Category Archives: Intelligent Design

Darwin’s Nazi Racist Textbook. The Origin of the Species.

READ THE SUBTITLE!
Darwin’s Origin of the Species by means of Natural Selection or The Preservation of the favoured races in the struggle for Life.

And People try and say Hitler was a Christian!
He Got his Ideas about ‘the Master Race’, Eugenics, and ‘Sub Humans’ directly from Darwins ‘Scientific’ textbook.
The Final solution was the Philosophy of Darwinian Evolution *in Practice*… for the preservation of the ‘favoured’ race… in the struggle for Life!
Bertrand Russell wrote on the Subject of Darwin and Eugenics before Hitler rose to Power.


“Biological arguments for racism may have been common before 1859, but they increased by orders of magnitude following the acceptance of evolutionary theory.”
—Stephen Jay Gould, a leading evolutionist (Ontogeny and Phylogeny, 1977)

Now Racism has indeed been a perpetual plaugue upon mankind, yet Biblical Christianity has never supported the idea Of ‘superior’ and ‘inferior’ races. It clearly taught that All Mankind are one Family decended from Adam and Eve.
St Paul declared God… ” hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth…” (Acts 17:26.)
And also that ” As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:… For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God (Romans chapter 3)… thus both physically and Spiritually there is no distinction between the races.
What more The Christian Gospel declares Gods love and concern for All individual human beings and that He Sent St Paul to preach the gospel of grace and to declare… “Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved” (Romans 10vs 13)
Salvation being the gift of God (Eph2vs7,8) All believers were to be united in love for one another and in fellowship. They were instructed to forsake any notions of Racism they may have held as heathens because … “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:28)
*These teachings are the very opposite of Nazi doctrine*

One of the Great Blessings of Humanitarianism, Liberty, and enlightenment that arose out of the Reformation and the Publication of the King James Bible was a great religious awakening in the doctrines of St Paul… and it was in this great movement of the spirit of charity and humanity which brought about the Anti slavery movements in Brittan and America. The Christian Protestant realising that Negroe Slavery was against the Spirit of Christ, and that Negroes had Full Rights and dignity as Human beings in God’s eyes, and that they were in fact ‘Family’.
The Negroes in Western civilization ought to be grateful for that period of Christian awakening… it came in the nick of time because had Darwin’s ideas of race had been developed one hundred years earlier they would never have been liberated!
The truth is that Darwinism was responsible for ending this period of enlightenment and humanity!
It is also easy to perceive the roll it has played ever since… in Racial conflict and inhumanity.
The records of 20th century Atheist Socialism are the Bloodiest in the whole of human history!
Not only was the Holocaust against the Jew the implementation of Social Darwinism, likewise was Himmler’s ambitions to create ‘a master race’…. Read…. Historic Photos Show The Third Reich’s Evil Attempt To Create A “Master Race”

How is it that today millions of people foolishly believe that Darwinism saved mankind from evil religious values? How can the be so ignorant as to not understand that Darwinism was responsible for all of the Nazi doctrines and ambitions for world domination?
How is it that the dark secrets of Darwinian Philosophy in action have been hidden from the masses?
How many people who worship Darwin today even know what the Racist subtitle to his book is?


How is it that in the light of what Darwinism has achieved that Pretentious Bastards like Richard Dawkins Dare to hold up Darwin like a Saint, and condemn Christianity and their God for their barbarity?
And why … for goodness sakes would so many Christian concur with the vile rantings of such False teachers… and forsake the teachings of the Bible… which are both scientifically accurate and morally pure , and embrace this de humanizing philosophy which renders mankind down to an Ape… nay down to a colony of germs?
Evolution is one Great Big Fat Dirty Lie!
Satan Laughing spreads his wings
Tim Wikiriwhi.


Darwin, like many evolutionists, believed that some hominids developed larger brains faster, leaving others behind. The most advanced species (in the evolutionist’s evolved brain at least) was a 19th-century European gentleman who was supposedly far more evolved than an Australian Aborigine. This revolutionary, evolutionary idea added fuel to racist thinking and vice versa.

Quotes from Darwins Body Snatchers
“Pickled Aboriginal brains were also in demand, to try to prove that they were inferior to those of whites. It was Darwin, after all, who wrote that the civilized races would inevitably wipe out such lesser-evolved ‘savage’ ones.”

13501598_1144714878921068_8301965816246072455_n

“Good prices were being offered for such specimens. There is no doubt from written evidence that many of the ‘fresh’ specimens were obtained by simply going out and killing the Aboriginal people. The way in which the requests for specimens were announced was often a poorly disguised invitation to do just that. A death-bed memoir from Korah Wills, who became mayor of Bowen, Queensland in 1866,4 graphically describes how he killed and dismembered a local tribesman in 1865 to provide a scientific specimen.”

Update. 23-7-12.
A friend posted me an interesting link on facebook.
It says Darwin’s first hand experience of South American slavery appalled him, yet as the following Quotes show Darwin’s cold ‘scientific’ rationale… and that he formulated his Evolutionary theory purposefully to accommodate and even vindicate Slavery… as Natural to the survival of ‘the strong’… and trump any contrary Conscience…
Darwin made comments upon Observation of the behavior of Ants…

“I loiter for hours in the Park & amuse myself by watching the Ants: I have great hopes I have found the rare Slave-making species & have sent a specimen to Brit. Mus. to know whether it is so.”9,10
“I had such a piece of luck at Moor Park: I found the rare Slave-making Ant, & saw the little black niggers in their master’s nests.”11
“I have had some fun here in watching a slave-making ant; for I could not help rather doubting the wonderful stories, but I have now seen a marauding party, & I have seen a migration from one nest to another of the slave-makers, carrying their slaves (who are house & not field niggers) in their mouths”12

In his Origin of Species, Darwin devotes several pages to what he called the “slave-making instinct”.13 He refers to the ant species Formica (Polyerges) rufescens (of Switzerland that he had read about)14 and Formica sanguinea (the one he observed in southern England), both of which make slaves of the ant species F. fusca. Darwin begins by “doubting the truth of so extraordinary and odious an instinct as that of making slaves” (p. 220). Then after giving his own observations he says: “Such are the facts … in regard to the wonderful instinct of making slaves” (p. 223).
Darwin then suggests that
“the habit of collecting pupae15 for food might by natural selection be strengthened and rendered permanent for the very different purpose of raising slaves. When the instinct was once acquired … I can see no difficulty in natural selection increasing and modifying the instinct—always supposing each modification to be of use to the species—until an ant was formed as abjectly dependent on its slaves as is the Formica rufescens.” (p. 224). “ … it is far more satisfactory to look at such instincts as … ants making slaves … not as specially endowed or created instincts, but as small consequences of one general law, leading to the advancement of all organic beings, namely, multiply, vary, let the strongest live and the weakest die” (pp. 243–244).

That was then.

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning —the first day.

And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning —the second day.

And God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And it was so. God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw that it was good.

Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds. ” And it was so. The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening, and there was morning —the third day.

And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening, and there was morning —the fourth day.

And God said, “Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the vault of the sky.” So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living thing with which the water teems and that moves about in it, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. God blessed them and said, “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth.” And there was evening, and there was morning —the fifth day.

And God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: the livestock, the creatures that move along the ground, and the wild animals, each according to its kind.” And it was so. God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground. ”

Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food. ” And it was so.

God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning —the sixth day. (NIV)

So goes the (main) Biblical account of creation. Implausible? Perhaps so. But no more so than the atheistic alternative.

I love the theory of evolution. Darwin’s theory of evolution (or the modern evolutionary synthesis, as it’s called these days) is a monumental intellectual achievement. It’s a thing of great beauty and power. Modern biology would be lost without it. (So, too, would modern atheism!) Nonetheless, as creationists never tire of reminding us, the theory of evolution is only a hypothesis.

I’ve studied biology. I’ve studied the philosophy of biology. I understand both the theory of evolution, and its philosophical implications. But most people don’t. (Most people haven’t read The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins.) Ayn Rand didn’t understand the theory of evolution. Or, she understood it well enough, and didn’t like its implications. I suspect the latter. Her one-time lieutenant (and lover) Nathaniel Branden recounts

I remember being astonished to hear her say one day, “After all, the theory of evolution is only a hypothesis.” I asked her, “You mean you seriously doubt that more complex life forms — including humans — evolved from less complex life forms?” She shrugged and responded, “I’m really not prepared to say,” or words to that effect.

Not prepared to say? Isn’t that evasion, Miss Rand? Surely not!

I have serious doubts about the theory of evolution. Because it has serious flaws. (I don’t like its implications, either.) Fatal flaws? I’m really not prepared to say.

The Lust of the Eye. Gen 3vs6. 1John2vs15-17

Thank heaven for little girls
for little girls get bigger every day!

Thank heaven for little girls
they grow up in the most delightful way!

Those little eyes so helpless and appealing
one day will flash and send you crashin’ thru the ceilin’

Thank heaven for little girls
thank heaven for them all,
no matter where no matter who
for without them, what would little boys do?

Thank heaven… thank heaven…
Thank heaven for little girls!

One Sunny day, Adam was yarning with God in the garden and he asked him
“Tell me Father, Why did you make woman soooo beautiful?
God replied… “So that you would love her my son”.
Then Adam thinking about that asked… “But why did you make her so stupid?”
“So that she would love you my son”… God replied.

The Bible has Mankind pegged.
It’s description of our deviant character is beyond dispute, and proven true by everyday experience.

Is this article true?
We’ll from personal experience I must confess it holds true for me.
The lust of the eye is truly a Powerfull thing.
God sure did an awesome job when he made the feminine form!
It is Art at it’s best, and one of the reasons I believe in him!
Yet I confess to ‘lusting’ rather than merely ‘appreciating’.
It is a very difficult problem to overcome.
The danger is in ‘Worshipping the creature more than the Creator’


The Islamic solution.


Nice try….

The lust of the Eye is as St Paul would say ‘A Thorn in the flesh’ which humbles me.
It exposes my sinfulness and lack of moral fibre, and need for Christ.
I post this to the net because I have no desire to pretend to be ‘Holier than thou’.
If I am going to be saved from the just Judgement of God it will be by Grace alone.
My own imperfection is one of the reasons I believe Libertarianism is the correct political philosophy for such Christians as I in that while i believe the morality of the Bible is valid… I am in no position to cast the first stone.
Tim Wikiriwhi
King James Bible believing Dispensationalist Libertarian Christian.

I have actively defended sex workers Liberty…


Here I am in 2010 ‘Boobs on bikes parade’ Hamilton. (see me step into the parade @ about 0:40)


Check me out the next years Parade in 2011 (at aprox 2:40)

Alan Turing

Alan Turing (June 23, 1912 – June 7, 1954)
War hero, mathematician, the father of computer science and State rape victim.

If you’ve done a Google search today, you probably noticed that it’s Alan Turing’s 100th birthday. Who was Alan Turing and why am I paying tribute to him?

Why I like Turing … from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Alan Turing (1912–1954) never described himself as a philosopher, but his 1950 paper “Computing Machinery and Intelligence” is one of the most frequently cited in modern philosophical literature. It gave a fresh approach to the traditional mind-body problem, by relating it to the mathematical concept of computability he himself had introduced in his 1936–7 paper “On computable numbers, with an application to the Entscheidungsproblem.” His work can be regarded as the foundation of computer science and of the artificial intelligence program.

Here’s British Prime Minister (in 2009) Gordon Brown to tell you a few other things you need to know about Turing. (Thanks to Ian Watson for the transcript of Brown’s apology.)

This has been a year of deep reflection – a chance for Britain, as a nation, to commemorate the profound debts we owe to those who came before. A unique combination of anniversaries and events have stirred in us that sense of pride and gratitude that characterise the British experience. Earlier this year, I stood with Presidents Sarkozy and Obama to honour the service and the sacrifice of the heroes who stormed the beaches of Normandy 65 years ago. And just last week, we marked the 70 years which have passed since the British government declared its willingness to take up arms against fascism and declared the outbreak of the Second World War.

So I am both pleased and proud that thanks to a coalition of computer scientists, historians and LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) activists, we have this year a chance to mark and celebrate another contribution to Britain’s fight against the darkness of dictatorship: that of code-breaker Alan Turing.

Turing was a quite brilliant mathematician, most famous for his work on the German Enigma codes. It is no exaggeration to say that, without his outstanding contribution, the history of the Second World War could have been very different. He truly was one of those individuals we can point to whose unique contribution helped to turn the tide of war. The debt of gratitude he is owed makes it all the more horrifying, therefore, that he was treated so inhumanely.

In 1952, he was convicted of “gross indecency” – in effect, tried for being gay. His sentence – and he was faced with the miserable choice of this or prison – was chemical castration by a series of injections of female hormones. He took his own life just two years later.

Thousands of people have come together to demand justice for Alan Turing and recognition of the appalling way he was treated. While Turing was dealt with under the law of the time, and we can’t put the clock back, his treatment was of course utterly unfair, and I am pleased to have the chance to say how deeply sorry I am and we all are for what happened to him. Alan and so many thousands of other gay men who were convicted, as he was convicted, under homophobic laws, were treated terribly. Over the years, millions more lived in fear of conviction. I am proud that those days are gone and that in the past 12 years this Government has done so much to make life fairer and more equal for our LGBT community. This recognition of Alan’s status as one of Britain’s most famous victims of homophobia is another step towards equality, and long overdue.

But even more than that, Alan deserves recognition for this contribution to humankind. For those of us born after 1945, into a Europe which is united, democratic and at peace, it is hard to imagine that our continent was once the theatre of mankind’s darkest hour. It is difficult to believe that in living memory, people could become so consumed by hate – by anti-Semitism, by homophobia, by xenophobia and other murderous prejudices – that the gas chambers and crematoria became a piece of the European landscape as surely as the galleries and universities and concert halls which had marked out European civilisation for hundreds of years.

It is thanks to men and women who were totally committed to fighting fascism, people like Alan Turing, that the horrors of the Holocaust and of total war are part of Europe’s history and not Europe’s present. So on behalf of the British government, and all those who live freely thanks to Alan’s work, I am very proud to say: we’re sorry. You deserved so much better.

Turing was found dead on 7 June 1954, two weeks before his 42nd birthday, after biting into a cyanide-laced apple. Wikipedia notes that

The logo of Apple Computer is often erroneously referred to as a tribute to Alan Turing, with the bite mark a reference to his method of suicide. Both the designer of the logo and the company deny that there is any homage to Turing in the design of the logo. In Series I, Episode 13 of the British television quiz show QI presenter Stephen Fry recounted a conversation had with Steve Jobs, saying that Jobs’ response was, “It isn’t true, but God, we wish it were.”

Turing’s work is the foundation of computer science and of research into artificial intelligence. Turing is responsible for the Turing Test (the CAPTCHA‘s big brother), the Turing Machine and (jointly with Alonzo Church) the Church-Turing thesis.

Here’s a Turing Machine built of Lego. (Are you Lego or Logos?)

This simple machine can, given a long enough ticker tape, do anything your mind can do—and much more. It’s humbling for some to realise that the human mind is the biological equivalent of a read-write head, a binary internal state, a look-up table and a ticker tape. But that’s all anyone ever is—biological ticker tape. (In fact, we’re all world lines.)

Biomimicry… Plagiarizing God’s designs.

When you look up Biomimicry on Wikipedia we are met with the Blind superstition of Atheism
Like Ostriches burying their heads in the sand, Atheists attempt to hide themselves from the knowledge that Living organisms are the handiwork of the God of scripture. ie Proof He really Exist.
Instead We are told @ Wikipedia that it was the Flying spaghetti monster ‘Nature’… The Deity of Atheist Materialism (at whose name all must bow!) who is said to be responcible for the existance and refinement of the Biological wonders which we see all about us.
Wonders which display a level of Technology far superior to what Mankind has so far aspired too… via millennia of plagiarizism.


Yet *The scientific truth* is the blind forces of Nature cannot construct complex devices!

This is because ‘Blind forces’ cannot ‘write’ information. A Rational Deity is Necessary to explain the existence of the Biological wonders on Earth.
Atheist like Dawkins attempt to Bamboozle the willfully gullible with statistical probabilities.
By playing games with gargantuan numbers they will look you with credulity and declare the most improbable outcomes (The spontanious generation and evolution of life) are Guaranteed certainties!
Via these charades the most extreme absurdities become iron clad Laws… the principles of Evolution.
It has wisely been said that Belief in spontaneous Generation and Evolution of life via Random coincidences of matter under the blind forces of Nature is like believing a dictionary can come into being via an explosion in a printing works!

Atheists like Dawkins believe that if you take enough monkeys and give them a typewriter each, and then give them enough time, that one of them will accidentally type out a perfect facsimile of ‘War and Peace’.

Wikipedia Quote: “Given enough time, a hypothetical monkey typing at random would, as part of its output, almost surely produce all of Shakespeare’s plays.”

There you have it! The miracle which turns the most improbable outcomes…. the wildest of imaginations… into certainties… without design.

… yet the reality is that beyond a certain point of improbability this becomes impossible. There simply is not enough Time or Matter. The Notion is absurd.

*This is why Spontaneous Generation has never been observed*, nor have *any* of the transmutations which make up the theory of evolution been observed or scientifically verified.
The whole theory is a fantastic fabrication.
*It Never Happens*

All this means that Science and Reason are squarely on the side of Theism and Intelligent design.
Tim Wikiriwhi.

Sick penguins

I came across this BBC news item recently.

‘Depraved’ sex acts by penguins shocked polar explorer

Accounts of unusual sexual activities among penguins, observed a century ago by a member of Captain Scott’s polar team, are finally being made public.

Details, including “sexual coercion”, recorded by George Murray Levick were considered so shocking that they were removed from official accounts.

However, scientists now understand the biological reasons behind the acts that Dr Levick considered “depraved”.

The Natural History Museum has published his unedited papers.

Mr Levick, an avid biologist, was the medical officer on Captain Scott’s ill-fated Terra Nova expedition to the South Pole in 1910. He was a pioneer in the study of penguins and was the first person to stay for an entire breeding season with a colony on Cape Adare.

He recorded many details of the lives of adelie penguins, but some of their activities were just too much for the Edwardian sensibilities of the good doctor.

He was shocked by what he described as the “depraved” sexual acts of “hooligan” males who were mating with dead females. So distressed was he that he recorded the “perverted” activities in Greek in his notebook.

Pages from Dr Levick's notebook with some sections coded in Greek

Graphic account

On his return to Britain, Mr Levick attempted to publish a paper entitled “the natural history of the adelie penguin”, but according to Douglas Russell, curator of eggs and nests at the Natural History Museum, it was too much for the times.

“He submitted this extraordinary and graphic account of sexual behaviour of the adelie penguins, which the academic world of the post-Edwardian era found a little too difficult to publish,” Mr Russell said.

The sexual behaviour section was not included in the official paper, but the then keeper of zoology at the museum, Sidney Harmer, decided that 100 copies of the graphic account should be circulated to a select group of scientists.

Mr Russell said they simply did not have the scientific knowledge at that time to explain Mr Levick’s accounts of what he termed necrophilia.

“What is happening there is not in any way analogous to necrophilia in the human context,” Mr Russell said. “It is the males seeing the positioning that is causing them to have a sexual reaction.

“They are not distinguishing between live females who are awaiting congress in the colony, and dead penguins from the previous year which just happen to be in the same position.”

A devoted Adelie penguin couple making love

Sexual coercion

Only two of the original 100 copies of Mr Levick’s account survive. Mr Russell and colleagues have now published a re-interpretation of Mr Levick’s findings in the journal Polar Record.

Mr Russell described how he had discovered one of the copies by accident.

“I just happened to be going through the file on George Murray Levick when I shifted some papers and found underneath them this extraordinary paper which was headed ‘the sexual habits of the adelie penguin, not for publication’ in large black type.

“It’s just full of accounts of sexual coercion, sexual and physical abuse of chicks, non-procreative sex, and finishes with an account of what he considers homosexual behaviour, and it was fascinating.”

The report and Mr Levick’s handwritten notes are now on display at the Natural History Museum for the first time. Mr Russell believes they show a man who struggled to understand penguins as they really are.

“He’s just completely shocked. He, to a certain extent, falls into the same trap as an awful lot of people in seeing penguins as bipedal birds and seeing them as little people. They’re not. They are birds and should be interpreted as such.”

There’s a lot of food for thought in this report.

The current curator of eggs and nests at the Natural History Museum, Douglas Russell, tells us that the then keeper of zoology at the same museum, Sidney Harmer, decided that George Murray Levick’s paper, Sexual Habits of the Adelie Penguin, “was too much for the times.” Apparently, though, Russell thinks it’s still too much for the times. He seems to think it necessary to remark that when live penguins fuck dead penguins it’s not actually penguin necrophilia. “What is happening there is not in any way analogous to necrophilia in the human context,” Mr Russell said.

Not analogous? Not in any way? Really? Frankly, I can’t see how penguins having sex with dead penguins is in any way disanalogous to humans having sex with dead humans. Sick penguins, sick humans.

Russell goes on to describe Levick as “a man who struggled to understand penguins as they really are.” He says that Levick, “to a certain extent, falls into the same trap as an awful lot of people in seeing penguins as bipedal birds and seeing them as little people. They’re not.”

They’re not? What about Happy Feet?! Why on earth shouldn’t we anthropomorphise penguins? We anthropomorphise people, don’t we?! Times change. Nowadays, being likened to a penguin is more offensive than a graphic account of necrophilia. What’s the world coming to?

Russell gives his alternative account of the live penguins’ non-necrophilic sexual relations with dead penguins. “It is the males seeing the positioning that is causing them to have a sexual reaction. They are not distinguishing between live females who are awaiting congress in the colony, and dead penguins from the previous year which just happen to be in the same position.” Russell, you see, claims to have “the scientific knowledge” that Levick, a century earlier, lacked.

But does he? How does Russell know that the penguins “are not distinguishing” between live and dead penguins? I’d say the penguins are well aware, but do it for the lulz. Perhaps Levick was right all along. Copulations with dead female penguins are the depraved sexual acts of hooligan males. Doubtless, the penguins involved don’t see it that way.

“It is the males seeing the positioning that is causing them to have a sexual reaction,” says Russell. Well, doesn’t “the positioning” of a human female also cause human males to have a sexual reaction? Of course it does! The positioning of a human female—is there a more apt description of the sex industry than that?

For whatever reason, humans are more like other members of the animal kingdom than humans care to admit. Darwin’s theory of evolution explains and predicts these similarities. Creationists must acknowledge that when God made the creature called man, he based his handiwork on an intelligent design blueprint he’d used previously and successfully throughout the animal kingdom.

What do you name a necrophilic penguin? Cold Feet.

There is a God! (part1)

Blah?
Blah Blah Blah!
Blar Blah Blah Blah Blar Blah Blah Blah Blar Blah Blah Blah Blar Blah Blah Blah Blar Blah Blah Blah!

Blah Blar Blar!
Amen.
Tim Wikiriwhi.

“The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God…”
(Psalm 14vs1)

“For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:”
(Rom 1vs20)

Click to Read more…

Way too Starry for Atheism.

There is a God! (part 2)

There is a God! (part3) Divine Messengers