Wednesday, May 20, 2009


Still Crazy After All These Years

Our old friend, Yomin Postelnik, who said he had simple proofs of the existence of God that no atheist has ever been able to counter effectively, is back boasting that he, a business planner, is "far more familiar with evolutionary theory ... [and] the intricacies and rationale behind the theory ... that falls apart upon proper dissection and analysis" than the people who support it ... you know, like scientists.

It's another wonderfully lunatic performance of delusion-art that is best seen in its original habitat.

But one point should be made about the recent over-hyping of Darwinius masillae. It might actually lend some credence to "arguments" like this of Postelnik's:

In the latest act of media hyped pseudo-science, aka liberal/conventional science, the discovery of the crushed and flattened fossil of a lemur monkey, that while alive had a shattered left wrist, is being touted as the needed "proof" of Darwinian theory.

For the first time, all scientists interviewed freely admit that the theory of evolution had gaping holes in it. They just claim that all of the answers lie in the packaged, crush fossil that spent the last 20 years hanging on someone's wall. In other words, they admit that until yesterday, anyone who claimed that there was anything close to conclusive proof of evolutionary was wrong, despite having sold that line for decades.

True, it will only persuade those who are woefully ignorant of science. Unfortunately, that pretty well describes most Americans.

Has UD tried to bring him on board yet? I mean, they interview Adnan Oktar, link to John A. Davison, and for a while they were courting William Brookfield. Seems like they have the hots for any nut who spouts the party line.
I'd like to think that even UD has standards ... incredibly low standards but standards nonetheless ...

I just don't believe it is all.
BTW, do you know what happened over that lawsuit between YP and Martin from Atheist Experience? I just Googled and link-surfed around to refresh my memory, and discovered that a lot of linked posts on the affair are now 404.
I didn't even remember it until you mentioned it, so, no, I haven't a clue.
OT: Who drew the picture that you used to accompany this article?

Auguste Ambroise Tardieu (1818-1879).
Thx - I asked because the use of white space/shading reminded me of some old anatomical drawings I'd seen but, since then, I could never find either illustrations or the artist. Alas, 'twas not Tardieu.

BTW After some research, it turns out that the your artist was Ambroise Tardieu (pere: 1788-1841) and not his son, Auguste, who was a forensic scientist.
... it turns out that the your artist was Ambroise Tardieu (pere: 1788-1841) and not his son, Auguste, who was a forensic scientist.

My fault ... I Googled on the name (and noted the additional first name but thought it might just be how he signed his work) but didn't really look at the Wikipedia article. My bad.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

. . . . .


How to Support Science Education