Intelligent Design 2.0

God-jeerer
In line with my practice of posting views opposing atheism, I am very happy to have a world renowned expert on Intelligent Design, Iemnaut Amunquay. As I am sure most of you know he is a world renowned Belgian biologist, chemist, philosopher, astrologer, physicist who has focused on Intelligent Design for the past ten plus years. Thank you for taking the time to participate in this interview. Rumor has it that you are coming out with a new book. Is that the case?

Iemnaut Amunquay
First I would like to thank the God-jeering ATHEIST for giving me this opportunity. We disagree on many things, but not the free exchange of ideas. And yes, I am indeed coming out with a new book.

What can we expect from this book? If you can excuse this expression, is the book “evolutionary” or revolutionary?

Obviously I cannot say my book is evolutionary, so it must be revolutionary. In fact, that is the case. I have several breakthrough discoveries that are revealed and discussed at great length in the book.

What are some of the areas where breakthroughs have been made?

As you know I formed the Revelation Institute in 2003 to advance the development of Intelligent Design theories. The progress has progressed much faster the I initially expected. Our theories now more detailed and supported fully by empirical data. The breakthroughs are so far reaching that I have titled my book Intelligent Design 2.0.

Intelligent Design 2.0 sounds interesting, can you tell me more about what is new and how it differs from previous theories.

In my book I lay out evidence for several types or levels of intelligent design. Also discussed are the intelligent designers themselves. This discussion in particular sets my work apart from previous ID work.

This sounds interesting, can you describe further what you mean by levels?

Yes, I would be happy to. Can you imagine “nature” creating a basset from a beagle? It took hundreds of years of careful breading by man to design this dog and other animal breeds. Also, if nature is so good at evolving things, why were plants diseased? Scientist created disease resistant hybrid plants. These development had a low to medium intelligence cause. This level is called Design One. In most Design One cases the intelligent designer is man.

I find this very interesting. What is the next level?

The second level is Design Two and it verifies that there are medium to high level intelligent causes. Geniuses laboring obscurely before recorded time time developed plant, animal or technological breakthroughs. The well documented Ancient Astronaut theory also fits into this level. Examples include the Pyramids, Stonehenge and many UFOs, etc.

And the third level?

Many developments cannot be explained even at Design Two. It is clear that it takes an even higher level of intelligence to design many elements of the cosmos. Even more clearly the design of man requires the highest level of intelligence. Even a monkey could not have evolved from a lower animal. And certainly, with the complexity of man’s brain, man could not have evolved from the monkey. And I don’t know about you, but I did not evolve from a monkey. My new research shows that there is a higher level of intelligent design, Design Three. Design Three explains the cosmos, man and many other complexities of the universe. I am sorry that I must leave now and I can only take one more question.

Thank you, Iemnaut Amunquay, for your time. My final question is, can you characterize the Design Three level designer in the same way you did at levels one and two?

This designer needed omniscience to design the complex elements of the cosmos and certainly humans, so at Design Three there is a Great Omniscient Designer. For more information you will have to buy my buy my book.

US Strikes Back

The US has been struggling with a way to combat Iran’s involvement in Iraq. Now word has come out about the unbelievably effective use of a 50 year old weapon. This weapon has very unique characteristics. It is stealthy, small, inexpensive and lightweight; in fact, the Iranians themselves bring it into the country. Current defenses have been ineffective. Iranian officials have called it “destructive” and a “danger.”

There is one potential downside to this weapon; it targets children. This could lead to extensive world criticism, but surprisingly so far it has not.

It seems when a country is a theocracy, it gives an enemy a much wider arsenal of weapons to employ.

What is this weapon? Yes its Barbie.

Coming Soon – Exclusive Interview

Coming soon to this site will be an exclusive interview with a world renowned Intelligent Design expert. He is about to publish his latest book that he claims will have several breakthrough discoveries.

Watch for updates.

Pope Curious

I don’t think about the Pope often, but with him in the U.S. I am curious and have some questions. Can anyone give me some answers?

1. That Pope outfit is hot; is it available at L.L. Bean?
2. Does the Pope communicate with God on his Blackberry or is he still using the old fashion prayer method?
3. Other than wanting to overpopulate the planet, what is the Pope’s position on global warming?
4. Who would win a healing cage match, Benny Hinn or the Pope?
5. Has the Pope ever had an orgasm?
6. Is the Pope 100% human or is he some percentage god?
7. What ever happened to that meatless Friday thing that was popular when I was younger?
8. Any chance the Pope will be questioned by authorities now that he is on U.S. soil?

Ignorance to Ego

Why do so many believe? Is it fear of death, peer pressure, family pressure, a need to have an explanation of the universe? Originally belief was based on ignorance, today it’s most likely ego.

Lets go back a couple thousand years. Everyone knew that the earth was the center of the universe with all things revolving around it. Man was easily imposing his superiority over all other beings on the planet. The big question remained, how was all this created? There were some believing in idols, multiple gods, etc., but this seemed unnecessarily complicated. Some philosophers of the day speculated on a single God. This seemed to catch on. This God supported the earth being the center of the universe theory. More importantly, this God claimed that man was indeed special and created in His image. This formed the foundation of many religions. Given the ignorance of the day this was easy to sell and fit man’s image of himself. It was a good time to be on earth, at the center of things and related to God.

Then eight or nine hundred years ago, there was a very, very threatening new development, much worse than any devil . . . . . up jumped science. Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler and others proved the world was not the center of the universe. Despite efforts by the church to squelch their view, they prevailed. Then the most threatening scientist of all, Darwin, gave his theory of evolution and worst of all, that man descended from other primates. Then it just kept coming with Einstein, Hubble and many many others.

So, after over a thousand years of being like God and at the center of the universe, science showed that earth is a speck among billions and man not much more than a monkey. What a blow to believer’s ego! The way most people fought off these depressing developments was to replace ignorance with blind faith clinging even stronger to God and religion. This also leads them to fight science at every turn; look at the ridiculous intelligent design claims. Religion still holds that earth is special and that man was in the form of God. This preserves believers’ ego.

Somehow atheists’ egos allow them to enjoy the position of most intelligent species on earth, but recognize that they are just a speck on a speck in the universe and will be truly gone in the blink of an eye.

Overheard Discussion

Believer:
My great, great, great, great, great grandfather had a dog that that built his house for him.

Non-believer:
I don’t believe that.

Prove that he didn’t.

No the burden is on you to prove that he did.

OK, some friends of my gggggrandfather wrote in their diaries that the dog built a house.

Can I see their diaries?

I have some copies of translations of the diaries.

What about the originals?

They were originally written in Swedish and have been lost, but they clearly document that the dog built a house estimated to be about 1100 square feet with several rooms and a fireplace.

I still don’t believe you.

Everyone in that area of Sweden knows all about this dog. There are remnants of a foundation that has been examined and experts say that it has a unique structure. You don’t have to believe it if you don’t want to, but I don’t see how you can refute what all these people say.

Can I see the experts reports and did the dog have any offspring?

I don’t have the expert reports, but my cousin in Sweden does. The dog died young and had no offspring.

This is ridiculous.

You are so negative. You have your mind made up. Even with all this evidence you don’t believe. No matter what evidence I gave you, you wouldn’t believe.

The Loony Preacher Political Doctrine

Democratic presidential candidates are better off if they avoid loony preachers.

Republican presidential candidates are better off if they are loony preachers.

Atheist Endorsements

Both McCain and Obama have received controversial endorsements recently. McCain from a John Hagee a televangelist nutjob with anti-Jewish/Catholic views. Obama from Louis Farrakhan another whackjob with anti-Jewish views

Despite their views, both of these “religious” men actually have large followings. Give Obama credit; he “denounced and rejected” Farrakhan’s endorsement. McCain, however, so desperate for conservative religious right support he has not denounced Hagee’s endorsement.

It is amazing what is legitimized under the name of religion.

Any candidates accepting atheist endorsements?

Evolution Can Be an Intelligent Design

In this case the Intelligent Designers are Mitsubishi engineers.

This car is the most fun for the money of any automobile made. I owned a 2003 and the new 2008 is much better. As fast as a Vette, more practical and roomy than a M3 at a fraction of the price. And all-wheel-drive, too!

1990’s Intelligent Design — 1960’s Ancient Astronauts

I was listening to Coast-to-Coast radio the other night on the drive home. I always find it humorous. There was a guest discussing the Ancient Astronauts. I hadn’t heard this nonsense discussed since the 60’s when Chariots of the Gods was a phenomenon.

Shortly into the discussion, I realized this is the same theory as Intelligent Design without the religious underpinnings.

I guess there are really no new crackpot theories, just recycled old ones.

Huckabee Girl

This is too good!!

Pledge of Allegiance

Why can’t we atheists just let it go. Certainly we agree religion has influenced America, so what’s the big deal about the reference to God in the Pledge of Allegiance. How could it hurt. I definitely support the separation of church and state argument that has been extensively debated, but I have a more basic reason for wanting God out of the pledge. I love my country.

The United States of America is real, it exists, unlike God which is not real. If one is an atheist God is like the Tooth Fairy. If you love your country and you hear this:

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under the Tooth Fairy, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Would you want to make this pledge?

It’s not that I don’t respect the right to believe whatever you want, I just don’t want what you believe to reflect unfavorably on the country that I love and respect.

FCC Supporting the Troops

According to many news articles the FCC is going to levy a $1.43 Million fine against ABC for an episode of NYPD Blue showing a nude woman from the side, exposing both a partial breast and her buttocks. More interestingly, it was aired in 2003; yes, five years ago.

Let’s see, maybe influence of the religious right on our federal government has gone too far; not to mention the waste of time and money.

An inside source provided the transcript that follows from a tape that was made during some of the discussions at the FCC on this issue:

“Gentlemen we are here to discuss the 2003 episode of NYPD Blue where there was side nudity showing a partial breast and buttocks. I have checked with our outside adviser Reverend Jones, excuse me, I mean Mr. Jones. He says we must take action and definitely recommends that we fine ABC; he leaves the amount to our discretion.”

“Reading from FCC Regulation 25-4/45-5.8.2.0.11; showing excretory or sexual organs in prime time is subject to a fine of up to $3 Million.”

“Is the maximum fine appropriate in this case?”

“Not since it was just the side with no nipple shown; about $1.5 Million is right.”

“I disagree; this TV program was aired in 2003. Some children who were irreparably harmed by viewing this vile TV filth are now old enough to be fighting in Iraq.”

“Excellent point. We should fine ABC the maximum for harming our fighting men and women.”

“Yes, do it for the troops.”

“Yes, for the troops.”

“Amen, $3 Million for the troops.”

“As much as I too would like to fine at the maximum, $1.5 Million is about right on the basis of only the side and no nipple as discussed earlier. And you know the left wing agents will join ABC to fight this no matter what the fine is. A lower amount will be easier to defend.”

“Do you guys think children that were breast fed are more or less harmed by nipples on TV than those that were not?”

“That’s an excellent question, but I think we should take that up another meeting.”

“Maybe even a little less than $1.5 Million would be appropriate since the nipple and no actual excrement was shown.”

“OK, then $1.25 Million.”

“Too little.”

“Before we settle this, I would like to ask the honorable Senator from Idaho, who is sitting in with us today, if he has any comments. What do you think Senator?”

“What is the possibility that I could view the TV clip in question? That might help me more effectively comment on the fine you have proposed. Oh, and I probably should have asked this earlier, but was the nude person in the TV clip a woman or was it a man?”

“Sorry Senator, the clip is not available today. $1.43 Million it is. MEETING ADJOURNED!”

Godly Entertainers and Athletes

Belief in God is funny to me in any setting, but I really crack up when entertainers and professional athletes thank God (or Jesus) for their latest achievement or award. Of course, these proclamations have nothing whatsoever to do with even their God. It is all about the self-indulgent celebrities themselves. What they are really saying is, “Look at me, God knows all about me, loves me and made sure I got this award.” Such ego can you believe it? This becomes even more ridiculous when an athlete does something like genuflecting before a free throw; could anything be less important?

If they were truly believers in their God, their acceptance speech might be, “God, enough already! I already have a $100 million contract, adoring fans and eight bookcases full of awards. Please, please can’t you use your powers to something better like feeding starving children.” Not likely to see this speech anytime soon.

As an atheist, the hilarious acceptance speech at the Emmy Awards several months ago by Kathy Griffin was right on point. Not only did she mock celebrities that thank Jesus, but also stated her own belief of his role in her receiving of the award.

No mainstream groups ever complain about the God thanking speeches that go on ad nauseam, but predictably there was an overreaction to Griffin’s speech. Outrage, threats and calls for censorship all followed her speech. This was different only in degree to the reaction to some Danish cartoons. When blind faith is challenged this is the usual reaction.

A more logical and meaningful response, if they wanted to issue a challenge, would have been to provide proof that Jesus had indeed helped Griffin. Don’t often see this more reason based approach used, however. Or maybe just a chuckle would have been appropriate. It does seem, however, that blind faith believers have no sense of humor.

Fear and Nausea

According to the talking heads this video comment is really code for abortion. I’m sure Mikey would be more than willing to take it further if the country was willing.

Regardless it scares me beyond belief. It makes me nauseous too.

In the beginning

This is my first entry in this blog. I hope this and future entries are thought provoking and somewhat humorous.

To start off right, I wanted to show an open mind. Belief in God has some definite benefits and here are some in a familiar format. With apologies to David Letterman below are:

The Top Ten Things You Can Do By Believing In God

10. Look forward to a really big flood

9. Join the Republican Party

8. Avoid being called a descendant of monkeys

7. Really enjoy Benny Hinn

6. Avoid menacing threats of going to hell in a hand basket

5. Say God damn it with real meaning

4. Keep women in their place using His teachings

3. Have open season on infidels

2. Take comfort that God is a white male just like all important people

1. Quit worrying about not doing well in high school science