and undirected processes can produce a living organism from non-living matter- Kevin is lying, again, as usual.

So here we have a pathological liar, Kevin R. McCarthy, continuing to make shit up and actually trying to pass it off as some sort of refutation of something.

Sunday, November 04, 2012

Kevin R. McCarthy- Still Choking on Global Warming

Kevin has a recent post titled Global warming a primer. In the comments Kevin sez:

The best way is to say that global warming (climate change) predicts more extremes of weather rather than just hotter temperatures. Massive droughts in the central plains, massive snow in the NE. More, larger storms. Things like that.

What a dumbass. Let's see the great dust bowl was brought about by a years-long drought in the central plains, ie a MASSIVE drought. That was in the 1930s, Kevin.

Massive snow in the NE? The blizzard of 1978.

More, larger storms? Well we have not seen that either.

IOW Kevin, climate change does not predict the things you say and it shows.

Kevin sez:

 Daily weather is affect by lots of things, but when you start averaging out the temps over the entire Earth for a hundred years, you start to see the warming.
Kevin, some time after 1850 is about the time when the little ice age ended. That means we would expect the Earth to start warming after that. And THAT puts the time-frame right in your window. 

A warm Earth is a GOOD thing, people. And we can end droughts via engineering.

Chicken-little alarmists, like Kevin, are just totally clueless...

Friday, November 02, 2012

Portable Generators

Another big storm has come and gone and again there are many people without power. That has happened to me- ONCE. The first day was spent cleaning up just so I could get out. The next morning I was up early, went to the closest Home Depot and picked up a 5500 watt portable generator. The day after that we had power back- the beauty of a municipal light plant.

When Sandy was coming I made sure it fired up, filled it up with gas and had gas in reserve. I had already wired it into my electric panel. All I have to do is flip two breakers, fire up the generator and plug it in. True, with only 5500 watts I can not run everything in my house. But I can run my boiler, two pellet stoves, my refrigerator, my computer, my lights and TV- we cook with gas.

Got that people? Get a generator.

And if you live near the coast or river, build a sea wall around your property. You know, do things to actually protect your investment.

Just sayin'...

Thursday, November 01, 2012

Rich Hughes Provides the Data that Shows Global Warming has NO Discernable Increase Over the Past 16 Years

Yeah I know he didn't want to and he actually thought he refuted my post but Richie provided the data that supports the claim that global warming has virtually stopped.

What data? The data that says there has been a 0.084+/- 0.152C temperature change. Well THAT = no discernable increase, as I said, AND it could actually be a decrease.

And not only that most temps are taken in urban heat areas which skews the data.

So thanks Richie, for providing the data that supports my claim.