06 April, 2014

I shouldn't have to argue this again: Why the evidence for evolution is NOT overwhelming

Discussions are certainly interesting. Especially when they appear between Christians and Darwinists: People seem to think that if you're not getting paid to teach a class, you must be dumb. Give me a break! The smartest man in the world today is a hick out of Montana who we only even know about due to his competition on 1 vs. 100 back in the day, let's not forget. Likewise, Steve Jobs and Bill Gates -- founders of the #1 and #4 corporations in the world in terms of market cap -- were both college dropouts!

Let's make this very clear: Calling all evolution-cross-examiners ignorant is tantamount to calling all Jews arrogant, calling all Hispanics drug lords, calling all Christians gullible, calling all Muslims terrorists, calling all Chinese people communists, or calling all black people watermelon and fried-chicken eaters. You're making a hasty generalization that gives the false impression of an unfair advantage. This one issue is being screamed out in such ubiquity as a one-sided undebatable fact, when the reality is that all the evidence people say is hard enough to support it is really less valid than it seems. It's a mere hypothesis being backed by not only circumstantial but also artificially exaggerated evidence that is being passed off as harder than it really is. Let's examine all the evidence closer, shall we?

Even Darwin himself admitted that the fossil record is probably the worst form of evidence to ever be used to prove his theory. Why? Because the fossils don't match up to it. Rather than there being a bunch of transitional fossils between microbes and animals, say, 550 million years ago, there's a sudden appearance of all the major animal phyla in a timescale that when compared to the age of the Earth is equivalent to a mere 8 inches of a football field! I admit, that still amounts to 70 million years, but still: where are the interphylum transitional fossils? If Darwin's evolution theory were true, we would see transition fossils from one phylum to the next. Not at all what we see: There's the fossils that set the phyla apart, but in a manner completely at odds with evolution, no fossils in the entire period that link the phyla together! And right before that, all you see is microbes. There's absolutely no transitional fossils between the precambrian microbes and Cambrian animals either, which if Darwinism was true, that's what you'd expect to see.

That's not all, however. What about the Miller-Urey experiment? If amino acids could come about in the early atmosphere, that would explain the origin of life, right? Wrong! Sure, amino acids may be the building blocks of chemicals like DNA and proteins, but a cell? For a cell to form, the amino acids need to be arranged in a certain order. That simply does not happen on its own (the odds of mere chemical reactions between amino acids somehow miraculously forming a cell on their own are odds that even supercomputers have been unable to calculate), and, perhaps most importantly, the gases used in the experiment -- ammonia, methane, and hydrogen -- weren't even close to the early Earth's REAL atmosphere! If you use the correct carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, hydrogen sulfide, hydrogen chloride, and water that REALLY made it up, what you get is an acidic sludge that contains absolutely zero amino acids whatsoever. Yet it still shows up in textbooks as evidence supporting evolution! Give me a break.

Homologous structures, you ask? You think THAT is evidence of common ancestry? In homology diagrams, the structures are severely doctored. The color AND size have been altered to draw attention to structures that otherwise would go unnoticed. Moreover, don't artificially designed objects have homologous structures? An iPad and an iPhone. A Nexus 5 and a Nexus 7. An Acer AC700 and an Acer C720. Tim Berra, a PhD professor of biology at Harvard University in the 1950's, even tried to prove evolution using man-made cars, of all things! If a design is a design that works, it's going to be used over and over by that same designer; hence, this "evidence" mutually proves both evolution AND creationism, without giving favor to one or the other.

What about embryology? Doesn't it have something to say here? Let's be clear: The embryos used as evidence in textbooks are in fact artificially exaggerated fakes compared to the way the embryos really are. Ernst Haeckel, whose embryo drawings have been used over and over in textbooks and elsewhere, did two things to deliberately deface the truth: 1, he cherry-picked embryos that looked the most similar instead of choosing them at random, and 2, he exaggerated the results instead of accurately representing them. Moreover, the stage of development represented in the drawings is a midpoint stage, NOT a beginning stage! Compare them closer to their blastula stage, and what you find is embryos that are all radically different, then become slightly similar only to diverge a second time. Even Darwin himself admitted that the embryos were the single most valuable proof that his theory was true, and yet the fraud lingers on.

You say we share 99% of DNA with chimps, don't you? What you're believing is outdated information: In 2011, scientists were able to determine that it's really more like 70%. The radical difference also has been found in the most unlikely of places: the "junk" DNA that Darwinists have been trying to pass off as evidence for evolution. Moreover, in 2012, scientists found multiple purposes for the DNA that they once thought to be evolution's useless byproduct: everything from 4 million or so gene switches that actually turn genes on and off, to disease genes, all in those non-coding genetic black holes that we once thought didn't do anything. These findings showed us that a good 80% of all the DNA in our bodies is indeed biochemically active, meaning it's not evidence for evolution after all.

So let's review; that is, A, the fossil record is NOT laden with as much evidence as we need to support it, B, Miller-type experiments use gases that aren't even close to the early Earth's REAL atmosphere, C, homology is mutually exclusive to both evolution AND creationism, D, Haeckel's embryos were faked, E, we really only have 70% of DNA in common with chimps, F, the biggest difference between humans and apes is in the noncoding DNA that was once thought to be Darwinian genetic waste, and G, that non-coding DNA actually is a genetic boss to the very genes that do make proteins, completely at odds with what Darwinists thought was true. Yeah, way to pass off this circumstantial evidence as fact, because it sure doesn't sound like it.

My fellow worshippers, pastors, Christian apologists, and I often get asked what would happen to our faith if scientists were able to make life in a lab. Our response? It would only reinforce our beliefs even more, due to the fact that in that moment, the scientists would be playing God. You need information input to arrange the amino acids a certain way, just like you need information input to go from bricks to a city, which only proves that God exists. He is either impotent or evil because he allows evil to happen, you say? Look to the cross. And to the empty tomb three days later... What do you see? A God who actually knows your pain! Crucifixion is far more miserable of a death than anyone today can possibly fathom. Add on top of that the scourging, flogging, thorn-piercing, rejections, mockery, and denialism going on during those times, and what you get is someone who is certainly capable of walking with you through any trial or tribulation. The earliest Christians were often tortured or killed with the same degree of evil as Jesus was, yet they too had hope and joy through it all. Oh, yeah, and not only Jesus, but also Lazarus and the 12-year-old daughter of a centurion's servant are all proof that this God who knows our pain can also raise anyone from the dead. That's exactly why we Christians are so joyful no matter what trials or tribulation really happen. It's really up to the reader whether he's willing to share in that joy or not, because in all honesty, people whose main reason to doubt is the problem of evil in the world are "sitting on God's lap to slap Him in the face".

19 March, 2014

Far and Wide: The Ubiquity of Biblical Accounts

How do we know when Biblical stories are real? When they're echoed by other sources, right? Texts like Ipuwer, Sumerian clay tablets, and ancient Greek and Roman sources alike all tell of stories that almost mirror the Biblical accounts like the Exodus, the Garden of Eden, the Maccabean Revolt, and Jesus' death and resurrection with relatively great detail. As far-fetched as these mirrorings are, however, they pale in comparison to what I was able to find, just tonight.

In Revelation 12, an account is given of a metaphorical reference back to Mary giving birth to Jesus. She is, according to the account, "given wings like an eagle" to fly anywhere, while a dragon — the Antichrist — tries to fight against heaven, is cast out, and then tries to pursue Mary instead. The dragon, however, couldn't get close due to the eagle-like wings, so decides instead to unleash a flood from its mouth (Revelation 12:15)

What's significant about this passage is where else it's echoed. You certainly don't see watery rivers coming from beastly dragons' mouths in any pagan sources of the ancient Near East of this time. It's absent from Greek, Sumerian, Egyptian, Roman, every source you can think of from that time and place.

Notice how I said and place, however. There are indeed sources from other cultures that mirror it. Why haven't we noticed it? Because these cultures that possessed eschatology mirroring this account were nowhere close to the location where events like the death and resurrection of Jesus were occurring. No, these mirror accounts, beastly images that bear a startling resemblance to this, are from thousands of miles away.

Long before Europeans arrived in the Americas, what is now Mexico was home to Native American civilizations that, independent from everything else going on, were building their own pyramids. They were astounding astronomers, and using the information they gathered from the heavens, they conjured up a calendar system with prophesies tied to it. They were the Mayans, and what images do their codices mention as something that would happen when the world ends? That very same image of a flood coming from the mouth of a dragon-like beast.

Here's even more proof of Biblical truth: For two distinct cultures from opposite corners of the world, mind you, to somehow manage to conjure up identical eschatological images, either their cultures intermingled — which we know did not happen, because there's absolutely no ancient Jewish, Roman, or Greek accounts of a world being known this far away from their empires — or there is indeed a God who managed to give two distinct portions of the world identical images of how He would return.

Of course, the Mayans were indeed pagans, but that's beside the point: By being the creator, the only creator, of the cosmos, there's no doubt the God of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam would have planted some object in the sky that cultures thousands of miles away from each other would be able to interpret the same way.

Hopefully people see this as even more evidence that the Bible is true. Because two prophesies thousands of miles away from each other that tell about the same thing can't possibly be mere coincidence.

12 March, 2014

Greed List 2016: Petitioning Blog Readers to Avoid the Checkbox On These Candidates

I'm sure all previous visitors to this blog remember the 2012 blacklist, in which I used political positions of different members of the Republican Party that contradict the Christian people they claim to be as a reminder to myself and to all this blog's readers not to vote for them. Now that we're halfway between elections and already there are talks by some real idiots about wanting to run for the 2016 campaign, yup, it's time for another blacklist, and I already have one person that's destined to go on it.

Disclaimer: This blacklist isn't final yet. Candidates' political positions change from time to time as the election gets closer, so don't be alarmed if some candidates are removed and others are added as these next two years go by.

Anyhow:

  • Chris Christie: As governor of New Jersey, there's absolutely no doubt that Chris Christie has made the state the most politically corrupt state in this entire country. He's conspired to close bridges, covering it up with lies, to stifle political opponents. He's misappropriated Hurricane Sandy relief funds, also out of pure political motive. And, just today, Wednesday, March 12, 2014, he went on to ban the one and only brand of sports and/or luxury car that is able to get up to speed very quickly without gasoline — Tesla — from actually being sold in New Jersey, I'm assuming, out of either A, pure political motive, or B, most likely, lobbying from the evil oil companies. This myriad of scandals and, worst of all, petrocracy almost instantly puts Christie on my "no way, no how" list.

  • Jeff Boss: 9/11 conspiracy theories are automatically indicative of the kind of extremism that puts people on my "no way, no how" list. Put it this way: If 9/11 was an inside job, then why in the world did the terrorists who hijacked the aircraft manage to check into the flights carrying weapons, mind you, prior to the hijackings? These zealots would have absolutely nothing on them if they were on the planes just to have fun, yet these guys had guns and knives. So, the fact that people can come up with conspiracy theories to doubt that when the scientific evidence is staring them in the face goes to show how skepticism has polarized modern Western society as a whole.

  • Paul Ryan: If a group of people vote to shove the US government into default, the last person you'd ever want to vote for is the one who staunchly pushed for it. That's just what happened when Paul Ryan, 2012's VP candidate under the Romney campaign, voted along with a boatload of his fellow Tea Party extremists against the new budget proposal that actually saved us from total economic chaos. Now he wants to run for President?!?! Give me a break. This guy has absolutely no clue how a modern economy functions. If he did, he would stop his staunch support of the top 1%'s greed, start being the believer he's claiming to be, and actually treat the American "least of these" like his brothers and sisters for a change!

  • More to be added...

04 March, 2014

Why the "Bingbook" will fail

So, it's now March 2014. Steve Ballmer is no longer the CEO of Microsoft (gladly), and in his place is Satya Nadella, notorious for his cloud computing expertise. Microsoft, you recall, was attacking Chrome OS with its "Scroogled" campaign for quite some time... but now, with Nadella on board, Microsoft goes from attacking Google to, according to the rumors, wanting to copy Google.

Leaked screenshots surfaced of setup screens of what appears to be a stripped-down version of Windows 8.1 that only includes IE and Microsoft's cloud services. Now hold it right there: If you're going to strip down an OS to just a browser, the LAST one you're EVER going to want to cripple down to that level is Windows. Why? It's a malware writer's paradise!

The reason why Chromebooks cannot get viruses at all is due to the military-grade security built into them: The root volume is read-only and write-protected. Packaged apps and Chrome extensions are jailed to their own chroots. The browser, and by extension all Web apps, is also chroot-jailed. On top of that, user sandboxes are also extended to this chroot-grade level of security: Even administrators (AKA owners) cannot see what other users have on their accounts. With good reason, of course: If a malicious app or extension makes it to one user account, it is confined and won't spread to the whole Chromebook.

In contrast, Windows by design is completely vulnerable. It's been a target for years on end. A browser-based version, obviously, wouldn't be any different. Even with UEFI, Windows PCs can still get infected, and even if Microsoft uses UEFI to copy Google's security model, guess what command you won't find ANYWHERE on a Windows machine, even in the C-prompt? Chroot! Which makes the military-grade sandboxing that Chrome OS users know and love virtually impossible on ANY Windows machine.

On top of that, Windows is SLOOOW by design. Even if Microsoft manages to strip down much of Windows 8.1's  userland, the OS would be useless if Microsoft doesn't also strip down the core services bloat, and I'm pretty sure we all know why: because booting a Chromebook and Bingbook side-by-side, one would notice that the Chromebook would boot many orders of magnitude faster.

Using Gentoo Linux as the base, Chrome OS can indeed take advantage of technologies that make it extremely easy to trim down Linux's core bloat. In the case of Windows, guess what? The kernel would need to be completely rewritten! Heck, with the GUI and kernel as one (something I believe Mac OS X also does, but OS X happens to be confined to one brand of only powerful hardware to begin with, and thus impossible to benchmark on anything else), there's no way Windows on any machine — even one with an SSD — can possibly boot in 7 seconds. It's just not possible.

So, that's two flaws that prove The Chromebook Guys right about this concept being a failure in the making. Microsoft's track record certainly is not good when it comes to competing and one-upping competitors, that's for sure, and the only reason Windows and Office are any good is that they have network effects associated with them. MSN, Windows Live, Bing... Notice how they all NEVER managed to be a threat to Google? Well, based on these two flaws — malware and slow boot — neither will a Windows-based half-baked implementation of a Chromebook, not in a million years. 

01 March, 2014

Is a WINE-like Android app shim coming to Chrome OS?

The debate about whether or not Android and Chrome OS will converge into one platform has indeed been a heated one. Google, of course, has indeed hinted at that possibility even before Chrome OS was unveiled and open-sourced back in November 2009: Eric Schmidt is quoted in saying that the platforms "may converge over time," and they of course couldn't look more alike, at least from an appearance standpoint. But there is indeed more work to do, as there's a whole catalog of apps to consider. While Chrome apps do indeed work on Android and iOS, not to mention Windows, Mac, and Linux, all at once, the same is NOT true for Android apps trying to run on Chrome OS: they just won't run. For now, anyway.

However, that may be about to change: As the good old Johan Heinstedt pointed out, Google may in fact be using the all-powerful Native Client to bring Android NDK (but not SDK, at least not at the moment) apps to Chrome in such a way that they behave like Chrome apps. How can you tell? Because the latest developer builds of naclports (the Linux/GNU core libraries that are being ported to run in the Native Client sandbox) not only include GNU core libraries, but also the unthinkable:


What you see there is Bionic. Whereas Dalvik and ART happen to be responsible for the majority of Android apps that use Java code being able to run on Android, Bionic is responsible for all the NDK code. It provides all the necessary C and C++ core functionality to allow apps written in native code to run easily alongside the Java apps, and the fact that Google happens to be porting it to Native Client sure says something about a possible convergence. This is probably why KitKat turned out to be Android 4.4 instead of 5.0: because the amount of API breakage in KitKat pales in comparison to what moving everything into a NaCl-embedded library shim would entail.

Now if Dalvik and ART are next, then we all know what's coming: You would be able to run (and possibly even develop) Android apps on a Chromebook. Then, of course, since the Android home screen happens to be an app in itself, Google could just use NaCl to run the Google Now Launcher as if it were a mobile Chrome app, and, boom! You've got a Chromephone waiting for you.

21 February, 2014

Golden Equation: The Final Piece of Evidence Linking the Golden Ratio to Jesus

In Alimane Studios' "The Signs of God's Existence", there were indeed some interesting points made. Points like the discovery of quantum Golden Ratios to the spiral arms of galaxies being astronomical Fibonacci spirals, which all do a profound job of debunking atheist denialism head-on. They also throw in things like the Cambrian Explosion -- a problem that even Darwin himself admits disproves his theory -- along with other blunders to the arguments that atheist propaganda likes to put out there. Proof that there is indeed a God, you say. But just what God is He?

They claim Him to be the one of all the Semitic religions: Judaism, Islam, and Christianity, but use the Islamic name. They know for a fact that based on calculations only one God can make marks like the Golden Ratio such ubiquitously in creation. They know that multiple deities would produce multiple marks (such that you'd see a proliferation of 20 or so Golden Ratio-like phenomena), and that simply does not occur, which throws paganism out the window. They then acknowledge that this God must continually be active in the perfecting of this universe that is otherwise imperfect to this very day, otherwise His special mark on creation -- the Golden Ratio -- would have ceased appearing long ago. But then they use circular logic, linking that to Allah without first realizing that monotheism certainly is not unique to Islam. It started a full 2100 years before Islam, in fact, when in the 15th century BC, Egyptian (Tempest Stele, Ipuwer Papyrus) AND Jewish sources alike tell of a story of divine wrath placed upon Egypt to free the Jews -- the people in question -- from the slavery taking place there. Even Zoroastrianism has monotheistic overtones, that there cannot be more than one God out there, and we in fact see evidence of that in the Achaemenid period, where indeed tactics very similar to those "dhimmi taxes" used by Muslims were used by the Persians some 1,300 years before the Quran was written. Likewise, Jesus of Nazareth -- who is known to exist 800 years before Islam, mind you -- already claimed to be the Messiah sent by that God to extend that exodus to one not just from bondage, but from sin itself, and most importantly actually DID die only to rise from the dead.

In 2010, a computer graphics artist by the name of Ray Downing happened to have collected enough information from the image on the Shroud of Turin to turn it into an actual 3D model, which bears an awful lot of resemblance to what all the medieval and ancient art depict Jesus to look like, and also has forensic evidence of things like someone both crucified AND scourged -- forensic evidence that certainly is unique, as the ONLY known crucifixion to also have a flogging and scourging associated with it is that of Jesus. All that blood on the Shroud, resembling the amount of blood that comes from someone flying through the window of a car, certainly throws the Quranic claims about Jesus -- that Jesus didn't really die, that He somehow was able to get back up and out of the tomb only to flee to Arabia and die there -- right out the window, since that much blood loss -- as much as half to three quarters His total blood volume -- is enough to put anyone, even 300-pound heavyweight WWE fighters, into hypovolemic shock, which tends to exacerbate itself via positive feedback and thus can only be stopped by modern medical treatments. Since the technology to treat (and especially to cure) hypovolemic shock certainly did not exist 2000 years ago, it certainly would have had a mortality rate of almost absolute quantities. Moreover, that side wound is always a fatal one. Any wound that is able to damage the single most vital organ in the body — the heart — will kill anyone instantly, even if the cross merely put Him in a coma, and to top it all off, even if that impossible scenario was true, if He was in a mere coma in that tomb, not really dead, and woke up from that coma to push back the stone, He would have met armed Roman guards waiting for Him at the entrance. He was armed with nothing. The only way the Roman guards could possibly have not killed Him — again — is if something miraculous occurred, and that's just what the Biblical accounts say happened.

In the documentary, the image is also analyzed on a microscopic level. An image so superficial as to penetrate only one layer of microfibers, not threads but the actual microfibers that make up those threads, cannot possibly come from paint or acid pigments either. Paint and acid pigments penetrate far deeper than that, enough that whole threads are permeated, but that's not what's seen here at all. Moreover, the controversial 1988 Carbon-14 tests were taken from a corner of the Shroud that contains linen and cotton fibers interwoven together in sufficiently large quantities, along with dye in the cotton fibers that disguises them and makes them blend in with the rest of the cloth. The cotton AND dye alike would have introduced a deluge of foreign Carbon-14, greatly skewing the results of the tests. So the atheist claims of the Shroud being a medieval forgery are circumstantially based at best, denialism at worst.

There are, however, ghostly images of 20th-century Japanese victims of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings on things like blankets and bed sheets whose compositions almost mirror the composition of the Shroud's image. They are indeed negatives. They have 3D information in them. They possess the same superficial, one-microfiber-deep structure, for the most damning evidence, that the Shroud's image does. How do we account for this? All these images were found less than a mile from ground zero in both cases, and in those close quarters, the people would have been vaporized instantly. In fact, they would have been vaporized so quickly that the wave of vapor would have traveled supersonically through the bodies -- a phase-change detonation of human flesh, resulting in multi-directional beams of radiation from every part of the skin's surface, just the way a detonation wave radiates out from every part of the surface of a sculpted plastic explosive which is then detonated near steel: the image is burned right in. In order for that image to have gotten there, a similarly powerful event must have taken place, an event that the Gospel of Matthew actually makes an account of: the stone being rolled directly backward from the tomb, while the ground shakes and the Roman guards are blown to the ground as Jesus is being resurrected, providing a very plausible explanation as to how the image got there: the resurrection itself. So we have proof that He died, AND we have proof that He rose from the dead, don't we? Also, in the Gospels, the accounts of the miracles that Jesus performed after rising from the dead throw in odd numbers like 153 and "quirky details", as scientists mention, almost on a whim, convincing even scientists in the sequel to Ray Downing's documentary that the only explanation for such numbers being thrown in is the events actually occurring.

To top this all off, Joe Jackson (the STURP leader) and Downing were discussing how to get around the "2-dimensional stretching distortion" that made it very difficult to devise the 3D model. If Jesus were dead, just lying there, at the time the image was created, that very distortion would actually cause the front image to wrap around to the back image, such that the front and back image would have looked somewhat like Siamese twins conjoined at the head. That is not what you see. Instead, the Shroud possesses two distinct images of the front and back of the body inside it within about 3 feet of each other. The only way those two mirror images can possibly get there is if the body was levitating between the two halves of the Shroud at the time the image was created. Providing, of course, physical, archaeological proof that the man who created the image — most likely Jesus — was physically rising from the dead at the time the image was created. Finally, a miraculous re-appearance of the resurrected Jesus caught on camera in Romania in 1990 is absolute eyewitness proof that the image of Jesus on the Shroud of Turin is an authentic one. The same height, the same facial structures, the same beard shape, the same hair length, bar none, as what you see on the Shroud.

Now we come to the fun part: Back to Ray Downing, right before the image was unveiled, Downing mentioned two stories, which he says are both "intertwined" in a way. The story of the Shroud, from 2D to 3D, from a picture to a statue, as one of them, and the story of Jesus, from death to life. But wait! There's a third story! Earlier this afternoon, I found some pretty damning evidence that ties the Golden Ratio right in with both of these stories, almost to the point of mirroring them, and that evidence happens to lie within the equation that produces it: The positive root is (1 + √5)2, which to within 15 decimal places is 1.618033988749895... and the negative root is (1 − √5)2, which to within 16 decimal places is -0.6180339887498949. Notice a pattern here? Most people who calculate the Golden Ratio just throw the negative root away. What they have no clue about is what happens when you add the positive and negative roots, both irrational, together: you get a whole number, which happens to be 1.

This is literally the only quadratic equation I know of, in the world, which actually manages to bridge the gap between whole and irrational numbers. Everything else doesn't come close. In literally every other quadratic equation that anyone can possibly conjure up, adding two irrational solutions from the same equation produces either A, another irrational result, or B, a repeating decimal, NEVER a whole number. Likewise, if you add an irrational solution to a rational solution, i.e. if one solution to a given equation is rational and the other is irrational, the irrational solution always manages to rear its ugly head and contaminate the sum. And most importantly, if an equation has two rational or whole number results and thus can be factored, it's absolutely mind-bogglingly impossible to get an irrational sum of two rational numbers, at all. This one equation defies ALL those odds, because using it one is able to combine two irrational, messy solutions in such a way that they produce not only a rational sum, but an integer for a sum.

That anomaly seems to be a metaphor for the very creation of the universe itself: making order from chaos, making something from nothing. And the gap it bridges — that between whole and irrational numbers — is about as far as that between us and God. The Alimane guys even acknowledged that if the Golden Ratio was put here, into everything from whole spiral arms of galaxies down to atoms, by a creator, a designer, then it must have a purpose, right? Thanks to the way the two solutions to its progenitor equation line up, in that irrational-number-cancellingly perfect manner, I know exactly what that very purpose is: it's a reminder. A reminder of the unending love for us, of a God who wants to actually be with His creation, to be seen, to be known, and to be continually working to make us whole, to take all that irrationality in us and cancel it out, cleanse us, and transform us from sinners into saints.

So, we in fact have three stories, not just two. The story of the Shroud, as Ray mentioned, is one from 2D to 3D, from a picture to a statue. The story of the Golden Ratio, likewise, is a story from irrational to whole, from chaos to order. And, finally, the story of Jesus is the story from death to life. In all these three cases, we have one common theme. A theme of making this otherwise imperfect universe perfect, and continuing to actively love on us and call all of us His sons and daughters. Remember that the next time you try and deny His existence.

19 February, 2014

So what exactly is in store for us in the end times...?!

I must give good credit to the evidence Simcha Jacobovici provided for the linkage of the Book of Exodus to the Minoan eruption of Santorini. The gas leaks, the earthquakes, and all the evidence from Egypt that seems to also tell of the same catastrophes described in the Biblical accounts affecting Egypt do indeed prove that all the stuff that went on was indeed linked to the same volcanic event, of divine origin. But what about the Book of Revelation? Doesn't much of the widespread devastation mentioned there greatly resemble what went on in the Exodus?

Of course, accretionary lapilli are definitely described in Revelation, just as they are in Exodus, only with one extra tidbit:

"The first angel sounded his trumpet, and there came hail and fire mixed with blood, and it was hurled down on the earth. [...]"
—Revelation 8:7 NIV
Volcanoes aren't the only events that accretionary lapilli accompany. They're also known to accompany impact events, particularly ones that occur in oceans, and the blood (or dissolved Fe2O3) mingled with them definitely indicates that iron-rich accretionary lapilli — which can only come from asteroids — appear to be nucleated by water (and water vapor) thrown up in an impact plume (or multiple impact plumes), with the iron oxidizing and dissolving into the plume(s) of superheated water and steam in question. See, not all asteroids are iron-rich, but a very large number of them, especially those that have actually hit the ground and made craters, indeed are.

The book of Revelation does indeed account for at least three impact events, two of which seem to be from asteroids and at least one from a comet (more on THAT later), with both the comet and one of the asteroids fragmenting into multiple impacts. As we find in the sixth of the seven seals, right before the seal in which the seven trumpets are given (guess what? That right there WAS the first trumpet), the first account takes place: one of what appears to be a breakup of a single asteroid into multiple impacting bodies, with solar and lunar eclipse accounts preceding it:

"I watched as he opened the sixth seal. There was a great earthquake. The sun turned black like sackcloth made of goat hair, the whole moon turned blood red, and the stars of the sky fell to earth, as figs drop from a fig tree when shaken by a strong wind."
—Revelation 6:12-13 NIV

Blood-red water seems to also be mentioned in the book of Revelation, just as in Exodus, and there's more to come besides:

 "The second angel sounded his trumpet, and something like a huge mountain, all ablaze, was thrown into the sea. A third of the sea turned to blood, a third of the living creatures in the sea died, and a third of the ships were destroyed."
—Revelation 8:8-9 NIV

Most asteroids, again, are known to contain unusually high concentrations of iron, which in the burning, molten form found in an oceanic impact event is certainly capable of dissolving in the ocean at the impact site, which Revelation 18:21 seems to give us: According to this map, the Arabian Sea seems to have one of the largest methane clathrate stores in the world, and "Babylon the Great", a.k.a. Iraq, would easily be wiped out by an impact-generated megatsunami there. Likewise, rapid methane clathrate breakdown can be an easy side effect of an impact event superheating a large section of ocean, releasing methane which then churns up the resulting dissolved ferric oxide. Ah, but now we come to an impact event that seems to cause problems unique to the book of Revelation:

"The third angel sounded his trumpet, and a great star, blazing like a torch, fell from the sky on a third of the rivers and on the springs of water— the name of the star is Wormwood. A third of the waters turned bitter, and many people died from the waters that had become bitter."
—Revelation 8:10-11 NIV

When Comet ISON exited the Oort cloud back in 2012 and came into astronomers' view, something very unusual was detected about its composition: abnormally high levels of hydrogen cyanide gas in its tail, which happened to spike as it neared the inner Solar System, only to diminish as the comet got too close to the Sun for any frozen water or gases to remain. Hydrogen cyanide, of course, gained infamy for its use by the Nazis to conduct the Holocaust itself, but it also happens to have a lesser known quality: it's precisely what gives bitter almonds their bitter taste. When ISON got close to the Sun, however, most of that cyanide evaporated entirely due to its intense heat.

See, out in the interstellar medium — which includes the Oort cloud — HCN is indeed far more abundant than it is on Earth. Perhaps the most common conjugate base found in the interstellar medium by astrochemists is the hydrocyanonium cation, which has thus far been virtually impossible for chemists to replicate here on Earth. HCN, therefore, has a tendency to form compounds out there — such as salts of hydrocyanonium and strong acids, i.e. hydrocyanonium nitrate, hydrocyanonium sulfate, hydrocyanonium halides  — that are only stable in those freezing out-of-Solar-System conditions. Once those alien chemical compounds — solids in the comets themselves — enter the Solar System, they're going to want to decompose, and that's precisely what happens when comets just exit the Oort cloud. So it seems, then, that while the first two impact events seem to be asteroid impacts — one in fragments, one intact — this third impact seems to be an Oort cloud comet strike. Most likely a fragmented one, as that's the only way it can contaminate so many small bodies of water — rivers, lakes, and springs — with cyanide without actually making a crater.

The impact events mentioned previously also would throw up debris plumes, which certainly explains the fourth trumpet, where a third of the day and night are darkened: the debris plumes would simply block out the sunlight and moonlight, then proceed to circle the globe, blocking out the sun and moon wherever they go.

In the early history of Earth, comet and asteroid strikes are also known to have genetically modified species native to Earth with alien DNA, and that's precisely what the fifth trumpet states: locusts suddenly obtaining scorpion-like stingers and evolving into monsters ready to inflict pain on the Antichrist's worshippers, for months at a time. Directly following comet and asteroid strikes in the past, such rapid genetic modification by impact events containing alien genetic material has indeed happened to other species of small size (including rat-sized mammals 65 million years ago), which would make insects of today no different. The sixth and seventh, of course, are of pure divine origin and therefore cannot possibly be explained scientifically, though I, as a believer, certainly am someone who sees them as possible.

Now, for the bowls. The first bowl seems to be a series of subterranean carbon dioxide releases similar to what Jacobovici mentions as a viable explanation for the Exodus Plague #6, as the "ugly, festering sores" are definitely something that carbon dioxide is capable of causing due to poor skin circulation. Out of the ground directly, I suppose, because if it leaked through water it would cause it to become blood-red (more on THAT later), and oh yeah, any series of sizable impact events like the ones in the trumpet judgments certainly would cause enough tectonic stress to allow gases to leak out.

Meanwhile, the second bowl is of the remaining two thirds of the ocean -- that which isn't turned red by the asteroid impact in Trumpet Sound #2 -- suddenly turning blood-red. Well, guess what? In the Arabian Sea impact, a good chunk of Arabian Sea methane clathrates would have been released into the atmosphere, causing very rapid, unprecedented global warming. Remember, methane clathrates are normally frozen, deep under the ocean, and can only form at cold, deep temperatures. When those clathrates are disturbed by heat, they're going to break down and release methane. The global warming caused by the Arabian Sea methane sets off positive feedback which then goes on to release even more methane clathrates, this time on a global scale.

In Bowl 3, the same thing happens to the lakes, rivers, streams, and springs: they too turn blood-red. This can only happen due to the gas leak that also caused the sores in Bowl 1. The extra carbon dioxide coming from land and methane from the oceans also come together to explain Bowl #4 in a nutshell: The sudden release of these potent greenhouse gases would easily push the climate to extraordinarily high temperatures, and trap enough heat to push the unleashed methane beyond its autoignition temperature, causing all that methane to then suddenly ignite and set off a firestorm that quickly spreads across the globe in a matter of seconds, just as the account describes.

The charcoal dust kicked up by the greenhouse-effect-induced methane explosion (which would scorch any vegetation it chews through, and cause enough sudden air expansion to also kick up topsoil and blow it around) then results in pitch darkness, which Bowl #5 describes, and the other combustion product of both methane and vegetation -- more carbon dioxide -- would trigger yet another warming trend, which explains Bowl #6.

See, the Tigris and Euphrates aren't fed by subterranean springs. They're fed by Caucasus glaciers. Those glaciers are likely to melt -- perhaps vaporize -- very rapidly as a result of the methane explosion and, thanks to the resulting carbon dioxide, not reform very easily either. Sure, there may be some groundwater and glacial lakes left over to sustain the rivers for a short while, but not for long. So, the rivers dry up, just as the Biblical accounts describe.

After this, the tectonic stress that causes gases to leak in Bowl 1 reaches a critical point. The multiple impact events, gas releases, clathrate breakdowns, and global firestorms place tremendous stress on Earth's crust, causing literally all the earthquake faults in the world to rupture in their entirety, not to mention volcanoes to erupt, which cause dirty thunderstorms besides, resulting in the very depiction of thunder, lightning, and a worldwide earthquake all happening simultaneously. The volcanoes -- several erupting at once -- then release sulfur oxides, which block out sunlight, first causing upper-level instability -- resulting in the "talent-weight" hail described there -- and then subsequently a cooling phase, allowing God's kingdom to finally be established where the earth once stood.

15 February, 2014

CO2 Emissions are Drying Up California... for Now

The climate change debate is indeed a heated one, and I can assure you that I've met my fair share of denialists in the past. Let's get the facts straight, however: Sure, climate has had its ups and downs over the last 800,000 years, there's no doubt. Sure, the carbon dioxide levels in Earth's atmosphere have also fluctuated, and have always played a crucial role in that oscillation. Since, the 1800's, however, the amount of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere has grown to more than double its 800,000-year average. Just in the last 200 years alone, the total amount of CO2 that the industrial revolution has added to our atmosphere is just mind-blowing compared to what it would be naturally, and here's the statistics to prove it:




This is certainly not a natural phenomenon. Notice how the spike around 300,000 years ago happens to be the warmest period the Earth has seen on record, for as far as the ice cores tell us. The amount of anthropogenic CO2 that has been dumped into our atmosphere pushed the concentration of the underlying cause of our interglacial at a good 75 to 100 more parts per million than it, and in that 300,000-year-old period that we just artificially one-upped, the Arctic Ocean was already nearly completely thawed out.

What's more alarming, though, are the results of our efforts. Right now, the polar jet stream -- the primary source of rain for California, where I'm at -- is not anywhere near us. Rather, it's bringing all the rain (and snow) to Alaska, which is usually what it does in the summer, not in the winter. The reason? Abnormally warm water in the North Pacific ocean, which results in the air also being warm, thus causing a persistent ridge of high pressure to form, ultimately resulting in the unthinkable: water-temperature feedback. Something that last year, after seeing these pictures of retreating Alaskan glaciers, courtesy of The Weather Channel, was something I was fearing was inevitably going to happen, sooner or later.

Why, you ask? The cold water off our coastlines is brought to us by the California Current. Normally, of course, it's freezing cold; often times surfers need wet suits even in the summer time! The California Current's only source of cold water, however, is -- you guessed it -- glacial meltwater from the Gulf of Alaska, which is carried southward by the CC into the North Pacific. Note how nearly all those pics provided by TWC that are from Alaska (and not Montana) are of glaciers in Glacier Bay and Kenai Fjords national parks, the Chugach National Forest, and the St. Elias Mountains. Those are ALL locations that empty into the Gulf of Alaska! Which really spells trouble. Not just drought, but especially in the long run, a complete 180-degree twist of wet and dry seasons. Oh yeah, and it's not supposed to be 80+ degrees F in January/February, but thanks to this abnormal pattern, it certainly is.

Meanwhile, our folks on the East Coast are feeling the opposite: record cold. Now before you try and use this against me, remember this: The polar vortex is typically centered right over the North Pole. Not this time, however: It's fragmented. It's utterly disorganized. Instead of one strong polar vortex over the North Pole, there's a multitude of fragmented, weak polar vortices. Here's how it's normally supposed to look, from November 2013, the last time it looked that way:



And here's how it looked in January 2014:


Note the annotated portion of Map 2. The polar vortex seems to be disrupted by that one little spot right off the eastern Gulf of Alaska, precisely where all the glacial melt is occurring... and oh yeah, precisely the very source of cold water that the California Current depends on. In prior years, that region didn't stop it. Now, however, it seems to be doing a very good job of tearing apart the polar vortex and causing all sorts of extremes.

Well, let's get back to California. Sure, it may be dry now, but it's also winter time. We as Californians are surely used to dry weather, but seeing it at this time of year is worrisome to say the least. However, thanks to the fact that there isn't as much Pacific glacial melt from Alaska keeping the California Current cold as there used to be, the warm waters of the Kuroshio Current -- the ones that give typhoons their energy -- are now slowly being given free-reign to spill over onto this side of the Pacific. That is exactly what's driving the jet stream northward and putting us in a drought now, to be sure, but in the summertime, a more direct influence that the abnormally warm water typically has on the air -- an increase in tropical humidity -- will have the opposite effect. To be precise, it can do either one of two things. First up: the monsoon.

The American monsoon pattern is infamous for the flash flooding and mudslide damage it causes in mountain and desert communities. What underlies it, however, is completely different from what underlies the Asian monsoon that makes India have such problems. In India's case, it's the Himalayas, which act as a sort of positive-feedback catalyst forcing winds to shift in one of two directions: toward them, or away from them. In the Americas, however, it's an area of low pressure caused not by high mountains but by desert heat.

See, during the summer time, the area around Death Valley -- notorious for its world-record high temperatures -- ends up getting so freakin' hot as to manipulate its own weather. Remember, Death Valley is an island of low desert - below sea level, in fact -- in a sea of high desert. The Mojave Desert and its kin may be hot, that's for sure... but being higher up, it doesn't get anywhere near as hot as Death Valley. This results in winds blowing toward Death Valley in a sort of counter-clockwise fashion, drawing in an atmospheric river from Mexico that ends up convecting and turning that weak low pressure area into a slightly stronger one.

In the case of warmer than normal Pacific waters resulting from the California Current's cold water source disappearing, however, that atmospheric river won't be coming from Mexico. Why? Because there would be warm tropical waters right off our coast for the thermal low to grab! So guess what: The normal sea breezes, rather than being cool and humid, end up becoming warm and humid, fueling the convection over the desert and turning the thermal low over the desert into a much more powerful thermal cyclone capable of completely drenching our area for several months straight. Speaking of cyclones, that's Scenario 2 for you.

Despite how rare they are, tropical storms -- including at least one hurricane -- have in fact hit California before. If the California Current is robbed of its only cold water source -- again, southern Alaskan glaciers -- expect them to only increase in strength and number. Yes, it's dangerous, and it certainly is something that's not to be taken lightly either, which is what this blog post is for: letting people know what's happening.

See, the whole reason why tropical cyclones are rare in California to begin with is BECAUSE of the California Current, at least the way it is right now. The water is so cold off our coast because of it that it tends to act as a sort of buffer zone, shielding California from disaster. Without it, more tropical cyclones off Mexico would have free reign to veer north and hit us, and that's just what anthropogenic glacial melt is doing: robbing the California Current of its only cold water source, and that source is again the glaciers.

Let's hope people finally understand what's going on here, because unfortunately it may already be too late. Hopefully it isn't, but the weather patterns that we're seeing now that it's 2014 may in fact prove that this is the beginning of the end for California's current climate, and the beginning of one whose wet and dry seasons are literally the exact opposite of what they currently are. If it's not too late, then good, we have carbon emissions to cut, so let's cut them. Provided climate change denialists funded by the oil monopolies don't continue to disseminate lies that subvert the truth, we should easily be able to. If it is, then we'll just have to prepare...

12 February, 2014

VIDEO: Microsoft's Scroogled fraud, exposed

Okay guys, since Microsoft happens to STILL be spreading the lies that Chrome OS is a "brick" when offline, it's time I kick it up a notch. With a video exposing every little bit of functionality that an offline Chromebook has, just to take out that campaign head-on. Here, watch for yourself:




I have had this video on YouTube for quite some time. One thing is certain, however: Microsoft STILL released another ad attacking Chrome OS, even after it was posted. Oh, and if you try and bring Microsoft's lame excuse for a productivity suite into the picture, let's keep in mind that some of this blog's biggest masterpieces -- including essays from English class dubbed over to it, like this one -- were typed up and submitted, as A+ papers, according to college professors, using not Microsoft Office but Google's productivity tools, which happen to be baked right into Google Drive. And oh yeah, they actually work offline, as this video proves... As for opening Microsoft Office files, that's what QuickOffice is for.

08 February, 2014

Why the "right" to sin isn't really a right

This issue tends to really be a heated one, which is why the last time I mentioned my position in these views was back in 2012 for my election blacklist, but let's take a step back for a minute. Are there genetics that dictate dark skin? You bet. Are there genetics that dictate slanted eyes? Again, yes. Are there genetics that control how abled or disabled someone is? In some cases, yes, absolutely, and in other cases injuries that cannot possibly be healed without divine and/or Messianic intervention also play a part. Is there a genetic factor that dictates whether someone is male or female? Yes, the very layout of chromosomes does. But is there any genetic factor that determines sexual orientation? Uh, no.

There may indeed be trisomies like Kintefeller's syndrome that may be minor factors, but in literally 99.9999...% of the gay community, the genetics that govern such disorders simply aren't there, and often times those that have the trisomy in question are completely sterile and incapable of having sex due to their lack of sexual hormones and thus inability to penetrate, making them asexual and often perpetual virgins. The same goes for XX male syndrome: sterility, NOT homosexuality, is what wins out.

On top of this, any infertile, unproductive form of sex poses a very significant risk to life on earth as a whole. Remember, sins always have consequences, no matter what those consequences are. The consequence of murder is, naturally, someone wanting to get even. That of incest is a child born with a deformity. That of rape is someone getting pregnant without wanting to. But what about homosexuality? Sure, there may be no ramifications of this lifetime, but think about it: What's the product of homosex? Is there any child? Any family? Nope, nothing at all. A society without traditional families, a society where babies are never born, is a society that will ultimately have a dwindling population. Yup, that's right, the consequence, the NATURAL consequence, of the sin of throw-away sex, regardless of whether it's homosex or heterosex obstructed by contraceptives, is ultimately human extinction.

See, science and Christianity certainly are closer now than they ever were in the past. We have biological proof that seems to only reinforce scripture, with this being just one of many examples of it. If people could change their skin color arbitrarily without divine and/or Messianic intervention, there would be no civil rights movement. Likewise, if people could miraculously cure themselves of cerebral palsy, autism, ADHD, and/or Down syndrome without divine and/or Messianic intervention, they too wouldn't have parades marching for their rights. But people who are gay can indeed change. Why? Because they can choose who they are sexually attracted to. It's not a trait, it's a choice, and if they're biologically capable of straightening out, which they are, then they certainly are practically capable of straightening out as well.

Then, of course, there's people who try hard to change their gender. Guys end up undergoing surgery and chromosome splicing therapy to become girls/women, and the same is true with girls/women wanting to become guys. This act only reinforces my claim that being gay isn't natural, and the very act of attempting to change one's gender is in itself a hypocritical testimony against the claim that sexual orientation is an innate trait. Gay animals, you may try to bring up? What DNA can you show us that governs their homosexuality? I would easily bet you a million bucks if I had it that none would ever be found. If geneticists were unable to come up with a human "gay gene", the likelihood of them finding an animal "gay gene" would be even slimmer.

So don't be deceived by the gay community. They may try to push the law and claim that they shouldn't need to change, that it's their right to retain their sinful lifestyles that they themselves chose to live. There is, however, both biological AND scriptural proof that they're wrong.

Bottom line: Can a black person "convert" to a white person? No. Can a disabled person "convert" to an able person? No. Can a man "convert" to a woman, and vice versa? Only unnaturally, and if they try they always fall short, such that certain aspects of their "old" gender often linger in their "new" gender and make them stand out, very noticeably. But can a gay person "convert" to a straight person? According to both biogical AND scriptural standards, yes, yet the activism they conduct often hardens their hearts to it. Keep that in mind the next time they try and pressure you into recognizing them.

Socialism and Christianity: The Case for Compatibility

To all who read this: What do you think is the biggest source of atheism in this world? Is it science? Good guess it's certainly up there, but it's not #1. What about the stigma that Catholic and Muslim terrorists put on the three religions of Semitic origin as a whole? That's another factor, but again, it falls short of the main reason by a long shot. So what is that main reason? To find out requires a history lesson.

The story starts in the late 1800's. The Industrial Revolution is in full gear, work is becoming more and more tedious by the minute, and pay for the average worker? Let's just say the top 0.1% of the world's population hold a lavish 80% of its wealth. Workers, of course, were fed up with this. They were impoverished, worked long hours, and basically became wage-slaves to the billionaires that ran the factories. Among them was a German, credited with basically inventing communism. His name was Karl Marx.

So what does Marxism have to do with atheism? A whole bunch. See, at this time, factory workers that made up the bulk of the world's labor couldn't even afford to put food on the table, let alone go to church. The only people who could afford to go to church were the wealthy elite, and often times they actually used the Bible — most of whom at the bottom couldn't even afford to touch — to reinforce their extraordinarily lavish lifestyles and evil business tactics. This along with the fact that church leaders themselves had a history and reputation for being ruthless tyrant kings living similarly lavish lifestyles gave those at the bottom — including Marx — the impression that the church was simply out to get them, and thus, the only way they thought they could solve the problem was to become enemies of the church altogether. What they didn't realize, however, was how much the early church founders could actually relate to them. Including the Messiah Himself.

See, the Roman Empire's wealthy elite were very much like the wealthy elite of Marx's time. The difference? In the 19th century, the wealthy elite still had to answer to a higher authority; in this case, the government elected by the people. In the Roman Empire during the first century, however, the people who ran the tyrannical regime that made up the Empire's absolute monarchy were themselves the top 1% of the world's wealthy. And oh yeah, the way they ran their military campaigns was to strip all the $$$ they could get from whoever they stepped on. Oh, yeah, and they often hired locals — tax collectors — to extort this money for them, taxing literally everything. Yes, that includes placing the military expenses from invading someone's country in the first place on the country having been invaded. On top of this, these locals would often charge more than what was required of them to charge, only to pocket the extra cash.

There are indeed several lambastings by Jesus against the wealthy, greedy people of His time. The story of the "rich young ruler" in Matthew 19 that was told to give everything to the poor if he wanted to follow Jesus is certainly one example. Another example are both Matthew's and Luke's versions of the Beatitudes and, in Luke's case, the "woes" against the lavish that follow. Still another are the seven "woes" mentioned in all of the gospels which are directed at the Pharisees, who being the religious leaders of His time were indeed also extremely wealthy, self-absorbed, greedy, and selectively welcoming. On top of that, Jesus even calls tax collectors, like Zacchaeus and Matthew, to ditch their vast tax-collecting fortunes and follow Him, and unlike the rich king, they actually ARE willing to drop their possessions. And then, of course, there's Paul.

In 1 Timothy 6:10, Paul goes beyond calling greed a sin. He calls it a "root of all kinds of evils". Which in many ways, it is. Why? Because of the way material possessions are presented. We are told in the New Testament to be "stewards" — mere caretakers — of the resources we're given. People who are greedy, however, tend to take pride in their possessions as if they're rightfully theirs. Guess what? That causes a cycle — which I call the "greed-pride cycle" — that ends up leading to people stealing, committing murder, prostituting themselves, raping women, and committing every possible mortal sin they can possibly commit purely out of pursuit for material wealth. This, of course, is EXACTLY what made the pre-Constantine Roman Empire so evil. The one thing they wanted, the one thing they would be willing to slaughter millions of people for, the one thing that made them want to conquer above all else, was money.

So why are communists still fighting the church? We have written in scripture, 1,900 years before Marx, in fact, that the earliest Christians, including Jesus Hinself, were in very similar circumstances to what set off communism in the first place. On top of that, just like the communists, the earliest Christians also saw greed, not lust, not gluttony, not homosexuality, and certainly not the mere state of "not being kosher" as the evil above all evils. Which of course is true, because a good 80% of the time, greed tends to serve as a motive for a host of other sins, and it's precisely why people at the bottom became fed up with the tycoons in the first place.

So, if anyone is able to actually admit that Christianity and communism ARE in fact compatible as my proof suggests, please come forward. These two circumstances certainly are too similar to be coincidental, and let's be clear: While the church of the Middle Ages up until the 1800's certainly was a product of the wealthy elite, intentionally interpreted by shallow religious scholars to cover up similar selfish ambitions to what the scribes and Pharisees had, the church of the 1st century — and likewise most of the church of today — was and is far from it. In fact, there are socialists, like Hugo Chavez for instance, who are in fact scripturally motivated. Let's make sure others in socialist and/or communist nations also notice, shall we?

04 February, 2014

Resurrection denial: Why it doesn't make any sense at all

Back in 2012, I was on an OCTA bus headed to worship at The R.O.C.K. to worship. All was well for the majority of the ride, and I was enjoying my Google Play worship music playlist along the way. But suddenly, out of the blue, a bunch of atheist skateboard kids boarded the bus when it passed Laguna Hills High School. What myth exactly where they trying to attack me with? Resurrection denial. They kept trying to convince me of the lie that Jesus' tomb wasn't empty -- to no avail, of course. Why to no avail? Because we indeed have proof of the contrary. Read on.

1. Il Sindone de Torino (The Shroud of Turin)


Ah, the one artifact that you say is a medieval forgery due to the controversial Carbon-14 tests, don't you? Not so fast: Back in 2005, the Shroud went under the microscope. Again. This time, however, they looked at the very location where the carbon-dating sample was cut. See, the original Shroud was indeed linen. The weave is very distinctive, and as always, the linen part of the cloth is indeed older. In 1532, however, a fire severely damaged the Shroud. It burned holes down the cloth's sides, and in order to help make the Shroud look better, the church put a backcloth on it, and proceeded to sew it onto the edges.

Here's where the 14C testing failed miserably: The corner that was tested was indeed a severely damaged one. So damaged, in fact, that they had to use a cotton patch to repair it. Why cotton? Because linen is far more difficult to dye. In order to make the repairs look as authentic as the rest of the Shroud, the charred portion that originally made up that corner had to be removed and the fibers separated. Then, the cotton threads in the patch had to be woven around the linen threads to make the patch not look like a patch at all, so that when the patch is dyed, it would deceptively look like the entire rest of the Shroud. Sure enough, what did the microscope examination reveal? Examining the microscopic thread images, textile experts have indeed found interwoven linen-cotton thread hybrids in that very corner where the 14C testing was conducted, contaminating that portion of the Shroud and skewing the results, just as the explanation above describes. The most compelling case of the authenticity of the Shroud itself, however, comes from microscopic examination of the image itself.

See, the image is very subtle. What makes up the image itself certainly isn't paint, pigments, or dye. If it were, you'd see microscopic particulates of the pigmentation in question. Even acid pigmentation, the main contender of debate, produces a crust of dyed salts and solid esters. In the Shroud image, those particulates and acid salts simply don't exist. In fact, there were indeed dye particulates in the 14C-tested corner, but not in the image area! Instead, the Shroud image penetrates only the top two microfibers of the cloth. The microfibers on the surface are slightly darker, slightly discolored, but once you pull them aside, there's nothing below them. Paint doesn't do this. Neither does dye, and neither do acid pigments.

However, there is indeed another phenomenon that is widely known to create images with the superficial microscopic patterns also seen on the Shroud. Not a medieval method, of course, but a modern one: In 1945, to end World War II in the Pacific that otherwise would have been far more deadly and costly due to how many Japanese soldiers and civilians alike were wielding weapons, the US did the unthinkable: dropped the first two nuclear weapons ever built -- A-bombs -- on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan. Indeed, on cloths, bed sheets, and towels, images of the bodies of several victims of the bombings were imprinted in very much the same way that the image of Jesus was imprinted on the Shroud of Turin. Wait, so the Shroud is a nuclear image?!

Maybe not, but understanding nuclear physics may help to shed some light here: See, when the bombs went off, before producing fireballs, they produced huge gamma-ray flashes. These gamma rays were also accompanied by high-energy particles, mostly fission products and neutrons. At ground zero, anyone would have gotten killed, of course... and yeah, vaporized instantly. In fact, they would have been vaporized so quickly as for a detonation wave of body vapor to propagate through the bodies themselves, which would have caused the contours of the bodies in question to behave like shaped charges, directing particles from every part of the surface of them in such a manner as to create the images in question. That body vapor would also produce ionizing radiation, in the form of either gamma rays or beta particles, due to the transmutation of carbon and nitrogen in these people's bodies into radioactive isotopes (yup, including the isotope to rule them all: 14C) by fast neutrons from the blasts, which would prematurely age portions of the cloths that they hit, discoloring them.

We actually do have Biblical evidence of the same explosive energy associated with the resurrection of Jesus Himself, certainly capable of creating such an image:
And behold, there was a great earthquake; for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone and sat on it. His countenance was like lightning, and his clothing white as snow. And the guards shook for fear of Him and became like dead men.
—Matthew 28:2-4
Note the boldfaced portions of the passage here. An earthquake-like shockwave and a flash brighter than lightning both seem like a detonation, don't they? Then, we have an account of the stone being rolled back. Not to the left, not to the right, but directly backward from the tomb. An explosion of the force described above would actually turn the tomb entrance into a sort of gun, blasting the stone back from the entrance in that very same manner. Then, that matter, having Jesus' soul in it, would have re-coalesced as the resurrected Jesus, outside the tomb. This to me certainly explains how the image got there.

Then again, the Shroud certainly isn't the only proof we have.

2: Jesus didn't JUST rise from the dead Himself...


He actually raised others from the dead! Not only did Jesus raise people from the dead, but so did His disciples, with the power of the Holy Spirit guiding them. We also have support for this, right in the New Testament:

Then, He took the child by the hand, and said to her, "Talitha, cumi," which is translated, "Little girl, I say you you, arise." Immediately, the girl arose [from the dead] and walked [...]
— Mark 5:41-42
Now when He had said these things, He cried with a loud voice, "Lazarus, come forth!" And he who died came out bound hand and foot with graveclothes, and his face was wrapped with a cloth. Jesus said to them, "Loose him, and let him go".
—John 11:43-44
But Peter put them all out, and knelt down and prayed. And turning to the body, he said, "Tabitha, arise." And she opened her eyes, and when she saw Peter she sat up. Then he gave her his hand and lifted her up; and when he had called the saints and widows, he presented her alive.
— Acts 9:40-42

Someone who is capable of raising this many people from the dead certainly is capable of rising from the dead Himself, don't you agree? Yup, so do I. So, we have more proof that the atheists are wrong.

If anyone has even more suggestions of proof, do me a favor: Please, mention them in the comments so I can add them.

30 January, 2014

Making All Things Work Together for Good

Well, here I am, worshipping at the awesome young adult ministry that is The R.O.C.K., a portion of the Mount of Olives Church campus on the opposite side of Chrisanta Drive that's just for us. Nicole Stirling, one of the youth directors, filled in for Pastor Jim Reynen, out sick with pneumonia, and preached an awesome sermon that centered mostly on Romans 5:1-5, in which Paul told people to rejoice no matter what, even in suffering, why? Because often times, suffering tends to be blessing in disguise. I, fortunately, am a living example of that.

Back in 2003, my parents suffered from layoffs within weeks of each other. My family's combined income, overnight, was literally 65% less than it was before the double layoff. Fast forward to February 2008, and the mortgage on the house they used to own, $3000 per month previously, doubled to a staggering $6000 per month, forcing my parents to abandon that place in a short sale, which completed in June 2008.

The 9 months that followed were a nightmare. My dad of course had a second job in addition to the one he got laid off from — a night audit one at a hotel — and through it we were able to get employee discounts on hotel rooms. However, he could only get them for a week at a time, so we had to pack up everything and hop from hotel to hotel to hotel, until finally, in March 2009, my family was able to rent a townhouse.

Ah, but wait: The landlord who rented to us decided to rent-skim the place and not pay the mortgage that the rent paid for! So, it was time to move again, this time, into a 2-bedroom apartment. In July 2010, guess what? We were on the move again.

We were in that cramped apartment for a few months, when, out of the blue, my grandfather (on my dad's side of the family) had a heart attack while doing groceries and was dead before he hit the ground. What shocked us the most about the situation was that his wife — my grandmother — was in far worse shape than he was! It devastated us. Exactly a year later, of course, in the fall of 2011, my paternal grandmother also died.

A double bereavement sounds devastating, doesn't it? Ah, but wait: They had a house in a 55+ community in Murrieta worth a good $115,000, plus $58,000 in cash estate. That was enough for a down payment!

The house hunt went on and on. Of course, land $hark$ were on the move, and tried to outbid us with full-ca$h offers. Meanwhile, my parents were on the computer, looking at digital maps of houses do sale within our range in the area, and my friends and I were worshipping and praising God. While they were in their browsers at home, the unthinkable happened: A house for sale popped up on the map WHILE THEY WERE LOGGED IN, purely miraculously, and 2 hours later, our offer ended up being the first one. Guess what? It was accepted, and on November 16, 2012, the sale closed, and we were able to move into this 4-bedroom, 3-bath, 2100-square-foot miracle, with a mortgage of the same cost as the rent on the cramped apartment, all because of what normally would be a tragedy: the death of two family members.

Hopefully people who read this can also have this hope: if all you do is curse God and blame Him for hardships, remember that God is a God of love. It's the devil who creates these hardships in the first place, and this is proof that God is the one who is able to turn those hardships into blessings. So, I rest my case. This awesomeness is certainly something I am beyond glad to praise Him for.


18 January, 2014

Editorial: Forget "extremism"; Just use the term "hypocrisy" instead

Extremism. Terrorism. People cringe at the mention of these words. They bring with them feelings of anger and hatred, plots to bomb buildings and special events just for the fun of killing innocent civilians, and most importantly seem to pit members of one faith against another in modern-day crusades.

This couldn't be more true for fundamentalist sects of the three Semitic faiths — Christianity, Judaism, and Islam — especially as we dig deep into history here. 2,000 years ago, as Jesus was conducting His earthly ministry, we see how He was at odds with the rather fundamentalist Jewish leaders of the time: the scribes and Pharisees. See, if you actually looked at a Jewish woman of those days, and saw both the veil and headscarf that was required of Jews at the time, you'd actually think she was Muslim!

See, the scribes and Pharisees, being fundamentalist Jews known to have written fundamentalist books (i.e. Jubilees) as examples of their strict legalism, started using interpreters — very similar to the Supreme Court justices of today — to turn a small handful of laws written by Moses into thousands of laws that were impossible for anyone to live up to, like Muslim extremists do today, and also like al-Qaeda and the Taliban, they tended to unfairly exempt themselves from having to live up to the standards that they set. It's no wonder, therefore, why Jesus railed against them to the degree that He did in the Gospel account.

And of course, Muslim — and also Christian (I'm looking at you, Irish Republicans, Klansmen, and neo-Nazis)  and Jewish (JDL) — terrorists of today aren't much different. In all cases, they're extreme fundamentalist sects of the respective faiths that they claim to represent. Of course, in Islam that hypocrisy tends to be very obvious — people who conduct terror plots and call non-Muslims "crusaders and Zionists" by day, yet stare at pornography, run brothels, pig out, and conduct oil-soaked Ponzi schemes by night — but then again, we also see examples (such as Northern Ireland) of Christians attacking other Christians the same way — by calling each other heretics — and likewise in the Jewish case, examples like the assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin carried out not by Hamas militants but by radical right-wing Jews with motives that almost resemble those that Anders Behring Breivik used to carry out the attacks in Norway.

Then again, the Muslim example is probably the single most significant of the three at describing an example of a hypocrite. The terrorists claim to be of a familiar God — the one that the Jews call Yahweh, that they call Allah, and that we Christians call the Heavenly Father — yet what they practice completely contradicts that claim. They publicly express hate, which we certainly know is hate that neither the Torah, nor Bible, nor even Quran (to a degree) endorses. They wage unsanctioned wars, wars that according to the Torah, Bible, and Quran alike are to be carried out only against pagans, never against members of their own faith or of similar faiths. Most importantly, they shout out claims of "Death to Israel", "Death to America", "Death to Zionists", and "Death to Crusaders" despite the fact that the Quran specifically refers to Jews and Christians as "people of the book" not to be messed with. Even by Muslim standards, those slogans are themselves hypocrisy, and guess what? They go to great lengths to try and persecute even the slightest dissent against Sharia as blasphemy. If that's the case, the only ones they should charge with blasphemy are themselves. Why? Because they're persecuting and shouting death threats against the very people that even the Quran tells them not to mess with.

See, people just don't listen. The parallelism between the habits of the scribes and Pharisees and those of al-Qaeda is certainly no coincidence. Yet they still conduct that very hypocrisy that Jesus railed against the scribes and Pharisees for: launching attacks, out of pure hatred, against the very people that the Quran — which they of course will defend to the death, as we've seen with reactions to Quran-burnings by Christian extremists — tells them not to touch. Not to mention, at least in private, committing the very adultery — in the form of brothel operation and porn distribution — that they say others should be stoned for. Well, this is exactly why I'm so happy to be a Christian who interprets the Bible the right way: because Jesus' teachings give me eyes to see this hypocrisy in people.

17 January, 2014

The root cause of high American unemployment: Lazy Employers

Ever wonder why the American economy has been so tight? Why there have been so few jobs out there? Many people will flat out say "It's the economy" but not tell you the underlying causes. It started out with banks screwing homeowners over with loans specifically crafted to go haywire at a certain point, leading to numerous foreclosures of homes, businesses, and business building facilities, which in turn resulted in job loss. But the recovery has been incredibly slow and cumbersome given how quickly the economy tanked. Why?

Since the economy tanked, employers have started doing the unthinkable: they first raised education requirements. People who offered simple minimum-wage jobs decided to require associate's and even bachelor's degrees just to flip burgers and stock shelves! On top of that, employers for higher-paying jobs that already required degrees like that went even further to tack on experience requirements. A bachelor's degree AND five, ten years of experience on top of the education, which alone GIVES people the experience needed? That's absurd.

Every time employers pull these greedy shenanigans, they hamper the economy's recovery tenfold. Why? Because it creates a vicious cycle. The more red tape you tack on that application, the harder and more expensive it gets for people to obtain the experience and education necessary. This in turn sends shockwaves throughout the economy, artificially deflating the demand curve for products and thus causing more employers to join this vicious bandwagon.

Politicians, of course, have tried to curb this approach. The Republicans have tried to use a top-down approach of sending stimulus to billionaires who run businesses. The Denocrats, on the other hand, have put more emphasis on handouts: free health care, vague Social Security disability laws that can be exploited by lawyers to waste the funds on temporary ailments, and government-sanctioned unemployment insurance. However, neither of these approaches are truly effective.

What handouts do, regardless of who they're given to, is make people more and more greedy and lazy. Billionaires, as we've seen with the automotive jerks, tend to greedily waste stimulus money on parties, booze, beer, and, oh yeah, luxury items instead of actually using it to create new jobs. Poor people? They tend to be conditioned to expect handouts instead of knowing that with the right money AND a purpose given to them for the money in question they can truly make a difference.

This, of course, brings us right to the only way this economy can possibly be fixed on a prompt basis: the competition approach. What does this entail? An antitrust tax. A progressive tax that of course falls hard on billionaires, yes, but falls especially hard on billionaires with known market monopolies who throw up unfair barriers to entry for competition that is able to employ more people. And of course, that tax revenue from those monopolies should be put towards an extensive small business scholarship fund. Guess what? Redistributing money from monopolies to competition, not just from the rich to the poor, allows the competition to in turn grow their business and compete with the former monopoly that was once keeping them out. More competition, of course, means a greater number of employers, and thus a greater number of people who can handle the high job demand, ultimately plummeting the unemployment rate.

See, what employers need to realize here: It's their fault that the economy hasn't recovered. It's their fault for placing red tape on the job market as a way to get around taking risks and thus wasting their entrepreneurship out of pure greed. The only way the economy will ever recover is if employers step up to the plate, take the risks that entrepreneurship entails, hire the potential employees that need hiring the most, and put more experienced staff to work training the inexperienced staff instead of minding their own business. Only then will the economy improve, and it's unfortunate that employers can't see this.

11 January, 2014

The roots of atheism: Why they fall short

The topic of religion is a heated one in people's minds. That's why you never see me using that word when I talk about scriptural truths. Nor will you see my pastor mention the "R word" either, but let's save that for another day. The point of this: People who develop animosities towards the church do it because of a clear lack of understanding about the church in general.

Let's start with the obvious: evil little sections of the church like Westboro with congregations and clergy whose interpretation of the Bible puts them more in line with that of fundamentalist Jews than that of other fundamentalist Christians. At the very bottom of every "God Hates Fags" sign they throw up is a Bible (wait, make that Torah) verse: Leviticus 20:13, which reads, and I quote:

If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their heads.
—Leviticus 20:13 NIV


Well, guess what? That's a quote straight out of the Jewish book of law, the very same law that made the scribes and Pharisees the hypocrites that Jesus railed against in Matthew 23. Now the New Covenant, in which Jesus ultimately came to pay the price of that sin by dying and rising again, doesn't sound so bad, does it? Sure, all sin is sin, but thanks to Jesus we don't have to sacrifice animals like the Pharisees did, and oh yeah, we actually CAN turn away from the sin and be given a fresh start BECAUSE of the sacrifice to end all sacrifices: Jesus' death and resurrection.

Now here we come to the number 2 fallacy: Science? You say Science disproves the Bible? Artifacts pertaining to the Bible? Then show me the proof! The odds of the entire universe, the Earth, the sun, the moon, the stars, the planets, the galaxy, having been created by accident and yet still forming in such a way as to make the Earth perfectly inhabitable, even by microorganisms, let alone humans, are incredibly slim. How slim? About as slim as the odds of a tornado building a jumbo jet out of junkyard scrap metal: approximately 1 in 10^37. Yup, that's 10 to the 37th power. Those odds are far too slim for any claim of the universe having been created by accident to be credible.

Those same odds also apply to atheist claims about the Gospel accounts. Sure, there were plenty of hallucinogenic fungi that could have infected the disciples' bread at the time of Jesus, there's no doubt about that... but seriously: The fungi that do that are slow-growing fungi. Ergot in particular takes years to infect wheat crops, and it certainly can be controlled simply by removing and burning infected parts of the crop — just like another common pathogen that can be controlled the same way: rust — a farming technique that was commonplace 2000 years ago, and continues to this day. So even back then, infections like ergot were extremely rare, so if there was an ergot outbreak, only a handful of crops (and thus people) would be affected, and oh yeah, they would be scattered over a broad area. Not concentrated right near Jerusalem, that's just not possible. What's more: People who eat hallucinogen-contaminated bread tend to have random hallucinations. The odds of the entire population of ancient Israel having the same hallucination — that of Jesus ascending — at the same time are just as slim as the above, if not far slimmer. In fact, I probably would put the odds of this atheist scenario happening, especially taking how easily wheat diseases can be controlled into account, at the same level as the odds of one man fulfilling 40 prophesies: 1 in 10^157.

See, these numbers just don't support the explanations. At all. The only thing these unsupported atheist attributions are doing when thrown at me is proving me — and thus God — right in this case. Yet they still seem to call beliefs mere opinions... and oh yeah, when confronted with these numbers, they respond with denialism, and oh yeah, they will even contest the numbers -- as has happened in a comment on this post that has since been deleted -- by jumping to the same conclusions that they accuse us of jumping to, as if they end up putting all their faith into trying to disprove scripture. It's as if they're just TRYING to get steamrolled right over...

03 January, 2014

Debunking 'Scroogled' 2.0: From Chrome to Chrome OS

Shortly after my post back in November 2013 that rightfully calls Microsoft's evil Scroogled campaign plank-eyed hypocrisy, Microsoft was at it again with another attack ad campaign. This time, targeting Chromebooks... and oh yeah, it was spreading the same outdated FUD that prompted this post in April 2013, exactly 5 days after I turned 20. Since then, the packed apps category has indeed been replaced with a collection... oh, but it does indeed work just as well in Chrome OS as it does in desktop Chrome for Windows, Mac, and Linux, doesn't it? You bet:


Yup, it sure does, and it's loaded with tools that are far more powerful than what we saw last spring, not to mention growing by the minute. Of course, there's simple tools like the "Wake Up!" app I developed that ONLY have use cases on Chromebooks (oh, yeah, in case you try to attack Chrome OS power management, that too has already been debunked at my hands...), but that's not all: What about WeVideo Next?


That's right, a full video editor, with all the power of the iOS version of iMovie that I've got on my iPhone 4S (and you said real work can't be done on an iPad, let alone an iPhone -- please) which runs offline, outside the browser, in a native-like manner on a Chromebook. This alone is enough to debunk the claims of Chromebooks being a "brick" when run offline... ah, and it also debunks the claim that tools for photo and video editing analogous to Photoshop and Final Cut don't exist on Chromebooks either. They do, not just for videos but photos as well (albeit online-only in the case of full-featured Photoshop-like editors, but that's bound to change). Enter Pixlr:


And if basic Paint-like (HA! While Microsoft's office products are pretty ubiquitous, Microsoft fails terribly in the creative department) photo editors are also factored in the equation, yes, Autodesk does also have one of them, and unlike the full version of Pixlr it runs offline and outside the browser. Pixlr Touch-Up, much?


Oh, yes, and if basic HTML5 cache mode is factored into the equation as well, there's productivity tools that also work offline... albeit not outside the browser. In the form of none other than, you guessed it, Google Drive, although it seems to be broken on this Canary build of Chrome OS I'm running... oh, well. Still, however, what about Angry Birds? Yup, that's also capable of running offline.

These claims of Chrome OS being a "brick" when not connected to the Internet are ones I have certainly come to expect from the evil that is Microsoft, given that was Microsoft's first reaction when Chrome OS was first unveiled (and its source code was first made open) way back in November 2009...but as always, times have changed. The fact that they're STILL sticking to these claims even after all the change Chrome OS went through for the good of offline users is enough to make me write this, just to give everyone Microsoft is trying to deceive some updated info here that alone is enough to debunk the bogus, hypocritical campaign that is Scroogled in all its demonic, hellish glory.