Secular Student Society at Texas Tech

So on Monday night I attended a meeting of the Secular Student Society at Texas Tech. It was a good meeting and they seem like they are going to be a good group they just need some time to get organized since this is their first year in existence. I wish them the best of luck and will probably try to make meetings when I can, assuming this whole grad school thing doesn't get in the way (which I am sure it will). From the few months I have been here in Lubbock it has quickly come to my attention just how conservative this portion of Texas is so I was surprised at the number of people at the meeting. I just wanted to throw a shout out to them and to link to their website if you happen to be at TTU and want to learn more or just want to see what they are up to. Their website is http://www.secularttu.com/.

This may be a bit excessive

So a few months ago I read a story about 2 school administrators getting in trouble for saying prayer at a school event and today there was a follow-up released on CNN.com saying that these two men might actually get sentenced to jail for this. Story can be found here.

So it turns out that not only is it illegal to say a prayer in public schools because it violates that whole separation of church and state thing but there is also this:

Both parties approved the consent decree put in place January 9 under which district and school officials are 'permanently prohibited from promoting, advancing, endorsing, participating in or causing prayers during or in conjunction with school events,' the ACLU said.

Lay was a party in the initial lawsuit, and his attorney was among those approving the consent decree, according to the organization. In addition, the court required that all district employees receive a copy.

Whoops I guess they forgot about that consent decree when they did this:

But on January 28, 'Lay asked Freeman to offer a prayer of blessing during a school-day luncheon for the dedication of a new field house at Pace High School,' according to court documents.

'Freeman complied with the request and offered the prayer at the event. It appears this was a school-sponsored event attended by students, faculty and community members.'

Now you ask my friends and I can assure you they will tell you I have a bad memory but it really did seem like this consent decree was shoved down their throats.

Their attorney seems to think that just because the audience was adults it was OK to do this:

Attorneys from Liberty Counsel, a conservative legal group helping defend Lay and Freeman, have said that attendees included booster club members and other adults who helped the field house project -- all 'consenting adults.'

Well sure they were but that doesn't mean that they wanted to have your religion forced on them. What if some of the parents were atheists or even Hindus, or any of the many other possible religions?

Look I am OK if you want to pray to yourself before, during, or after a public event but it cannot be sponsored by people who work for the state at a state run institution during a state run event.

Now you might be wondering why I titled this what I did. Well as much as I am for separation of church and state as the next guy I feel that putting them in jail for it would be a little too strong. Now I know what they would be put in jail for is actually not saying the prayer but is actually for contempt. But this is probably their first time in trouble with the law, they have already lost their jobs, I am assuming, and will probably have a hard time finding another teaching job again after this the least that the state could do is end it there. It would, however, be interesting to see how the prison population would react to these two men being put in jail that when asked what for they say, "We said a prayer."

My View on the happenings at Sam Noble Museum

Alright so it has almost been a week since I last posted anything, but since I have to study tonight why not post something tonight right? So I figured I would make a statement on the goings on at Same Noble Museum at the University of Oklahoma. For those of you who don't know go here and you can read both PZ's view on the goings on and he links to the original article.

So after reading the post last night I sent it to a friend who is a grad student there. They told me that they didn't even know about it, till I sent them the article, and that there is a chance most of the scientists probably didn't know about it until recently as well. They also told me that since the museum rents to anyone willing to pay that they don't have any say anyway.

My view is that it is fine with me if the museum rents to anyone to whom the money is right. This is a free country and the museum is part of a state university so they can't dictate who gives a speech there. I am as big a fan of free speech as the next person no matter how wrong it actually is. What I would suggest to all those who live near by and are free thinkers go see this and try to take up all of the question and answer session as much as possible. Be respectful if you go and try to get those in the audience who don't understand evolution or who have never heard the evidence go look up the answers to the questions that the scientists raise. This is the only way to get people to actually think because if you handle it aggressively you will only scare people off like this:

Book Review #2

Alright so I know I promised more book reviews earlier on but life got in the way and now school is starting to again as well but I finally finished another book. This time the book is Dinosaurs of the East Coast by David B. Weishampel and Luther Young, I know I promised to review Your Inner Fish next but this one seems smaller and like it would be a quick read before I started. But anyway before I get to the review here is what the cover says:

"The great dinosaur bone beds of the American and Canadian West are world famous and have yielded spectacular fossil finds. But the eastern United States and maritime Canada, where dinosaurs also roamed in great numbers, have been equally important to the study of these extraordinary creatures.

In Dinosaurs of the East Coast David Weishampel and Luther Young restore East Coast dinosaursto their rightful place on the paleontological map. They describe such dinosaurs as the plant-eating Astrodon johnstoni, similar to the Brachiosaurs, which browsed in the tropical Maryland jungle 100 million years ago. Other East Coast dinosaurs included a distant relative of Astrodon, Anchisaurus polyzelus, which lived in New England some 200 million years ago. And the remains of Hadrosaurus foulkii, a duck-billed dinosaur that lived in New Jersey some 70 million years ago, represented North America's first well-preserved dinosaur skeleton.

The authors also show that dinosaur fossil-hunting has not only had a long history along the Atlantic coast but also is very much alive there today. Some dinosaur fossils have come from the bog iron and clay pits of Maryland and New Jersey, while others have been discovered in the riverbanks of North and South Carolina. Dinosaur footprint sites have been found from central Virginia to the Bay of Fundy in Nova Scotia.

Richly illustrated with more than one hundred photographs and drawings, Dinosaurs of the East Coast combines science, history, and modern reporting to offer a new look at an always fascinating subject.

Alright on to my review.

Overall I thought this book was an interesting read. But I will say this is not beach reading there is a lot of scientific data and information but it is presented in such a way that anyone who has at least some high school education should be able to understand it. If you have studied a lot about dinosaurs you may not be interested in about half the book which deals with the basics of dinosaur types, and evolution, and the controversies currently being studied in dinosaur paleontology. Another problem I had was that the book seems to spend a lot of time focusing on western dinosaurs for a book about eastern dinosaurs.

If it is your first time sitting down and reading about dinosaurs you should find all of the introductory information very helpful. It is also nice that they refer back multiple times to the chapter in which they talk about something for the first time so if you forget what they are talking about you just have to refer back, trust me I had to do this a couple of times. I learned a lot of information that I did not know or did not remember about east coast dinosaurs. I did not know about all of the sites that they talk about and they smartly do not give away specific locations. There are plenty of pictures especially of the people who are currently doing the research.

All in all this is a well written introduction to east coast dinosaurs, with all their sources cited if you want more information, that plays a great homage to the people who have done the research, are doing the research now, or will do it in the future. While this is not a book for everyone, I recommend this to anyone living on the east coast who has any interest in dinosaurs or to anyone who has any interest in dinosaurs in general.

Book Citation:
Weishampel, David B. and Luther Young. Dinosaurs of the East Coast. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996.

Book review page

9/11

I am sure we all remember what happened 8 years ago today. I remember they whole day as if it was only yesterday and for most Americans it changed our view on the world. So on this day we need to remember those whose lives were lost remember them for the way they lived but we also need to remember why they died. We will probably all hear the conspiracy theories about the attacks being planned by the government or whatever. Well Penn and Teller do a good job, and very simple, job of telling exactly why not to believe them (Sorry I would have embedded it but it was disabled for this video):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcrF346sS_I

The rest of this episode is very good as well and I recommend it, along with all of the episodes of Bullshit. So take today to remember what happened so we can prevent it from ever happening again.

Michael Shermer's What I Believe

Michael Shermer the editor of Skeptic magazine, and eSkeptic online magazine, something I recomend that everyone subscribe to (its free), put this out yesterday. It is a good read and while I do not agree with everything he says I agree with enough to send it on. Enjoy

http://skepticblog.org/2009/09/08/science-and-the-power-of-humanity/

Earth Science Video

So this video was made by The American Geological Society (AGI), website here. Anyway someone posted it on YouTube so I figured I would pass it along.

Finally Kickoff

Ok so I would post a preview of the game coming up this weekend but there are so many people who are so much better at it than I am, but before I do we need to win this not just for any chance at making the national title game but also to bring the SEC down a notch.

I am especially fond of Tailgate Fever

I will post a couple of videos to get you pumped up as well:







and finally:



LETS GO HOKIES

30 Reasons Creation is Wrong

I decided I would make it easier to navigate for all those who might come across this blog later so I am going to link all of my posts on the 30 Reasons series so here we go:

The originial article

My Series
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5

Enjoy

30 Reasons Creation is Wrong Part 5

Part 4 can be found here and the article I am refuting can be found here.

We shall finally finish this article in this post.

21. Not only must there be the input from a greater intelligence in order to produce an increase in complexity and/or intelligence, that intelligence must have a preconceived plan of action. No master craftsman would start to build without first having a plan, a blueprint.

Just like a beaver wouldn’t build a dam without first drawing up a plan. For this one I am going to do something that I should have done for all the other ones and ask you to provide me with the evidence showing that there must, “be the input from a greater intelligence in order to produce an increase in complexity.”

22. In order for evolution to be true atoms must form useful molecules such as enzymes, amino acids and proteins by random chance. It is mathematically impossible for these molecules, much less the far larger DNA molecule, to form by random action in nature. It cannot happen!

First off it is not the atoms that have to form into enzymes etc it is the compounds they make up and we already know that atoms form organic compounds after all they have been found even in space. Secondly it is a good thing that the real world does not behave exactly the way that mathematics always predicts. But this is off of the old you have to hit the jackpot x number of times in a row. A better example would be to show a slot machine that you can stop one row at a time. Let’s say you get the first row right then you can begin to focus on the second row then the third etc.

23. Natural selection and survival of the fittest are supposed to be the driving forces of progressive upward evolution. There are no selective benefits for a supposed transitional form. There would be no advantage for a creature to have a half-evolved eye or a half-evolved wing. Indeed, the existence of such structures would be detrimental and serve only to eliminate, not perpetuate, such disfigured organisms from a given population.

Evolution does not have a goal in mind so therefore it is not progressing upward it is just progressing. As far as the eye in concerned I suggest you watch this:



A transitional species is not transitional at the time it is alive it is only when we look back at the fossil record and see what game both before and after that we can get away with calling it transitional. After all you and I are transitions between our parents and our children but we don’t think about ourselves in that light.

24. The presumed intermediates required by evolution do not exist. The missing links are missing because they are missing. Reptilian scales do not/cannot become feathers. These structures originate from different cells within the skin tissue. Reptilian lungs do not/cannot change to become avian (bird) lungs. Air flows in and out of reptilian lungs just as in humans. Bird lungs have a flow through design.

For the start of this point see point 4. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6VS0-40R4C5V-N&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=994126200&_rerunOrigin=scholar.google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=56d80db496bc7cb6adbf8a49a69d647d That should just about cover the reptile to feather controversy.

25. Living organisms are incredibly complex and have specific design features. In order to make this point please consider the following partial list: woodpecker tongue, Bombardier Beetle chemistry, insect metamorphosis, Giraffe heart and arterial system, Gecko feet and human eyes (or human brains for that matter).

Just because these things are incredibly complex is not evidence that they could not have evolved I have already pointed out the evolution of the eye there is no reason that all of the rest of these processes could have evolved through natural means.

26. Single-celled organisms such as bacteria, amoeba and algae have the same degree of complexity within them that multiple-celled organisms have within them. Single-celled organisms have a skeleton, respiratory system, digestion and elimination systems, circulatory system, reproductive system, command and communi- cation [sic] system.

I don’t know what single celled organism he is looking at. Yes they are complex but our cells are more complex than single celled organisms.

27. Life forms are irreducibly complex. To code for RNA production within a cell you must already have whole and complete DNA. To make DNA you must already have whole and complete RNA. In addition, it requires about 70 proteins to fabricate a DNA molecule, but you must have whole and complete DNA to fabricate those proteins.

Life forms are not irreducibly complex see Only a Theory by Dr. Ken Miller. You are right in a human it requires DNA to produce RNA but that is not the way it works in all organisms in fact there are some viruses, like HIV, that use RNA to produce DNA. Search reverse transcriptase.

28. When we see design we know that there is/was a designer. The human mind intrinsically knows the difference between randomness and design. When we see a plastic hair comb, one of the simplest structures ever designed and consisting of only one part, we know that it was designed and made through intelligent effort. A plastic hair comb does not come into existence by random chance.

We see design in nature because that is what was helpful to keep us alive out in the natural world in which we evolved. If some grass moves and you think it is a lion and it is only the wind but you run from it anyway you are still alive. If, however, the grass moves and you think it is the wind and it is a lion so you don’t run then you our lion dinner. The PLASTIC comb is a bad example because the only way that plastic is made only by HUMANS so we know it has a maker since we have seen or can see someone go make one.

If we see three stones sitting on the bottom of a clear stream we know that they got there by the random action of the water current. If we see the same three stones piled up one on top of the other sitting on the bank of that stream we know that an outside intelligence placed them there.

Sure about that?

We see design throughout nature. For good health blood must clot when it gets outside the body, but must not clot inside the body. In addition, it must stop clotting and not continue to clot once exposed to the outside. The molecular motors which turn the cilia of cells look exactly like little electric motors complete with bearings, shaft and housing. Our bodies must make decisions to accept or reject foreign substances or our immunological system does not work. Our bodies must also manufacture effective countermeasures without killing us at the same time.

Because all of these things always work so perfectly. As far as the blood clots and cilia of cells are concerned I again refer you to Only a Theory. Our body instinctively rejects everything you put into it. This is part of why they give people getting another person’s organ anti-rejection drugs. Our bodies easily could kill us while fighting off an infection, this is the reason why people get fevers.

29. Charles Darwin stated that the existence of vestigial and retrogressive organs and structures in the human body were essential proofs of evolution. It has now been determined that there are NO vestigial or retrogressive organs or structures in a human body!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_vestigiality Even if there weren’t any vestigial organs in humans there are plenty in other animals including wings on birds that don’t fly.

30. Evolutionary theories remain incapable of explaining the existence of sex, symbiosis or altruism.

How so? Evolution is perfectly capable of explaining sex, see History Channel’s episode of Evolution on sex. Symbiosis and altruism are even easier and there is plenty of published material on both of these. In general both of these exist because they help the organisms survive better which is after all what evolution is all about.

I reiterate that the solution to evolution is education! If we teach the true facts of science and teach our people to think critically they will never believe the Just So Stories of the evolutionists.

I agree with him that education is the most important thing in this world. However, as I pointed out at the start of this critique as people go further and further through the education program and learn more and more of the true facts that exist they see that evolution is actually true.

Besides, what is so dangerous about the facts that support creation?

Maybe this:

A belief in creation destroys the works of the Devil!

How so?

That is what is so important about it and why evolutionists cling to their faith position concerning it. Evolution is a religion of conveniences. The acceptance of evolution is the only way in which people may mentally justify that there is no God. The acceptance of evolution is the only way in which they may mentally justify that they may lead a sinless life with Jesus Christ. The Bible declares that this is manifest delusion.

I don’t know why people are so insistent in saying that evolution is how people justify atheism. Science is by nature agnostic and since it is constantly changing as we find more evidence it isn’t like it has a set dogma that never changes, unlike something I know of.

Paul used creation to lead the Greek evolutionists of Athens to Christ. (See Acts Chapter 17) Paul wrote a letter to the evolutionists warning of the consequences of evolutionary philosophy. (See Romans Chapter 1:16+) Paul told Timothy to avoid pseudo-science because it caused people to fall away from the faith. (See 1 Timothy 6:20-21) Peter warned us about what evolutionists would say in our time. (See 2 Peter 3:3-7) You and I need to do the same thing in our time. You and I need to:

‘Finally, be strong in the Lord, and in the strength of His might.

Put on the full armor of God, that you may be able to stand firm against the schemes of the devil [Evolutionary Just So Stories]. For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness [those who would teach evolution theory without revocation], against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places.

Therefore, take up the full armor of God, [the whole counsel of God] that you may be able to resist in the evil day [in our time], and having done everything, to stand firm.

Stand firm, therefore, having girded your loins with truth [in part, the knowledge of the truths of creation science], and having put on the breastplate of righteousness, and having shod your feet with the preparation of the gospel of peace; in addition to all, taking up the shield of faith with which you will be able to extinguish all the flaming missiles of the evil one. [If we have our minds right, then false arguments will have no effect on us.]

Take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. [Use the Berean method of proof. If it doesn't line up with God's word, then it is to be rejected.]’

Ok I am not a biblical scholar but pretty much what I get out of all of that no matter how much logic and well reasoned arguments one uses against you reject them because a book that was written 2000 years ago in the Middle East is clearly more accurate.

In conclusion it is pretty obvious that all of these arguments have been raised by other people multiple times in the past but creationists are clearly not listening to the arguments I raised back at him. Evolution is a scientific fact and as a process continues to this day. Most of the arguments against his points are easily found on a quick search on the internet and in this day in age in which the internet is at the hands of an ever growing number of people that there are still people who believe that the Earth is 6000 years old and was created in 7 days.

Thanks for sticking with me and hopefully my next few posts won't be quite as long