That new body slamming Montana Congressman believes that retirement is for pussies because Noah was building that ark at 600 years old.

Hi my name is Greg Gianforte and I believe in fairy tales.

Courtesy of the Washington Post:  

In a 2015 talk at the Montana Bible College, Gianforte said the idea of retirement doesn’t exactly match his religious beliefs. 

“There’s nothing in the Bible that talks about retirement. And yet it’s been an accepted concept in our culture today,” he said at the time, according to a report in HuffPost. “Nowhere does it say, ‘Well, he was a good and faithful servant, so he went to the beach.’ It doesn’t say that anywhere.”

“How old was Noah when he built the ark? 600,” he said. “He wasn’t like, cashing Social Security checks, he wasn’t hanging out, he was working. So, I think we have an obligation to work. The role we have in work may change over time, but the concept of retirement is not biblical.”

Oh dear god that I don't believe in, what fresh hell, which I also don't believe in, has Montana subjected itself to?

Noah is a character in a children's tale of morality, NOT an actual person whose life should be taken literally!

I swear the next person who tries to convince me that religion does not destroy rational thinking, I am going to body slam.

Ken Ham the lunatic building the giant "Ark Encounter" in Kentucky gets a little defensive on Twitter. Twitter gets defensive right back.

My wife Mally and I standing in front of @ArkEncounter --a world class attraction emphasizing the ARK of Salvation pic.twitter.com/Iv0qQUpzQi

— Ken Ham (@aigkenham) April 25, 2016

What a giant waste of money. Building a huge mythological boat just to make people more stupid.

In reaction to criticisms like that Ken took to Twitter to defend his Biblical theme park.

Secularists emphasize God's judgment at the Flood of Noah's day but ignore man's wickedness and why a righteous God had every right to judge

— Ken Ham (@aigkenham) April 25, 2016

Secularists emphasize the judgment aspect of the Flood but ignore man's wickedness and the fact God is a God of salvation providing an Ark

— Ken Ham (@aigkenham) April 25, 2016

If Ham thought that he had somehow put the criticism to rest he certainly did not understand Twitter.

@aigkenham If someone kills 99 people but lets one go because he decided they weren't so bad he's not a saviour, he's a serial killer

— Scott Johnson (@scottiej24) April 25, 2016

@aigkenham Killing everyone and only saving a family isn't #Salvation, that's #Genocide...

— X - Meathead (@Awetitu) April 26, 2016

@aigkenham Salvation from what? From himself. Inventing a disease and selling the cure: that's what religion does best.

— Mark (@fallenoutbrain) April 25, 2016

The lesson here of course is that if you are engaging in a battle of wits, you might want to make sure you brought wits to the battle.

(H/T to Raw Story.)

Man finds fossils in front yard that he believes are from Noah's flood, evolution denying fossil "expert" confirms it without actually seeing the evidence. Go ahead guess which state this is.

Courtesy of CBS 19: 

One East Texas man believes he found fossils from Noah’s flood and a self-proclaimed fossil expert says he's right. 

“From Noah’s flood to my front yard, how much better can it get,” Wayne Propst said. 

Propst is stunned. He was helping his aunt lay some dirt outside her home in Tyler when he found this. 

“What's really interesting to me is we're talking about the largest catastrophe known to man, the flood that engulfed the entire world,” Propst said. 

He called up self-proclaimed fossil expert Joe Taylor who confirmed that what Propst found is in fact from the time of Noah’s ark and he says finding those fossils in Tyler is rare.

Did you guess Texas? Because seriously you should always guess Texas, with Florida as your back up.

By the way this is what it says on this "fossil experts" website:

I’m Joe Taylor, the director and curator of the Mt. Blanco Fossil Museum. If you like fossils, dinosaur digs and other old things you have come to the right place. Check the news reports. We want to show you why we do not believe that the evolution theory or the millions of years concept is good science.

Well it's a good thing he keeps an open mind, don't you think?

"Hey if you want to hear some complete bullshit about fossils, from a guy who hates actual science, then give me call. Reinforcement of your superstitious beliefs guaranteed."

This is what this Propst guy's aunt had to say about the "discovery":

“To think that like he says that we have something in our yard that dated back to when God destroyed the earth. I mean, how much better could anything be,” Givan said.

And at the end of the video on the CBS 19 website Propst himself makes this comment:

"Who else can say they have a front yard full of Noah's dirt?" 

Look I know that Texans get really snippy with me for pointing out all of the morons living in their state, but come on! How could I resist this story?

2011 video of Ben Carson shows him claiming that the flood of Noah was real and that Darwin was encouraged by Satan to come up with Evolution.

Now that video up above is over 48 minutes long so I don't expect anyone to sit through the entire thing without ripping their hair out.

I certainly couldn't.

However here is a brief synopsis by the blog  Danthropology followed by some snippets of Carson's remarks:

Most people know that Carson denies evolution is a fact and instead subscribes to young earth creationism, believing the earth is only 6000 years old and humans were created as is. Whether he is stupid enough to actually believe this or is pandering to the ignorance of the GOP voter base has been up for question among some, but a video discovered from 2011 seems to close the door on that idea.

And here are some of the actual remarks that Carson offered during an event called “Celebrating Creation":

 [20:56] “… there is abundant evidence, geological evidence, that there was a worldwide flood. Go up into the Andes Mountains and see all those fossils on the top of those mountains. I mean, these things, when you talk to the evolutionists about them, they always say the same thing … ‘well, we don’t understand everything.’ And I just say, ‘I’m not sure you understand anything.’ You know, they look at all those layers, and then they find some fossils in one of the layers, and they says this fossil is this many years old because it’s in this layer. So, that means this fossil is like a million years old. And then later on they say, ‘well, this layer is a million years old because this fossil which is a million years old is in it.’ You know, that’s like saying, you know, ‘the sky can be red or blue’. And you say, well, the sky is blue. And you say why is it blue? ‘Because it is not red.’ Well why is it not red? ‘Because its blue.’ Yeh, you know that’s known as circular reasoning. That’s how they explain the age of all these things, its very circular reasoning, and really it has no real scientific validity.” [22:22]

How interesting that he recognizes the term "circular reasoning" but does not seem to understand that his entire argument is based on the premise that the Bible is the inerrant word of God and therefore any evidence which disputes that claim must be rejected, and only evidence which supports the Biblical accounts will be accepted.

By the way that is a consistent theme throughout his Q and A.

[27:24] “You know, according to the theory [of evolution] it [the eye] had to go pukh! and there was an eyeball, overnight, just like that, because it wouldn’t work in any other way. And when you ask the evolutionists about that they say, ‘well, we don’t understand everything.’ And I say, ‘well, I don’t think you understand anything.” [27:48] 

That is of course completely false, and evolutionists indeed have a working understanding of how the various eyes in the animal kingdom developed. (As you can see for yourself in this Ted Ed video.)

The fact that a medical doctor does not understand this is more than a little troubling.

[answering a woman’s question, 45:07] “I personally believe that this theory that Darwin came up with was something that was encouraged by the adversary [Satan], and it has become what is scientifically politically correct. Amazingly, there are a significant number of scientists who do not believe it but they are afraid to say anything.” [45:38]

So to be clear the man who is currently polling at number two for the GOP presidential nomination, believes that things which disagree with his religious perspective are the work of an evil entity whose job it is to undermine Christianity by introducing doubt.

The thing that I noticed while watching the video is how utterly convinced Carson is that he is absolutely correct in his thinking.

So sure is he that he feels comfortable ridiculing those who dare to consider that science may have the answers instead of the Bible.

That kind of absolute certainty is frightening to behold, and reminds me in no small way of George W. Bush in the lead up to the Iraq war. In my opinion Carson is a truly dangerous person who should be kept far away from the levers of power.

People of faith seem to feel confident in their belief, regardless of the evidence, while people of science are always searching for that next bit of evidence which will change their minds completely.

Personally I am much more comfortable with the uncertainty of the thinker, over the certainty of the believer.

Montana business man argues against retirement and social security benefits by citing the "fact" that Noah was six hundred years old when he built the Ark.

Damn I'm dumb.

Courtesy of HuffPo:  

Greg Gianforte, a multi-millionaire tech entrepreneur who is "seriously considering" challenging Montana Gov. Steve Bullock (D) in 2016, doesn't believe he has to divorce his Christian faith from his professional life. 

In a February talk at the Montana Bible College about how to find "godly purpose" in work, Gianforte explained why retirement isn't consistent with biblical teachings. 

"There's nothing in the Bible that talks about retirement. And yet it's been an accepted concept in our culture today," he said. "Nowhere does it say, 'Well, he was a good and faithful servant, so he went to the beach.' It doesn't say that anywhere." 

"The example I think of is Noah," he continued. "How old was Noah when he built the ark? 600. He wasn't like, cashing Social Security checks, he wasn't hanging out, he was working. So, I think we have an obligation to work. The role we have in work may change over time, but the concept of retirement is not biblical."

"The idea of retirement is not biblical." Holy shitballs this guy is an idiot!

ANYBODY who uses "facts" to support his point of view that come from a book filled with stories told by primitive superstitious desert folk is too dumb to ever hold public office.

Period!

Ken Ham's Ark project springs a leak.

Courtesy of TPM:  

Kentucky's proposed "creationist theme park," Ark Encounter, won't receive tax incentives from the state because of potentially discriminatory hiring practices, the news website Insider Louisville reported on Wednesday. 

The secretary of the state's tourism and arts cabinet sent a letter to the theme park's lawyers on Wednesday explaining the decision. The park, being built in Williamstown, Ky., may have been eligible for up to $18 million in tax breaks from the state, according to the website. But Kentucky backed out after the proprietors of Ark Encounter refused to agree to hiring practices that wouldn't discriminate on the basis of religion, the site reported.

Loss of the tax incentives will likely signal the end of the project because:  

Answers in Genesis, the group behind Ark Encounter, has experienced funding issues throughout. In 2011, the company had only managed to garner $4.3 million in donations, a far cry from the proposed $24.5 million.

You know I hate to bring this up, but I do believe that according to the Bible Noah built HIS without benefit of tax incentives.

I'm just saying.

I saw an earlier story about this where a commenter said, "Well I'm bummed. I was really looking forward to that awkward moment when the fire inspectors posted the maximum occupancy allowed inside the Ark."

Good point.

Why I am not going to see the new Ridley Scott movie and you shouldn't either.

Look at that!

Doesn't that look good?

Yeah I think so too. I love going to the movies and that looks right up my alley.

I mean I love the director Ridley Scott, I am a big Christian Bale fan, and big extravagant films like this are why I go to the movies.

Except I am not going to see it. Ever!

Why you may ask?

Because it is all bullshit that perpetuates a myth that is incredibly destructive and vilifies an entire nation even though there is absolutely NO evidence to support it.

Don't believe me? Here you go:

It turns out that there is no archaeological evidence of any kind relating to a separate settlement of religious people in Egypt during that time. There is also no evidence of any kind relating to a mass migration across the Sinai Peninsula. 

If things did indeed happen as it says in the Bible (and the Torah), there would have to be some archaeological evidence. But there is none. 

Further, there is no evidence of any kind that Egypt even used slaves, and certainly no evidence that they enslaved an entire nation. The workers that built the pyramids are known to be well payed Egyptians. The pyramids weren’t even built in the right time period, being 800 to 2,000 years older than the supposed “Exodus”. 

The same techniques used to track the migration patterns of ancient humans by examining DNA also show that there was absolutely no procreation between ancient Egyptians and ancient Israelites during the time that the story was supposed to have taken place. Not to put too fine a point on it, but if an entire nation was enslaved for hundreds of years, surely there would have been some inter-breeding. 

In short, this story never happened. 

There is more here and here if you need further convincing. 

Last year I was talked into going to see the movie Noah, starring Russell Crow, by my daughter.

However halfway through I thought "Well this is just religious bullshit. And by purchasing a ticket I am financially supporting this religious bullshit and probably helping to convince movie makers to create more of this religious bullshit."

It actually bothered me for days afterward, and even though I tried to rationalize it by reminding myself that I also watched the movie Troy, which is also based on mythologies, I still couldn't do it.

You see it is easy to dismiss a craptastic flop like Kirk Cameron's recent Christmas movie, but these movies support the mythologies that are vital to propping up a religion that, let's face it, is now well past its sell by date.

You see I dearly love fantasy movies and will gleefully spend my hard earned money to watch all kinds of completely unrealistic action sequences on the big screen.  I like horror movies, superhero movies, dinosaur movies, Liam Neeson movies, you name it.

However in most cases the line between fantasy and reality is pretty easy to identify.  (Though I actually have problems with movies about demonic possession as well because I think they perpetuate a superstition that can be quite harmful to people with mental health problems.)

And besides at least Captain America movies never promoted a mythology which supports the oppression of women, makes it alright to hate gays, and is actively trying to destroy scientific education in this country.

I'm just saying.

Ken Ham tells us that Creationists DO believe in climate change. However no need to worry as it is just the earth "settling down" after Noah's flood. Oooookay.

Okay so on Saturday Ken Ham, founder of the Creation Museum and the worst thing to happen to children's brains since lead based paint, wrote a post explaining how everybody is wrong to assume that Creationists do not like science.

In fact they LOVE science. Just not the science that scientists understand.

Confused? Me too.

But here let Ham explain it to you:

You see, there are two different kinds of science. Observational science works in the present and is testable, repeatable, and observable. Historical science deals with the past (origins) and is not directly testable, repeatable, or observable. With historical science, the worldview you approach the evidence with is going to determine how you interpret the evidence. Secular scientists start from the perspective that man is the ultimate authority and determines truth, but we start from the view that the Bible is God’s Word and provides the true history of the universe. So we both reach different conclusions when we look at the evidence.

Okay so now do you get it?

The "science" that scientists study is the kind that relies on ridiculous things like facts, reliable testing procedures, and peer review. That kind is much more accessible for really smart people, and makes the brains of less intelligent people hurt like crazy.

However the much easier to understand "historical science" (Which is a term that apparently Ken Ham pulled out of his ass.) simply means that you rely on your faith in the Bible to explain how things work.  See? No brain pain.

Ham then goes on to explain that using his "scientific method" puts the whole global warming thing into perspective, and renders it not nearly so frightening:

I want to emphasize that we do not deny climate change. Even Bill Nye continues to spread the false charge against us that we supposedly deny climate change! What we do deny are the worldview-based assumptions behind the interpretations of what causes climate change. Climate change is observational science (we can observe it by recording measurements), but it needs to be interpreted as to why it’s happening—and your starting point determines your interpretation. Starting from the Bible, we know that there was a global Flood a few thousand years ago that completely changed Earth’s surface and climate, and that the earth is still settling down from this catastrophe. So we should expect there to be some variations in climate change, but this is not alarming and is not the direct result of modern human activity. 

See that kids? 

Sure the earth IS experiencing climate change. However there is no need to worry your ignorant little heads over it because it's really just due to the earth getting its act together after a huge global flood for which there is absolutely NO evidence.

But what am I thinking? What I mean is that there is no "observable science" which proves the existence of Noah's flood. But if you get your information straight from the "historic science" of the Bible, well then everything makes perfect sense.

So don't worry about switching to renewable energy sources, or having to buy an electric car, because God would never allow humans to break the planet he gave us.

And if the oceans do rise, no problem. Because surely God will simply wave his magic wand and give us all gills to help us survive underwater.

Wow, religion really IS the opiate of the masses.

Pesky kangaroos.

Of course this is only one example of why nobody should take the stories found in the Bible literally.

There is also the fact that there is no evidence for the Exodus, no real historical evidence of Jesus, and of course no evidence that the universe or planet earth were created by any means that could be deemed supernatural.

And yet people who take these, and other stories, literally are currently sitting in Washington making our laws, serving on the Supreme Court, and teaching in our public schools.

And we wonder what is wrong with America.

Neil deGrasse Tyson challenges Abrahamic religions head on.

For some time I have been under the impression that Professor Tyson is subtly trolling the Creationists, with the stories he tells, and research he reveals, on the show Cosmos.

He has rubbed Fundamentalist noses in evolution in the second episode, helped to explain the workings of the universe in an episode aptly named "When Knowledge Conquered Fear," and last night he took on one of the most famous of all Biblical stories.

Noah's Ark.

Only Tyson does not relate the version we are all most familiar with, he shares the one related in the Epic of Gilgamesh, a thousand years earlier. 

Of course those of you who are fans of IM, know that we dealt with the stories that proceeded Noah earlier this year. Of course that is the kind of thing I like to explore here on this blog.

However having the story transmitted into American households by such a popular new show is definitely going to cause bigger shock waves than anything we do here.

And if suggesting that one of the most famous Biblical stories was the result of plagiarism were not enough, then Professor Tyson went on to suggest that life on this planet may not have been the result of a supreme being suddenly snapping his fingers but instead simply the result of microbes hitching a ride on an asteroid.

In other words he opened the door for Panspermia, the idea that life on this planet originated elsewhere and then hitched a ride here on meteorites.

I think there is very little doubt that the producers of Cosmos and Professor Tyson are purposefully goading the Fundamentalists and Creationists into responding, and that they are prepared to continue challenging Christian mythologies moving forward, in what I would assume is an attempt to address the attacks on science, and public education, in this country by religious zealots. 

So far I have found no response online from the Creationists. But since they have demonstrated an overwhelming need to refute the facts shared on this show in the past, I have to imagine they are typing their fingers to the bone in response to this one.

Have I mentioned before how much I love this show? Because I most certainly do!

Bill Maher trashes the story of Noah's Ark on Real Time last night.

In reference to the Christian backlash against the upcoming movie "Noah":

"But get this, what the Christians who are now protesting this movie are upset about, is that it doesn't take the Biblical story literally enough. They're mad because this made up story does not stay true to their made up story."

It seems to me that I said much the same thing just last week.

Producers make changes in new movie about Noah's Ark because of claims from religious people of historical inaccuracies. You read that right, "historical inaccuracies."

Courtesy of Raw Story:  

According to The Wrap, Paramount Pictures has edited Darren Aronofsky’s Noah — which stars Russell Crowe in the titular role — in order to avoid offending Christian viewers. 

Aronofsky allegedly told an associate that he was “not happy” when he learned that Paramount had appended a disclaimer to both the film and promotional materials for it. 

At the request of the National Religious Broadcasters (NRB), Paramount added a disclaimer which reads, in part, that “[t]he film is inspired by the story of Noah. While artistic license has been taken, we believe that this film is true to the essence, values, and integrity of a story that is a cornerstone of faith for millions of people worldwide. The biblical story of Noah can be found in the book of Genesis.” 

NRB board member Phil Cooke told The Wrap that the disclaimer was necessary because the film is “historically inaccurate.” It is, Cooke said, “more of an inspired movie than an exact retelling.” 

Cooke is not the only Christian to have concerns about the film. 

Writing on his blog last year, Answers In Genesis president Ken Ham noted that the film’s script “is not at all faithful to the biblical account in Genesis.” Ham believes the trailer for the film is “a Hollywood con” designed to lure unsuspecting Jews and Christians to witness “an unbiblical production.” 

He lists the many ways in which the film does not accurately reflect his interpretation of what happened in Genesis 6. He notes that “Noah’s family only consists of his wife, three sons, and one daughter-in-law, contrary to the Bible.” Moreover, “[i]t appears as if every species was crammed in the Ark instead of just the kinds of animals, thus mocking the Ark account the same way secularists do today.” 

Most problematic for Ham, however, is that “Noah does not have a relationship with God but rather with circumstances and has deadly visions of the Flood,” and that “[t]he Ark lands on a cliff next to a beach.”

To be clear this is an impossible story, told by untold authors, about an event that defies all scientific probabilities.  In short it is about has "historic" as the story of Athena being given birth from a hole in the skull of Zeus.

There are a lot of movies coming out with an overtly religious theme this year like Mark Burnett "Son of God." featuring the first latino Jesus (Wouldn't that me "Hey-suess?"), Ridley Scott's "Exodus,"  "Heaven is for Real," and "Mary, Mother of Christ," to name a few.

And of course all of this is by design, after all the sixth mountain of the 7 Mountains of Societal Influence is Arts and Entertainment.

So you would think that the religious community would be thrilled simply to have their mythology spread to a newer secular audience.

However if they are going to insist that every part of the film be completely accurate according to their favorite version of the Bible (King James?), they are going to lose much of their potential audience.

After all these are movie goers used to watching giant robots transform in to cars, humans portrayed as living batteries while their minds remain trapped in a giant MMORPG, and superheroes fighting off an alien invasion in the middle of New York City.

But let's remember there are limits to any movie goers ability to suspend disbelief.

I mean come on, watching hobbits taking a dangerous journey to dispose of jewelry while fighting off orcs and wizards is one thing, but buying into the concept of one family building a giant boat to hold two of every kind of animal on the planet while the entire population of humans, animals, and insects is drowned around them.

I mean come on how did a story that absurd even get past pre-production?

Good news for Christians, 4000 year old tablet relates the earliest version of the great flood and Ark. Bad news, wrong God, wrong religion, wrong time.

Courtesy of News.com.au:  

The British Museum yesterday put the recently deciphered clay tablet from ancient Mesopotamia - now Iraq - on display. 

It's claimed to be one of the most important archaeological discoveries ever. 

What it contains are specifications for the legendary Ark which was said to have saved two of each animal - and a handful of humans - from a catastrophic flood. 

But some of the details are different to the generally known version. 

It describes a circular vessel known as a coracle, not the rectangular vessel of modern mythology. 

"It was really a heart-stopping moment - the discovery that the boat was to be a round boat," the tablet's discoverer, Irving Finkel said. "That was a real surprise."

Ah, but that was not the ONLY surprise.

The tablet records a Mesopotamian god's instructions for building a giant vessel - two-thirds the size of a soccer field in area - made of rope, reinforced with wooden ribs and coated in bitumen. 

Etched in the clay is one of the story's key elements: It describes how the animals must enter "two by two".

Wait, a Mesopotamian god?  But doesn't that mean....

This is not the first time the ancient story of the ark has been found outside of the bible. But it is the earliest. 

The flood story recurs in later Mesopotamian writings including the "Epic of Gilgamesh." 

Finkel says the discovery may cause dissent among believers in the biblical story. When 19th-century British Museum scholars first learned from cuneiform tablets that the Babylonians had a flood myth, they were disturbed by its similarities to the story of Noah. 

"Already in 1872 people were writing about it in a worried way - What does it mean that Holy Writ appears on this piece of Weetabix?" he joked to Fox News, referring to a cereal similar in shape to the tablet. 

"I'm sure the story of the flood and a boat to rescue life is a Babylonian invention," he said.

Of course it does not come as a surprise to most Atheists that the stories of the Bible, and Christianity itself, are made up of fables and traditions from a wide variety of  previous mythologies and religions. However it is always important to point out that the arguments used by Creationists to attack the teaching of Evolution and science in the public school classroom are based on myths that predate the "history" and the God on which their religion is based.

Ultimately science will provide the answers, just like it provided an answer to the mystery of Noah's Ark.

The Math of the Great Flood

Courtesy of the YouTube page:  

I was surprised to find very few places where the math of Noah's flood was discussed, so I made this video to illustrate the scale of what the bible describes. Seeing it calculated out makes the myth seem a lot more fantastical and less feasible. After researching this video, it became clear to me that the people who wrote this myth originally did not understand how outlandish their claims were at the time, because they didn't know how big the planet was, or how tall the highest mountain was, or how many species there are, or what that much rain looks like. Once you do the equations, you can see that this is all made up. For the ignorant desert tribes during the time of Gilgamesh, there was no danger that anyone would call the authors out, but the people of modern times have no excuse for blindly accepting it.

The fact that the Creationist use Noah's flood to explain virtually everything about the fossil record, the geographical  landscape, and the importance of avoiding sin, is mind boggling.

As the video demonstrates the facts simply do not support the possibility of anything like a great world encompassing flood ever having taken place. But beyond that, at least to me, the story demonstrates an almost psychotic rage on the part of God that he would drown potentially billions of people, many living in cultures that had never heard of the Jewish god, simply in response to the disobedience of a comparative few.

In my opinion anybody hoping to convince people about the compassion of the Christian, Islamic, or Jewish god would want to ignore this story, and multiple others, like the plague.

Possibly the MOST damaging of the Biblical myths.

 You know if you read the Bible as it was intended to be read, as a book of allegories which teach religious lessons, that is fine with me, and I would probably never say anything negative about it or challenge its accuracy.

However many Christians take the Bible as being LITERALLY true, and use it to make decisions about how to view the world around them, how to vote, how to think, and who to trust.

Creationists of today use the story of Noah's Ark as the linchpin for their argument against Evolution, and use it to explain away everything from the different layers of strata, evidence of fossils, and even the extinction of the dinosaurs.

In fact when it comes to arguing against science, Noah's flood is their "go to" Biblical resource.

Of course as illustrated above the entire premise of the story is too fantastical to ever seriously entertain, much less use as the basis for rejecting scientific evidence.

It is not only Noah's age that should make reasonable people reject the myth, it is also the ridiculous idea that Noah could have gathered two of EVERY land animal that we see today from all over the world, that the Ark would have been large enough to hold them (About 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high. Not even close!), that Noah could have brought along enough food to keep them alive for 40 days and 40 nights, and that wild animals would have responded to a human and remained docile for 40 days and 40 nights. I mean please!

It is a tale for children, and as a child we can all enjoy it right along with the 12 Labors of Hercules, and Aesop's Fables, but as rational thinking adults we should be able to recognize that children's stories can no longer be used to explain the world around us.

For that we look for evidence, and let that evidence guide us toward a greater understanding our universe and our place within it.

Actual 4th grade "science" test in South Carolina private school.

This is the kind of thing that absolutely drives me nuts!

Purposefully teaching children bullshit is absolutely child abuse in my opinion.

Take a look at this model of Noah's Ark featured at a Creationist Museum.

This may seem like a small thing, but when you consider how drastically you impair a child's ability to pursue a higher education while saddled with this religious misinformation you can imagine how negatively that impacts their future.

I can remember sitting in a Philosophy class once where the subject matter literally sent a girl educated in a Christian high school fleeing the room in tears.

(Source.)

Several Texas public schools not only teaching Creationism but also a pernicious brand of Biblical racism.

Courtesy of Alternet:  

A new report put out by the Texas Freedom Network Education Fund reveals that in several public school classes on the impact of the Bible on history have found classes teaching from a right-wing, fundamentalist Christian standpoint. 

A Southern Methodist University religious studies professor Mark Chancey found instances of students learning a literal interpretation of the Bible, that the earth is approximately 6,000 years old and that Judaism is a “flawed and incomplete religion” with materials “designed to evangelize rather than provide an objective study of the Bible’s influence.” 

TFN also found a lesson explaining “racial origins traced from Noah.”

The claim that Africans are descendants of Ham, whom Noah curses in Genesis after he “saw the nakedness of his father,” has long been used as a biblical justification for anti-black racism and slavery. 

Well isn't THAT interesting.  While the country celebrates the second inauguration of America's first African American President, the children in Texas are being taught that he is less than a real human being and therefore undeserving of their respect.

Courtesy of the Grio:

What we have inherited is a legacy of racism that is deeper than simple racial preferences or even basic ethnocentrism. American racism has had the aid and comfort of a theological construct perpetuated by churches that attribute racist intentions to God. This was the underpinning of American slavery, Jim Crow laws, and South African Apartheid.

You know whenever anybody asks me why I have such a problem with the Bible being used as a textbook in public school classrooms I always ask them, "Have you read it? Because if you have, then you should know."

It just seems to me that every time we take a step forward in this nation, there is some bible waving lunatic trying to drag us back into the darkness with them.

Now for something completely different.

Last week as I was internet surfing I came upon this rather extraordinary young man with an incredible voice singing covers on You Tube.

I had bookmarked the link as was planning to post it at some point, even though it is not usually the kind of thing that I post here, but then somehow I closed the link and forgot the boy's name.

This morning I woke up to the Today Show and lo and behold there was the gifted teenager right there in front of me. Apparently even though I never got around to posting his video, it blew up anyhow and has now received over two million hits on You Tube.

The eighteen year old simply goes by the name Noah, but there is nothing simple about his talent. He has his own You Tube channel and you can hear his work for yourself by clicking here.

Below is perhaps my favorite of his many covers.  Take a couple of minutes and see if this does not impress you as much as it has just about everybody else who has listened to this young man.

To be fair Creationists know EXACTLY why dinosaurs do not exist today.

Well there you go then. The problem was poor memory skills.

They had such tiny brains you know.