A Christian Blog About Religion, God, Jesus, & the Bible Articles and Answers about God, the Bible, Jesus, Religion, & Theology

I love the brilliance and priorities of our modern scientists. I mean, in this century we are truly blessed to have the brilliance of today’s thinking men proving such important things such as why we cry and how we have alien bacteria.

Really, who cares about cancer, H1N1, or any of these other serious problems killing people daily? Shouldn’t we focus on more important things such as religious relic re-creation?

In a new article just released, the Shroud of Turin is a fake (according to Luigi Garlaschelli). Wow, this is incredible news to say the least…Yawn.

My Official Position on the Shroud of Turin Cloth

Before I rip this silly notion to shreds, let me reaffirm my position on the shroud. I NEVER  come out definitively and say statements such as “the shroud is authentic,” or “the shroud is a fake.” I wasn’t there when it was made.

My position on the shroud has always been, “I don’t know.” I think it has some very compelling evidence, but I don’t place my faith in a cloth, I place my faith in God. I find it hard to believe it is a forgery at this point in time based on the overwhelming evidence, but I am neutral on the shroud and despite watching a documentary or two (and posting a couple of articles on this site), I really don’t think of it too often.

Whether the shroud is authentic or not really doesn’t make a difference to me or my faith.

But it does annoy me when the secular scientist “geniuses” make it a point to be complete fools. So let us rip this silly article apart that is making headlines as “definitive proof the shroud is a fake.”

Proof the Shroud is Fake: Discovered by Luigi Garlaschelli

First, let me state the obvious: Since when did Luigi become a scientist? I thought he was a plumber with his brother Mario and his wife the Princess, and their pet dinosaur Yoshi (inside Super Mario Bros. joke for those of you who didn’t get it).

Anyway, since when did something become a fake just because it can be reproduced centuries later? Who would believe a headline that says,

“The Mona Lisa painting is fake, and a scientists can prove it… because it can be re-created by scientists hundreds of centuries later using advanced technology and materials (paint) that were available back then..”

Really, this is absurd. And we know it is completely absurd, because in the articles we are shown who this man is funded by: Atheists and agnostics. So did we really expect Luigi to prove it was real, when he is getting paid to specifically to prove it is fake? Go figure. This is par for today’s research and funding.

So atheists pay this man money to re-create religious relics, simply to try and prove their religion (atheism) is more superior? What? I am glad to see the atheists are ignoring the starving children in Africa, and funding much more important things right now: religious relic replication.

Or do they really think that if the cloth was fake, it would even affect 1 serious Christian? I think NOT.

If I have said it once, I have said it 1,000 times: Some atheists are the most religious people I know, and they are far more fundamental than most religious people I know. They mock and scoff at religious people donating money to a church, but freely fund nonsense like this and never think twice about it. Hypocrites.

Perhaps the creationists should release a press release that says the following:

Evolution’s transition fossils are fake: scientists have proved it…  They were able to recreate fossils that appear to be transitionary in a lab using materials (elements) that were available at the time when the original fossils were thought to have been created. Therefore, atheists creation story (evolution/abiogenesis) is fake, and their religious relics (fossils) are fake. They can be recreated, therefore, that is proof they are fake.

Since when did secular scientists start using that logical fallacy anyway? If something is recreatable centuries later, it must have been a fake originally. That is the most absurd logical fallacy I believe I have ever heard.

Perhaps that should have been the premise for the first Jurassic Park movie. Instead of the the dinosaurs getting loose, the movie should have ended as soon as the tour began. Jeff Goldblum should have stood up and said,

“Hey, wait a second guys. If scientists just recreated these dinosaurs using materials that were also available back then (DNA), then this proves dinosaurs were really fakes back then. Wow, astounding.”

and then the credits begin to roll…Although I suppose it might not have been such a success at the box office…

Seriously, it really annoys me when news stations publish this biased, illogical nonsense. It is an insult to any one’s intelligence (whether you are an atheist or Christian).

Furthermore, the articles mentions nothing about other known scientific evidence of the cloth, or what he replicated: the blood stains, the pollen grains, and more. It just says he was able to re-create the image. So what if he re-created an image. The image isn’t really the compelling evidence.

Why would they go to such detail to place pollen grains specific to that region where Jesus was thought to have lived, when a microscope needed to view and analyze the pollen grains were not even yet invented?? Brilliant. These hoax creators really made a piece of art didn’t they? They were way ahead of their time…so much, in fact, that scientists today still can’t replicate it perfectly.

Conclusion: Who Cares?

In conclusion, who cares whether the shroud is authentic or a fake? Does that prove one way or another that Jesus is the Christ? Does it prove one way or another that there is a God? Didn’t think so!

The bottom line is this: I don’t care whether the shroud is fake or real. It makes no bearing on my faith. But this article (or scientist’s re-creation) did zilch to affect my beliefs of the shroud.

No, I take that back. It actually makes me lean more in the direction that the shroud might be authentic after all. Why? Because they are throwing so much money and time at it, in an attempt to prove it might be fake. So they must be worried. Perhaps there is something there after all.

Sponsored Links

Posted under science

Wow, this is perhaps the most shocking news story I have stumbled upon in my life. If you thought you had all of the answers about evolution and intelligent design (or creationism), then you will be in for quite a surprise. You may even find yourself changing your views on the origins of life after reading this (I know I have).

Apparently, a leading Harvard scientist has made a radical discovery in the human genome that promises to put the evolution and creation debate to an end once and for all. Here is the entire article below, and the in-depth interview:

In what promises to be the biggest discovery yet concerning the evolution and intelligent design debate, a leading Harvard scientist, Dr. Paul Damascus, has uncovered a new piece of evidence hidden in the human genome which will change the thinking of modern scientists and even those of faith.

Those with faith supporting the intelligent design theory have often long believed that a being or form of intelligence (God for example) created all life on Earth.

Secular evolutionists, however, have often scoffed at the notion in favor of the model of Darwinian evolution to explain the means by which life originated.

These two wildly different views have caused countless debates and arguments among the two sides. A new discovery, however, could put an end to this debate once and for all.

Dr. Paul Damascus: There is no doubt that the new evidence we have discovered will show once and for all that both intelligent design and Darwinian evolution model for all humans life is wrong. Neither is 100% accurate. I think both sides will be surprised by what we discovered.

Immanuel Iscariot: Can you please explain what the evidence has revealed? What was the big discovery your team made in the human genome?

Dr. Paul Damascus: Well, the human genome was widely viewed as being very similar among humans, with only a very small percentage of insignificant variation, even among different races. What we  have recently discovered is that there are actually 2 different genome types in the human race. These two genome types vary by as much as 40% in terms of genetic information.

Immanuel Iscariot: This finding has already been published by most leading news organizations and scientific publications, and is beginning to spread on the web. How did your team make this discovery?

Dr. Paul Damascus: We isolated over 5,000 samples of human DNA, and ran each sample through a computer program that isolates the amino peptide structure of certain genes, and then compared them to a database of samples using a complex algorithm and statistical analysis. What we found is that there are 2 very distinct types of human DNA, whereas scientists originally thought all human DNA to be virtually the same without a statistical difference.

Immanuel Iscariot: You say this discovery has implications for the theories of origins of life. So what exactly does this discovery lead you to believe concerning the theory of evolution and intelligent design?

Dr. Paul Damascus: Due to the statistical analysis performed, this clearly shows that one group of humans could not have evolved. Their genetic makeup is different from all other known species on Earth by a very large significance. The other group, however, could have very well evolved from lower life forms. So it appears that both the theory of evolution and intelligent design are both accurate. We can now say that one group of humans have evolved from lower life forms, or common ancestors so to speak (such as monkeys). While the other group shows clear signs of intelligent design, by some higher form of intelligence.

Immanuel Iscariot: So you are saying that some humans on Earth right now evolved from common ancestor monkeys, and the others were designed by a creator? A God so to speak?

Dr. Paul Damascus: Yes, that is correct.

Immanuel Iscariot: I would imagine that some individuals after hearing of this will want to know whether they have evolved, or whether their genetic makeup shows signs that they were designed intelligently. How can people find out?

Dr. Paul Damascus: Well, there are a couple of ways. The first method is DNA sequencing, and we would need to get a sample and test it in a lab against a database and look at certain genes to determine if the person evolved or was designed.

Immanuel Iscariot: Okay, so they can pay to have their DNA sequenced in a lab. What is the other way?

Dr. Paul Damascus: The other method is actually much easier. What we discovered was that those with the intelligently designed genomes have a predisposition to believing in God. So, for example, those who believe in a creator, were designed by one.

Immanuel Iscariot: So you are telling me that those who believe in God were designed by God, and those who don’t evolved from monkey-like common ancestors?

Dr. Paul Damascus: Yes, that is correct. So far our analysis has confirmed this to be true in every tested case. The reason is that in the intelligently designed genome, there is a gene responsible for the development of neurons in utero. These neurons are created in a way so that there is a sort of “packet” of knowledge hard-wired into their minds about a creator. This is similar to buying a computer that has the software pre-installed. They automatically believe creation by an intelligent being is more logical, therefore they believe in God.

Immanuel Iscariot: So what about those who evolved from monkey ancestors?

Dr. Paul Damascus: The humans with the evolved genome structures do not have this packet of hard-wired neurons. Therefore, they simply do not believe in their mind that they were created by a form of intelligence. In their mind, they are not very different from lower life forms. Some even act like animals, and enjoy the fact that they are very closely related to them. They even get really excited to hear any information that confirms that they evolved from monkeys and have no real purpose or meaning.

Immanuel Iscariot: So would the most famous scientists in history that helped revolutionize the field such as Isaac Newton, Francis Collins, Albert Einstein, etc. have this gene? They believed in God, so does that mean they were in fact intelligently designed?

Dr. Paul Damascus: Absolutely. Nearly all of the intelligent scientists who made real discoveries that helped increase our knowledge did in fact have this gene. They believed in God, therefore they had the genome that bears intelligence. Many of the scientists today do not make bold discoveries. Instead, scientific discoveries only gradually happen over long periods of time due to the lower intelligence of the leading scientists. It takes a longer period of time, and more secular scientists to make any type of discoveries.

Immanuel Iscariot: So what about modern day secular atheist scientists. Names such as Richard Dawkins, and others? Do they have the genome which suggests they are related to monkeys? They weren’t intelligently designed at all?

Dr. Paul Damascus: Well, I would use the term “scientist” very loosely if I were talking about them. They are probably more accurately described as teachers, speakers, or authors, and not scientists per se. After all, have they really done anything at all to revolutionize science like Newton?  But yes, if you want to call them scientists loosely, they could be an example of evolved scientists who do not have the intelligently designed genome. Therefore, they are in fact evolved creatures. They certainly weren’t intelligently designed by a God.

Immanuel Iscariot: What kind of impact do you think this discovery will have on the future of the human race?

Dr. Paul Damascus: Well, I think it will clearly put an end to the debate of creation vs. evolution. Evolutionists will realize that the theory only applies to them, and not the entire human race. Therefore they will try to stop evangelizing the theory to people who believe in God. Likewise, the intelligently designed race will simply stop debating evolutionists. They will no longer protest the theory being taught in classrooms, however, they will demand that the theory only be taught to those who  were not created by any form of intelligence.

 

I was in complete shock as I read this article. Who could have known that the whole entire time, some people actually did evolve, and some were created by the mighty hand of God? You learn something new every day I suppose.

Note: For those of you who may be “slow,” this entire article was a satire (that means a joke). It was completely made up.

Sponsored Links

Posted under evolution, science