Space alien crop circles are science, but ID isn't?

"Government scientists" in Bulgaria are examining crop circles and claiming to talk to space aliens which they think are all around us:

Aliens from outer space are already among us on earth, say Bulgarian government scientists who claim they are already in contact with extraterrestrial life.
They claim aliens are currently answering 30 questions posed to them. Lachezar Filipov, deputy director of the Space Research Institute of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, confirmed the research.
He said the centre's researchers were analysing 150 crop circles from around the world, which they believe answer the questions.
"Aliens are currently all around us, and are watching us all the time," Mr Filipov told Bulgarian media.

With these clowns communing with crop circles and Richard Dawkins thinking space aliens seeded the Earth with life what calls itself "science" is fast spiralling into a taxpayer-funded comedy circuit. And these are the same people who will flatly insist that examining living creatures and inferring the hand of an external guiding wise Intelligence who is in no way explicitly God somehow doesn't count as real science.
I can remember a time when "science" wasn't laughable and when people wanting to talk to aliens couldn't do it on the taxpayer's dime, and as my father used to say back then "Don't worry your head about that, missy, you just get that laundry sorted". At some point since then something's happened to "science" which most people don't understand, and they're real upset about it.

Find out why there's a design controversy!:

Coffee!! Tears as weapons?

Hot on the heels of their "lusty ladies" theory of Human evolution the evolutionary psychologists trot out their latest show pony; the idea that tears aren't a sign of tenderness or vulnerability or a manifestation of enrapturement by the Holy Spirit but that they are defensive weapons, crucial to survival back in the stone age as our ancestors were being stalked by wolves. This is comedy hour, right? Defensive weapons are things like a bombardier beetle's boiling acid spray, not the salty taste of cold inner sorrow.
The problem is that these evolutionary psychology people are just looking for any excuse for research dollars.

Just so jellyfish

"Scientists Unravel Evolution of Highly Toxic Box Jellyfish" yells the headline as if they've actually figured how and why a floating bag of jelly in the ocean millions and millions of years ago made the huge transformation into, erm, a floating bag of jelly in the ocean now. Closer reading of the article shows they haven't even managed to do anything as impressive as that, instead trickling out a few watery just-so stories.

Their vision may have something to do with the evolution of some extremely unusual mating behaviors in box jellyfish species.

"May have something to do with" counts as science nowadays? This is comedy hour, right? The flamingo's legs may have something to do with running up giant beanstalks but I can't prove it, can I have a grant from the taxpayer for my science as well?

Breathless fawning before the race altar

There's a wave of darwinianoid articles in the press because today is the 150th anniversary of the publication of Chales Darwin's 'The Origin of Species', or to give it its little-mentioned full title: 'On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life' which exposes the dark racist heart throbbing within the chest of this bombshell planted under the morals of society. The vile racial agenda at the core of this most insidious of works is made clear only a handful of pages into the very first chapter as Darwin, dear saint Charles, that nice man with the kindly face and the fuzzy beard, makes clear that race lies at the core of his new ideology:

it seems to me not improbable, that if we could succeed in naturalising, or were to cultivate, during many generations, the several races, for instance, of the cabbage, in very poor soil, that they would to a large extent, or even wholly, revert to the wild aboriginal stock.

"The several races of the cabbage": has ever a more damning or ominous phrase been penned in the whole of philosophy or politics? Darwin started out as a racist with exactly this warped sort of brassica supremecist agenda and sought to apply it to every other divinely created kind he lay his eyes upon. Amid all the chatter today about his holy relics and fortunate toilet incidents don't let his followers in academia or the media pull the wool over your eyes to the true nature of Charles Darwin. The man was a racist with an unhealthy obsession about barnacles and pigeons, as well as a misogynist who wanted to breed a master race of supercabbage, a line of thought which led directly to Hitler. And he was cruel to puppies.


It's more important than ever to find out why there's really an intelligent design controversy!!!

Intelligent design makes headway

While the darwin-worshippers in academia keep bleating that intelligent design isn't going anywhere, engineers in the real world are more concerned about getting the job done so it's no surprise that they're swift to recognize design in nature. So the Biomimicry Institute is helping them do exactly that.

At first glance, a humpback whale and a wind turbine don’t have a lot in common. For that matter, neither do a shellfish and a sheet of plywood. But both sea creatures are the inspiration behind products designed using biomimicry, or looking to nature’s designs and processes to solve human problems.

People who work with design every day can see it in nature when they look clearly:

Instead of harvesting organisms, or domesticating them to accomplish a function for us, biomimicry differs from other "bio-approaches" by consulting organisms and ecosystems and applying the underlying design principles to our innovations.

Bird beaks designed like bullet trains:

The Shinkansen Bullet Train of the West Japan Railway Company is the fastest train in the world, traveling 200 miles per hour. The problem? Noise. Air pressure changes produced large thunder claps every time the train emerged from a tunnel, causing residents one-quarter a mile away to complain. Eiji Nakatsu, the train's chief engineer and an avid bird-watcher, asked himself, "Is there something in Nature that travels quickly and smoothly between two very different mediums?" Modeling the front-end of the train after the beak of kingfishers, which dive from the air into bodies of water with very little splash to catch fish, resulted not only in a quieter train, but 15% less electricity use even while the train travels 10% faster.

But of course the kingfisher's beak just happened in some non-design way. At least that's what some people would really want you to believe, regardless of whether they really think that themselves.


Find out why there's a design controversy:

Coffee!! Galloping crocodiles ate our dinosaurs?

Fossil finders have been digging in the Sahara and this time they turned up what they think are ancient "galloping dinosaur-eating crocodiles" from about a fajillion years ago. Here's what an artist thinks the scientists think the bones tell them what the creature would have looked like when alive:
Looks more like a dinosaur than a crocodile to me. One thing not mentioned in the article is what all this means for darwinism. If crocodiles were galloping around eating dinosaurs way back when then it doesn't look like much "evolution" has been going on since because now they just slouch about in rivers waiting for a zebra to come take a drink. If crocodiles have really been around for a kafrillion years and they've really been evolving from something which was agile and smart enough to chase down a dinousaur then they ought to be living in houses and wearing hats and composing operas by now. But they only live in houses when people keep them as pets which really isn't wise, folks, because crocodiles make lousy pets. Too often people get a crocodile when it's a sweet looking newborn and maybe the kids nag mom and dad who don't think it through and then they're astonished when it grows too big. Then when it gets too big for the house they mistreat the animal or release them into creeks which makes a stack of problems for other people. The city's Animal Control dept already have enough to do with just raccoons making trouble and a pound full of dogs without irresponsible people adding crocodiles as well.


There's a design controversy! Find out why there is!

Darwinists ready to embrace their corn overlords?

Humans compose music, write books, carve sculpture, learn languages, form societies and design the canadarm. Corn just stands around in fields. So if living creatures and people are really just the simple mechanistic result of their genes as darwinists insist then of course humans must have more genes. Turns out... not so true.

Corn 'contains more genes than humans'
Scientists have decoded the genetic make-up of corn and found the humble vegetable contains more genes than humans.
The researchers discovered that a stalk of corn contains around 32,000 genes.
By contrast the DNA of humans, decoded in recent years, is thought to contain an average of just over 20,000 genes.

Best not eat that corn, darwinists, it's more advanced than you think you are! Or maybe life is more complicated than you've thought it might be.


Learn why there's a design controversy!