As reported on the Lou Dobbs program (with an interview of Christopher Hitchens) the United Nations is trying to pass a binding resolution to encourange member states to ban criticisms of religion (especially Islam). As far as I’m concerned the U.N. can stick any such resolution up their collective asses.
Do we really need to listen to lectures from this collection of tin-pot dictatorships (who think nothing of committing untold numbers of human rights violations against their own peoples) about the ‘horrors’ of possibly causing offense to someones delicate religious sensibilities?
It’s even worse than listening to Bush prattle on about defending freedom and liberty while holding people indefinitely without trial (torturing many of them) and wiretapping his fellow citizens without benefit of warrant (just to scratch the surface).
[Via Pharyngula, though unlike P.Z. I don't find Dobbs to be "odious" even if I don't agree with him on everything.]
Over at Uncommon Descent they are taking advantage of the brouhaha over the New York Post’s ‘gunned-down chimp’ cartoon (which many have taken as a racist slur against President Obama) to take their own pot-shots at evolution and in the process they have served up another example of the two faces of intelligent design.
This particular snark (“Is this Darwin’s legacy?”) is brought to us by UK weather-guy/meteorologist Andrew Sibley:
This is something of a followup on my previous post on bird hips and the place of the sauropods in the dinosaur family tree.
In that post I linked to an image of the dinosaur family tree I had found on the creationwiki web site:
After a commenter (Moth Eyes) noted, in so many words, how it was odd that a creationist might label this illustration a “family tree” given that they don’t believe there is such a thing. This led me to look at where creationwiki might have gotten this illustration.
AiG recently republished on their website a Menton piece from last year attacking the evolutionary relationship between dinosaurs and birds.
Often my first instinct when I run across these things is to launch onto a point by point refutation but I am going to restrain myself this time and simply highlight one rather obvious error in Dr. Menton’s article that in my opinion should cast doubt on anything else he has to say on the subject (especially since he claims to be an anatomist).
Happy Darwin/Lincoln day everyone! On this auspicious day we celebrate the 200th anniversary of the birth of both the founder (but not finisher) of evolutionary biology, Charles Darwin, and the great emancipator Abraham Lincoln, both of whom were born on this day, February 12, in the year 1809. Tis a day to celebrate both knowledge and freedom.
To make (not much of) a living I work as a small printing press operator and as you might imagine I’ve printed all sorts of things over the years. Last year we had some raffle tickets come through the shop that amused me (I just found a copy of the tickets I had saved while straightening up my office).
The tickets were for a“Vow of Chastity Raffle Extravaganza“.
This “extravaganza” was put on by a local Christian ministry (no surprise there) to “celebrate” their “vows of celibacy”. Now I find this sort of thing to be rather odd myself and a tad amusing in and of itself, however what was really funny, at least to me, was one of the things listed as a possible prize to be won in the raffle:
A queen sized bed (in a bag).
Is giving someone who is trying to remain celibate a portable bed really a good idea?