Christ is Born!

With all the giving that's about to happen, please remember that God is the original author of giving. The words give, gave, gift, etc. appear over 2,100 times in scripture. Ultimately God gave Himself to an undeserving world and tonight we celebrate the arrival of our Savior, the greatest and most expensive gift ever.

Merry Christmas.

The Abortion Trick

Great. Our Health and Human Services Secretary just luuuvs the accounting trick in the Seneate Health Bill that will not only allow abortions, but mandate everyone pay for them. But that can't be true! She said it's not for abortions.

I honestly hate these people. Listen to the double talk from the one with the forked tongue.

What's The Problem? Kids Do This Stuff All The Time

Before watching this video wrap duck tape around your head to prevent it FROM EXPLODING!!!!

If you get an error saying the video is not available click this link.



I don't even know where to start:

1. First - Hey Mom holding that pillow or blanket or whatever it is over your mid-section doesn't hide the fact you have a weight problem. Moron!
2. "[My] Biggest concern was him being out there, getting kidnapped, getting run over, the alcohol, having to have his stomach pumped." - My biggest concern is that YOU are a moron and has custody of a child!
3. "He runs away trying to find his father. He wants to get in trouble so he can go to jail because that's where his daddy is." - SHOCKER!
4. Speaking of the beer the child got a hold of, "He got it out of my father's cooler in the back and how he got it open I don't understand because it was one of those tab beers." - Yes those "tab beers" are so mentally challenging for us we're not sure HOW a 4 year old could figure it out! He must be like super-freaky smart.
5. "Going to the neighbor's house and taking their presents, very embarrassing," - Embarrassing for who? MORON!!!
6. "Kids do things like this and it's out of your control, you can do the best you can as a mother, everyone makes mistakes, it was an honest mistake," - WHAT?!! Kids do things like this?! AHHHHHHHHHHH!

And if that's not bad enough, I read that Child Protective Services is going to let her keep the kid. What does it take? Let's see:

• Mom is a moron (opening a "tab" beer is like on the order of completing a Rubik cube)- check
• Dad likes drinking in the streets and is well known to do so by his kid - check
• Dad's now in jail - check
• Mom's father leaves unsupervised beer in cooler out back that is easily assessable by children - check
• Child skilled at disarming safety devices on door knobs - check
• Home not secure enough at 2:00 am to prevent a child from getting out into the streets - check
• Child is known to want to get into trouble, drinks alcohol, is adept at breaking and entering, theft and enjoys a little cross dressing - check
• Mom is too stupid to know that this not only really dangerous behavior, but seems to not even understand it is ALL HER FAULT. CHECK!!!

Scientific Reasoning - This Is How It's Done

Watch the video. It's a little over 10 minutes, but well worth it. In it you will see with your own eyes and hear with your own ears the two dominant and opposing thought processes of the people in this world. The majority of us fall into one of these two camps. Neither are unreasonable. The two carry out a conversation that is civil and calm.

I have to admit that what makes this exchange so valuable is the combination of two things. 1) The ability of the interviewer to present the facts and ask pointed questions, and 2) the willingness of the Green Peace activist to continue with the interview so we can all witness for our selves why her thinking is flawed. Understand it's not just her data that is flawed; no, it is how she thinks that is the root cause.

The apex of the argument occurs at the 7:25 mark. She admits that her belief in the crisis of "man made" global warming is based on faith; faith in sources that support her own pre-conceived ideas that man made global warming is true. Many have said to me that my faith in God is the same thing as someone's faith in global warming and I would agree with the exception of one major difference. If anyone can prove that my sources for believing in God are false I would give up any belief in God. But again, proof is objective facts that is outside of what I feel or want to believe. The woman in this video refuses to want to do that.

Beer, Guns and Making Good On A Bet

Question: What's the last thing said before someone called 9-1-1?
Answer: Hold my beer and watch this!

Pro-Abortion? You Know The Truth.

I keep saying this; I just don't get it. Watch the video and you tell me, how do the answers given make you feel? Deep down in your heart of hearts is this right or wrong? Or is it a gray area?

Gray?! What could be gray about the issue of abortion. The doctor is very clever with his answers. For example when the woman asks the doctor what will be "removed" and the doctor answers "a fetus..but a fetus is not a baby", is that a truthful answer? In one way it is; a fetus is not a baby. However, the next question that the woman should have asked is "Is a fetus a living human?". The answer to that question is absolutely YES. From conception to natural death we are always a living human. A zygote is a zygote, an embryo is an embryo, a fetus is a fetus, a baby is a baby, a toddler is a toddler, a child is a child, a teen is a teen, a man is a man. All are stages of human life.

I've written before about this and you can read more in my article The Logic Cop Says It's A Human Baby. Also click on the Abortion topic on the right menu bar for more heart stopping sadness.

Science Becomming Scandalous

At first I didn't want to write about this, and I am sorry it's such a long article, but I have a lot to say. I get so tired of putting forth these arguments, trying to shine a light on how scientist's preconceived ideas is what determines the final result even if the data does not fit what you want it to be. Just click on the Science label on the right side bar of my blog page to read them.

Let me state again for the record: If the data is honestly and exhaustively examined and it shows a result, and that result is repeated in a vast majority of samples, I will hold the result to be true and that truth will formulate current beliefs of reality. What does that mean? If someone proves to me that there is no God, understanding that proof is something outside of us, proof is not influenced by what I think or how I feel, it is objective; knowing that, if someone proves there is no God, I will stop believing in God.

But that goes for scientists too. It's what makes science dependable and based on integrity. If the data disproves what you thought is true, you must change what you believe to be true, period.

We've seen this in the recent Climategate scandal. At least that scandal is finally being exposed so the public can see for themselves what's being done. We also have seen this in the science of Darwinian evolution, which I have written extensively about, specifically in the area of soft tissue being found in dinosaur fossils that are supposedly 60-80 million years old. Scientists say that it is impossible for soft tissue to survive that length of time, even saying they doubt soft tissue can survive longer than a million years tops. Yet when faced with finding soft tissue and being quoted as saying it is impossible for soft tissue to be present in a 60 million year old fossil, do they say "we have to rethink the science behind how we determine the ages of these fossils"? No, they just say "I know it's impossible, but there you have it. Isn't it amazing?".

To provide you with a visual, I've included a link to a video from the TV show 60 Minutes. This dino soft tissue story has finally made it to the main stream...after 10 years! It's about 13 minutes long and you have to endure a Viagra commercial but it's worth it. Watch it with a ear tuned for how they carry out their science. A few notes about this video:

• Jack Horner has been around for a long time. I was reading his work back in the 80's and he's been the leading scientist that supports the theory that dinosaurs evolved into modern day birds. I was surprised to hear him still pushing that theory because I've read that it has all but been abandoned. Read my article called More Scientific Backtracking.
• When the soft tissue find was first published the scientific community's first response was harsh criticism. Funny how that is. Instead of verifying whether it's true or not, the first reaction is to kill the messenger.
• Watch the video, I think it's around the 6:30 mark when they start talking about the soft tissue find; even with the evidence in front of their eyes, and despite their own incredulity, the two still accepted the story that organic remnants that should have rotted long ago had somehow been preserved for longer than many current species have supposedly existed on earth.

Why manipulate the data?

In regards to the Climategate scandal, best case, this scandal means that scientists are manipulating the data to show man made global warming is true when it is not because they want to tap into the billions of dollars in research money available. Basically fabricating a desired result to get themselves and their institutions rich. It's a circular cash-cow. They produce false results, everyone panics and says it's a coming disaster, money pours in to study it further, and they produce more false results to perpetuate the con.

Worst case it is a massive fraud, a global redistribution of wealth that is intended to socialize American and bring down our standard of living in order to perpetuate the communist idea of social justice.

Here is the 60 Minutes video:



Watch CBS News Videos Online

Vested Interests Are The Enemy Of Science

In my 11/20/09 article titled The New Scientific Method: Remove The Data That Doesn't Support My Theories I talked about what is now being called "Climategate". The purposeful effort by climate change scientists to alter the data to suppport their preconceived theory.

This scandal is not going away, at least not in the blogosphere (you won't read anything about it in the main stream media), and I finally read a great article in the Wall Street Journal titled Climategate: Follow The Money. In that article (read it, it's short and to the point) was this fantastic quote regarding the organizations that receive ever increasing grants to study climate change because those very same organizations keep ringing the warning bell of climate change ever louder:

None of these outfits are per se corrupt, in the sense that the monies they get are spent on something other than their intended purposes. But they depend on an inherently corrupting premise, namely that the hypothesis on which their livelihood depends has in fact been proved. Absent that proof, everything they represent—including the thousands of jobs they provide—vanishes. This is what's known as a vested interest, and vested interests are an enemy of sound science.

Emphasis mine. I couldn't have said it better.