On the Craig Ferguson show, Ben Stein said (in reference to his movie Expelled): “Don’t fire people because they say the planets do stay in their orbits because of something other than Darwinism.”
By “Darwinism” I presume he means the Theory of Evolution which does not address planetary motion in any way, but only describes speciation. In fact, Evolution has absolutely nothing to do with planetary motion (Gravity), the beginning of the universe (Cosmology), or the beginning of life (Abiogenesis), all of which Stein has criticized Evolution for not explaining. Evolution only addresses the origin of Species and Speciation on this planet. To ask it to explain anything else, especially something as different as Gravity is simply foolishness and exposes Stein’s complete lack of scientific understanding.

One of the downsides to owning a very large HD TV is that it is now possible to read the fine print on many commercials and what I see greatly reduces my respect for humanity. Presumably the fine print is added to these commercials by lawyers representing whatever product is being advertised. These lawyers are very correctly afraid that if the comical, fanciful, and down-right ridiculous actions portrayed in the ads were to be reproduced for real that someone would likely be severely hurt or even killed. This would naturally result in an extremely large law suit against the makers of the product being advertised. Never mind that everyone is responsible for their own actions and if you are dumb enough to try some of the things you see on TV for yourself you deserve everything that happens to you.
So, here are a couple of examples that I found particularly amusing or absurd:

The screaming squirrel:
This ad was played during the 2008 Superbowl. It was a commercial for tires in which a squirrel runs out into the road in front of a car. The squirrel sees the car and begins to scream. We are then subjected to what was meant to be comical cavalcade of forest animals screaming at the inevitable and gruesome demise of the squirrel. The man driving the car, with a look of exasperation for his screaming wife, casually nudges the wheel and the car swerves gracefully around the squirrel. The object of the ad was to show that the traction capabilities of the tires are excellent and you can rely on that traction when you need to make an emergency maneuver. The fine print says: “Stunt driver. Closed course. Do not attempt.” The fine print actually tells you not to take advantage of the very aspect of the product that the commercial is advertising.

The Cheese Snack In the Nose:
This ad shows an unfortunate woman on an airplane sitting next to a large man who is snoring loudly. The woman is apparently so tired that she is hallucinating the products mascot which tells her to use the tools that she has been given. She then proceeds to stick the cheese snacks up the man’s nostrils to silence his snoring. The fine print (I kid you not): “Stunt nose. Enclosed set. Do not attempt.” Don’t worry we didn’t really film this on a real airplane and no, that woman didn’t really stick things up a strangers nose. I’m so relieved.

There are some people in this country who claim that the Bible is the true and accurate word of God and that the description that it provides for the creation of the universe in Genesis is to be taken literally. Literally, as in it took 6 literal days. I presume that their insistence on the literal interpretation includes not only Chapter 1 of Genesis but also Chapter 2 and in fact the entire Book and the entire Bible. In reading Genesis I discovered a number of discrepancies and items of interest that I would like to point out.

Let’s take a look first at the order of creation as I’m sure this is a very important aspect of Literal Creationism.

In Chapter 1 the order of creation is a follows:
Day 1: Heavens and Earth.
This is really a misnomer since really he only created the Heavens (I presume this is heaven as in where the angles live and people go when the die, because he creates the stars later) and Water. He then creates light and begins the day/night cycle (without the sun and moon, he creates those later).
Day 2: Sky
That’s it. On the 2nd day God created the sky. It’s interesting that he created the day/night cycle before creating the sky. Not that God couldn’t have done it, just seems odd.
Day 3: Land and Vegetation
On the 3rd day God separates water and creates land. He also creates plants and trees and all manor of vegetation. No problems here, but this becomes important in Chapter 2.
Day 4: Sun, Moon and Stars
Curious. He made vegetation (which relies on sunlight to produce energy) before he made the Sun. Granted the plants only had to survive one day without sunlight, but still, wouldn’t it have been better to do this the other way around?
Day 5: Fish and Birds
Nothing special to point out here. Fish and Birds are good.
Day 6: Land Animals and Man
On the 6th day God creates the land animals. He creates the “cattle, creeping things, and wild animals, each according to its kind”. Then finally, God creates Mankind (note Mankind not one man) in “our image, our likeness”. He (they?) do this so that Mankind may rule over all of the fish, birds, animals, and earth. He doesn’t create one man in his image but “God created humankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them, male and female he created them.” Genesis 1:27
He then goes on to tell Mankind to multiply and fill the earth. He then gives “every seed-bearing plant on the face of the entire earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it.”

Now we move onto Chapter 2. Which seems to completely change voice and style. Chapter 2 seems to start over again stating that THIS is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created. This chapter isn’t broken up into days so we’ll just go with the order.

It starts with a barren earth: “Now no shrub of the field had yet grown on the earth, and no plant of the field had yet sprouted, for the Lord God had not caused it to rain on the earth”. 2:5
Then “Springs would well up from the earth and water the whole surface of the ground.” 2:6
Then God formed the man (singular one man) from “the soil of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life”. 2:7
Then God plants an orchard (Eden) and puts the man into it.
God then makes all of the trees grow (including the Tree of Life (immortality) and the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil (sentience).
God then charges the man with caring for the orchard. Apparently the man was simply created to be God’s gardener. He tells the man to eat from any of the trees except the two in the middle. This contradicts Chapter 1 where he gives every tree to Mankind.
Then God, seeing that all was not good, decides that the man shouldn’t be alone, so he creates the animals and the birds.
After letting the man name all of the animals and birds, God decides that he needs more company and creates him a woman.
This is the end of Chapter 2 and there are no more descriptions of creation. Chapter 3 then continues to create contradictions with Christian Dogma but I’ll get into that later.

So, if you have been paying attention you should be a little confused about the order of creation. If you aren’t then let me sum it up for you:

My question to the Literal Creationists then is: What was the order of creation? There appear to be two completely different creation stories in Genesis. Am I to interpret both of them literally? If not, is one correct and the other wrong? Which is which and why? Should one be taken literally and one not? If so then what about you’re claim that all of the bible must be taken literally? If only some parts should be taken literally then how do I tell?

Typically I don’t care to jump onto bandwagons. That’s not true. Bandwagons are fun. I just don’t like to look like I’m jumping onto bandwagons. I’m speaking about blogging. It seems like everyone and his brother (including mine) has one now-a-days. However, I think I have allowed sufficient time to pass since this whole “blogging” thing started that starting one now will seem like I am honestly interested in speaking my mind and am not simply starting a blog just because everyone else is doing it.

Really, I’m starting this blog because I am becoming more active in other blogs and having your own is a great way of differentiating yourself from all of the other people who post to blogs that have the same name as you. Not having a unique enough name makes it difficult for one to differentiate oneself within a blog community since in this text-based world you do not have a distinct “voice” to be recognized (at least not easily recognized), you don’t always have the option of having a picture, and pseudonyms can be easily hijacked. Starting this blog doesn’t necessarily solve all of those problems but it does make it easier to establish my “persona” within a blog community. There are a lot of people out there that may call themselves “Bill” but very few who would refer to themselves as the “ThirdMonkey” and link to this blog.

Eventually, as time permits, I will try to make a positive influence on the ever growing pile of information, news, opinions, lies, and controversy that is the blogsphere.