Atheists Stand By Jeffrey Epstein

From here:

At least two grant recipients in academia are standing by Epstein, saying he remains a friend: Krauss and Robert Trivers, a Rutgers University biologist. Trivers said Epstein is a person of integrity who should be given credit for serving time in prison and for settling civil lawsuits brought by women who said they were abused.

[…]

Trivers also said he believes girls mature earlier than in the past. “By the time they’re 14 or 15, they’re like grown women were 60 years ago, so I don’t see these acts as so heinous,” he said.

As for Krauss, who can forget his attempt to sheild Epstein:

As a scientist I always judge things on empirical evidence and he always has women ages 19 to 23 around him, but I’ve never seen anything else, so as a scientist, my presumption is that whatever the problems were I would believe him over other people.

When you pause to actually consider the content of these two statements, you have to ask yourself why in the world as these men considered to be so smart?  Truly intelligent men would not make such truly stupid comments.  So what gives?

Advertisements

Atheists Believe Without Evidence

The internet atheists once again proudly showcase their gullibility. This time it’s about the mean Christians who vandalized a park all because some lovable Satanists wanted to keep it clean.

Atheist actvist Hemant Mehta explains:

A few days ago, I posted that The Satanic Temple chapter in West Florida “adopted” Hitzman-Optimist Park in Pensacola, vowing to keep it clean. Groups that participate in the program, Keep Pensacola Beautiful, get some publicity via a sign in the park.
Well, the park and the sign have already been vandalized by Christians — or at least in the name of Christianity.

The Satanists are horrified by it all:

Jes Smith, the head of this Satanic chapter, told me the vandalism likely happened last night or this morning. The group would’ve cleaned it up by now, but given the mayor’s comments, he’s waiting to hear back from Keep Pensacola Beautiful as to how they want to move forward with the adoption situation. (This is all assuming the mayor’s explanation is accurate about the adoption of this park being a clerical mistake and not some personal vendetta against Satanists.) If the city says it’s their responsibility to clean the park, they’ll have to deal with the spray paint.

As for the graffiti, Smith added that it’s unfortunate someone would do this in an effort to discourage them from cleaning the park. He added that observers should challenge themselves to question “what it means when Satanists want to clean the park, and someone motivated by Jesus wants to vandalize the park.”

Ah, except there is one problem. What if we were to ask Mehta and Smith for the evidence that a Christian was behind this?

Atheist Activists Meltdown Because of Supreme Court

Yesterday was a bad day for the anti-religious/atheist activists:

A 40-foot-tall, World War I memorial cross can continue to stand on public land in Maryland, the Supreme Court ruled Thursday in an important decision about the use of religious symbols in American life.

The justices said preserving a long-standing religious monument is very different from allowing the building of a new one. And the court concluded that the nearly 100-year-old memorial’s presence on a grassy highway median doesn’t violate the Constitution’s prohibition on the government favoring one religion over others. Seven of the court’s nine justices sided with the cross’ backers, a lineup that crossed ideological lines.

The 7-2 Supreme Court vote fits nicely with my “tell it like it is” observations from back in February:

Yet according to atheist/humanist activists, the Memorial is actual part of a government conspiracy to force them all to adopt Christianity so they have gone to court to have it removed. These kooks think a WWI memorial, that was constructed a century ago, is actually the government trying to establish the Christian religion. So they, of course, are “offended.” They squeal about the memorial being “illegal” and try to come up with any ad hoc argument to support their revisionism. Yet even with a 100 years of data to collect from, not a single one of them has been able to come up with evidence that the memorial has actually been establishing Christianity as the official religion all this time.

All this case establishes is that atheist activists are snowflakes. Hypersensitive, easily offended, intellectual lightweights always on the look out to ban that which offends them.

Of course, the atheist activists are in full blown meltdown mode. Activist Hemant Mehta is archiving some of the hysteria from his fellow activists.  We’ll have to apply some critical thinking to their complaints.

Activist Jerry Coyne was deeply upset and began to lash out at the Court:

The strategy of American courts in their desire to continue allowing religious incursion into the government—be it “In God We Trust” on our money or religious symbols on public land—has been to pretend that religious symbols and mottos morph into nonreligious, historical and secular icons over time. This is patently bogus, an offense to anybody with two neurons to rub together.

Hmmm. In God We Trust first appeared on coins 160 years ago. It appeared on paper money 60 years ago. The Peace Cross was erected about 100 years ago. This “strategy” Coyne speaks of sounds like a Huge Conspirary that is well over a century old. I’m not surprised that Coyne would defend his crackpot conspiracy theory by implying those who disagree are stupid. In reality, Coyne’s extreme, radicalized position is stupid.

It get’s even more interesting in the comments section. Someone named rustybrown wrote, “This is a sound ruling. Who is this harming?”

Coyne was triggered. He begins with the insults:

Here’s someone lacking the requisite two neurons.

Then tries to answer the question:

Who is it harming? How about the CONSTITUTION, rustybrown.

Gotta love the all caps. But someone needs to tell Jerry “two neuron” Coyne that the Constitution does not qualify as a “WHO.” Second, seven of nine experts on the Consitution don’t agree with Coyne. Third, there is no evidence this war memorial has harmed the Constitution. The memorial has stood for 100 years. As I wrote months ago, “Yet even with a 100 years of data to collect from, not a single one of them has been able to come up with evidence that the memorial has actually been establishing Christianity as the official religion all this time.”

Only Crackpots think the Constitution is being harmed by allowing this memorial to stand.
Given his own position is so weak, Coyne tries to change the topic:

Should we have mandatory Christian prayers in school, like we used to? Who is that harming?

No one is talking about making people say prayers in public. The issue was a war memorial and whether it should allowed to exist as is.

And of course, Coyne then bans the dissenter:

People like you don’t belong on this site. Not enough neurons.

Given the weakness of Coyne’s crackpot views, is anyone surprised he so quickly needs to ban dissenters?

Atheists Can’t Make Up their Minds

According to atheist Jay Wexler,

Atheists all believe there is no god that governs the universe, but other than that, nothing necessarily unites us.

But even that belief does not unite the atheists.  From some, we are told that atheists merely lack belief in any gods.  Of course, I’m not sure how that is supposed to differ from agnosticism, but I guess that’s not supposed to matter.

Anyway, so which is it?  Are atheists people who merely lack belief a god that governs the universe or are atheists people who believe there is no god that governs the universe?

Oberlin College Found Guilty of Attacking and Slandering Local Business

Oberlin College has been found guilty of helping to organize a smear campaign against local citizens:

Oberlin College has been ordered by a jury to pay $44 million to a local bakery and convenience store after the midwestern liberal arts school was found responsible for defamation, infliction of emotional distress and intentional interference of business relationships.

Here’s more.

Christian Baker Again Under Attack

It appears the LGBTQ community is still involved in a hate campaign against a baker who just happens to be a Christian:

The owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop — which won a case before the US Supreme Court recently — was sued for a third time this week.

Jack Phillips, the Lakewood, Colo., bakery owner who has refused to bake cakes that violate his Christian faith, is being sued again by Autumn Scardina, a transgender woman, for refusing to bake a gender transition cake.

Scardina claims it is textbook LGBT discrimination. But Phillips said she is rehashing old claims that hold no merit.

Ah yes, a wealthy, privileged lawyer attacks a working class guy for not agreeing to the privileged lawyer’s selfish demands.  So I did some more checking and stumbled upon this article.  It raises two questions for members of the LGBTQ community and its allies:

Netherlands Teen Kills Herself While Parents Watch

According to the most recent reports, the Netherlands did not euthanize Noa Pothoven.  Instead, she committed suicide with the help of doctors and parents.  At least that’s what the latest story is, as apparently there is some type of investigation:

Clarification: An earlier version of this story reported that Noa Pothoven’s death came via euthanasia, which she had initially requested. The Dutch Health Ministry said Wednesday that Noa’s family was maintaining that euthanasia — the definition of which is contested — had not occurred while indicating that the circumstances of her death were still being investigated.

Yet I think my original observation still stands:

I think this case illustrates the critics of euthanasia have been right about something – that a slippery slope does exist whereby a culture can begin to embrace death too quickly and too easily.

Netherlands Euthanizes Depressed Teen Girl

More post-Christian enlightenment:

A 17-year-old Dutch girl was legally allowed to kill herself using euthanasia after she was raped when younger and spent years battling depression, according to a report Tuesday.

I can understand assisted suicide for elderly people suffering extreme, chronic pain that is not really treatable by modern medicine. But this? The only and best option for a 17-year-old depressed girl is suicide? Sorry, but I don’t buy it.

I think this case illustrates the critics of euthanasia have been right about something – that a slippery slope does exist whereby a culture can begin to embrace death too quickly and too easily.

Getting it Wrong

Ten years (plus two days) ago to this date, Jerry Coyne attacked Francis Collins, opposing his nomination to head the NIH:

I am funded by the NIH, and I’m worried. Not about my own funding (although I’m a heathen cultural Jew), but about how this will affect things like stem-cell research and its funding. If appointed, Collins will have wide latitude in how to disperse the $30 billion annual budget, and can steer it towards or away from various projects. I’d be much more comfortable with someone whose only agenda was science, and did not feel compelled to set up a highly-publicized website demonstrating how he reconciles his science with Jesus. (Truthdig has published Sam Harris’s evisceration of Collins’s wacko book.)
[….]
We are just recovering from the theocracy of G. W. Bush, and I was happy that federally-funded stem-cell research was allowed to go ahead. Now what will happen? This is NOT a presidential appointment designed to smooth the waters roiled by our previous administration.
[…]
Collins may indeed be a good administrator, but this appointment is a mistake.

Ten years later, we can all clearly see that Coyne was wrong and had no rational basis for being “worried.”

Dr. Coyne is supposed to be a scientist. He preaches, and preaches, about the need to adopt the scientific method and the need for evidence. Yet in 2009, he had no evidence to back up his wacko concerns and ten years later, he still has no evidence to back up his wacko concerns.

What’s more, during the entire ten year span since he publicly aired concerns about Dr. Collins, has he ever tried to gather data to test them? No.

So, has he ever admitted his worries were not supported by the evidence? No.

Has he ever acknowledged he was wrong? No.

Ten years later, the question is not “Should Dr. Collins head the NIH?” That was always a wild-eyed question that only resonated among the kook, anti-religious bigots. The question in 2019 is different: “How in the world could Dr. Coyne have been so embarrassingly wrong? “

In 2009, I knew there was nothing to worry about. How could the theist be so right and the atheist be so wrong?

God of the Gaps Atheism

The militant atheist movement is built on the belief that there is no evidence for God. Of course, such atheists are entitled to their opinions on this matter, but because of their militancy, and the way it serves their agenda, they will not acknowledge their opinion is an opinion. Instead, they posture as if they have discovered some objective truth – There is no evidence for the existence of God. We’re all supposed to agree.

Yet if we are supposed to agree with this claim, we’d like to know exactly what it is we are supposed to agree with. So we ask the New Atheists what would actually count as evidence for the existence of God. Typically, the New Atheists will tap dance around that question, insisting there is no evidence without telling us what such evidence would look like. This is their Hide-The-Goalposts tactic.

However, if pressed, some New Atheists will spell it out, especially when they are trying to make themselves look open-minded about the issue. One example is New atheist activist Jerry Coyne who, in a blog post entitled, “What evidence would convince you that a god exists?, writes: