On occasion, after feeding my dog I might lazily leave an empty can of dog food on my kitchen counter for 2-3 days. The amino acids in what’s left in the can form organisms by way of maggots and flies. Anyone with half a brain can understand that this type of process is what led to the existence of life on Earth. Chemistry made it happen, not god’s magic wand.

That’s what he actually thinks atheists believe, that maggots form spontaneously out of amino acids in cans of dog food. What’s worse is that he doesn’t even understand how spectacular that would be, if indeed it really happened. It would be abiogenesis happening in a can of dog food!

Now, of course, Comfort proceeds to tell this “typical” atheist what really happened:

Magical maggots are his proof that a Creator doesn’t exist. It doesn’t occur to him that a fly flew in when he wasn’t looking at the empty can, and laid eggs.

So, what? Flies laying eggs that hatch into maggots is Comfort’s proof that God does exist?

The rest of the post is more of the same I talked about last time, with Comfort simply repeating the claim that there is no scientific evidence of evolution whatsoever (not that the evidence is flawed or contradictory, mind you, that it does not exist, period), with the added bonus that apparently the Genesis account, which does contradict itself numerous times in the Bible, is absolutely, scientifically true and valid.

The tragedy for those that believe in evolution is that they automatically discount the Genesis account of creation, which holds up perfectly under the light of honest scientific scrutiny. It informs us that God is the initial Cause of all things.

Apparently, Ray believes science is some text that magically poofed into existence, and that merely informs us what is true and what isn’t. Another text informing us of something else is, apparently, arbitrarily rated higher, and therefor trumps the text of science. That is Comfort’s idea of arriving at accepted truths.

Unlike the idea of evolution, Christianity can be tested. Simply read the Sermon on the Mount—which tells us among other things that God considers lust to be adultery (see Matthew 5:27-28), and that leaves all of us in big trouble on Judgment Day, heading for Hell.

Near the end, he’s not even making sense anymore. He doesn’t even understand what he himself claims. How do we “test” whether lust is the same as adultery? He doesn’t say. He just states that we’ve been informed that that is the case, and apparently that should be enough. It’s what passes for scientific rigor to him. But then how can he dismiss the theory of evolution? How can he claim that this can be tested, but evolution can’t? He doesn’t say, and he most probably doesn’t know. At this point he’s simply say anything to prove his own point, no matter how inconsistent or contradictory it is. The cognitive dissonance is staggering.

Repent and trust Him and you will pass from death into life, and know the truth–and the truth will make you free (seeJohn 8:31-32). There’s the proof.

A guy claiming life evolves from non-life in an empty can of dog food can be dismissed without a second thought. A 2000+ year old book of collected myths and laws claiming there’s a being that can give birth to himself, to sacrifice himself to himself, yet resurrecting himself in the end, can be trusted as absolute (and testable) truth.

I… I don’t even know how to respond to a claim like that. It’s like trying to talk to the crazy guy on the street corner babbling about how his teeth pick up secret CIA radio transmissions, when all of his teeth fell out long ago.

I will admit, I cannot defend, not to mention explain, the claim that life can arise from non-life out of an empty can of dog food. Unarguably, Ray Comfort will take an admission like that to mean that I admit that all of evolution is a hoax. I leave it up to everyone else to draw their own conclusions based on that.

His problem (referring to a comment regarding the “mountain of evidence for evolution”) is that he has never taken a close look at the mountain, and believes that he has a mammoth case with his long list. His “etc.” means that he believes there are even more mountains, somewhere.

Maybe that works for the simple folk, but it doesn’t work for those who know that his evolutionary fossil “record” doesn’t exist. Of course fossils exist, but not as a record for evolution.

So, neither the person who wrote the comment Ray replies to, nor any of the worlds biologists, geologists, chemists, physicists or otherwise scientists, have ever taken a close look at the figurative “mountain” of evidence. Ray has, apparently. He has gone where no person has gone before, and concluded that it’s all smoke and mirrors, no substance to it at all. He declares, without hesitation, that the fossils that exist in no way whatsoever show any kind of historical record of species adapting and changing over time. I’ve always found it interesting why God placed so much emphasis on “kinds”, yet still needed to specially create every single form that could possibly be seen as an intermediate species… Only to kill them off and leave their bones in the ground for us to find. Why did they exist in the first place, if they weren’t good enough to take on the Ark?

Ray continues,

I don’t have time to run down the long list of winding rabbit trails, other than to say that DNA is an incredibly complex “language”, and to say that it’s proof for evolution, rather than of intelligent design, is to confirm Psalm 14:1.

No, of course he doesn’t have the time. After going through every single scientific field related to evolution, and personally studying every last piece of evidence in favor of it, there wouldn’t be much time left over to publish the results, now would it? I mean, he’s only human…

Only Ray could make the argument that it’s more important to study the external appearance of DNA, than to actually find out how it works, what it’s for and what evidence it makes up. It’s almost as if he actually believes that every biochemist out there makes the explicit argument that simply because it looks complex, that in itself is evidence of evolution.

In conclusion, Ray proves yet again how if his understanding of evolution was compared to a baseball game, he’d be the equivalent of the hot dog vendor in the stands.

Also, you are not a primate, nor are you a relative of fish, pig, or the dog. You are a human being, created by God (with an intuitive knowledge of right and wrong), and therefore you are morally responsible to Him for your thoughts, words, and deeds…whether you believe it or not.

Ray seems to think that “primate” and “human being” are mutually exclusive terms. Surprising, considering his vast expertise in biology. You’d think someone who has a complete and in-depth understanding of all the evidence in existence for the theory of evolution, would also know the most basic terminology used to describe said evidence… I guess not.

Lastly, he touches on an interesting point. So many times have I had it explained that God is like a loving, caring parent, and we are his children. Now, with that in mind, those with parents who actively punish you for thinking the wrong thoughts, put your hands up. Yes, right now. I’ll wait. No one? Really? What about those who think “thought crime” should be acceptable, as well as punishable as a capital offense? Yes, I’m talking lifetime in prison, plus Guantanamo-style torture… only it’s not for life, but for eternity. No hands for that either? Shocking!

But apparently the act of creating human beings (as opposed to primates) is so incredibly exhausting and mentally straining for an omnipotent First Cause-type being that we should spend our entire existence trying to make up for the fact that we exist. It’s almost as if God was lonely, so he created something that would amuse him, and that he could treat as badly as he wanted, only to guilt-trip into obedience every time it started to have its own opinion on things.

Ray Comfort isn’t fun anymore. It’s why there hasn’t been very much activity as of late. Ray isn’t even trying, neither is anyone else in the Creationism/Intelligent Design community. All the small, ambiguous scientific finds that could be made in favor of some kind of “purpose”-driven interpretation have been made, and debunked several times over. The only resort to these people is a fantasy world, a universe in which a street preacher has as much authority studying fossil records and DNA as paleontologists and biochemists do. A universe where evidence that has convinced the most stubborn scientists for over a century and a half is “obviously non-existent”. A universe in which “something from nothing” is a ridiculous suggestion, but “something from God, who came from nothing” is perfectly acceptable, and indeed, preferable. I suspect future updates will be scarce as well, unless something amazing happens, and at least one of the members of the league of extraordinary ignorami changes their tone, or even their arguments. Until then, it’s just beating a horse that’s been dead for decades…

[After quoting a long list of evidence for evolution] Then, after such impressive proof, Froggie throws down the gauntlet and says, “Go ahead, falsify one even one of thousands of established facts supporting evolution. Go ahead.”

So let’s go ahead just a little and examine the list of “facts.” How about “human tails”? Where on earth (or in the fossil record) are humans with tails? We don’t even have a “tail bone” as some maintain.

Ok, so at this point I’m straight back to when I first read about Ray Comfort. I cannot believe he is anything but a fraud. You can’t possibly be this ignorant, and still maintain authority, can you?

Well, the straight fact is that humans with tails are born from time to time even today, and we do have parts of a tail bone left. In most people, it doesn’t take the shape of an actual tail, but if you ever fall down and hit the part of your lower back where that tail would be, don’t tell me it doesn’t hurt more than it should had we not even had hints of a tail bone left. Here’s the Wikipedia article on human tails. Here’s a site with plenty of images of human tails.

Now, Ray, want to revise your statement on the existence of the tail bone and tails in humans? Of course that, that would require you admitting you’re wrong.

Ray continues:

Ditto with legged whales, seacows and snakes with legs. Snakes had legs . . . did they talk? Then there’s the “ape-humans” (the missing link), and the “reptile birds” (that would be the belief that chickens were once dinosaurs). Sure.

Yes, Ray, if you close your eyes and cover your ears, all those fossils of legged whales magically disappear. There are both snakes with legs, and lizards without legs (the latter is actually quite common here in Sweden). The “missing link” is your own strawman imagination. You can’t keep getting closer to the middle between black and white, and still refuse to call it gray. As for reptile birds… Again, if you want to ignore hard evidence, that’s your problem. Ignoring it, however, does not make it go away for the rest of the world.

Of course when listing evidence of evolution, always be sure to drop in a few unpronounceables, such as pharyngeal, pseudogenes, endogenous retroviruses, anatomical parahomology and suboptimal, and you will impress the simple, because you have just evidenced your intelligence.

Maybe Ray can’t pronounce “suboptimal”, but that hardly disproves evolution as a fact (but does hint at why Ray has such a hard time grasping elementary school biology). And if it weren’t for the fact that any attempt to simplify the evidence is only met with even greater lack of understanding (a feat in itself), we wouldn’t have to write such long lists of incomprehensible and unpronounceable (say those two words quickly three times in a row) terms and names.

The rest are winding rabbit trails that I don’t have time to follow. They lead nowhere. It’s about as powerful as me listing all 66 books of the Bible and thinking that I have just proven the existence of God.

But… That is what you do, Ray. You keep telling us God exists because God says God exists in the book God wrote. That’s essentially the same as just listing the 66 books of the Bible. Did we just have a breakthrough here? Did Ray just unintentionally understand (the only way to make Ray understand anything, by the way) how flawed his entire position is?

Even if he did, he’ll repress it. After all, that’s what he does best.

He’s usually way up there, talking all kinds of nuttery, but this is pretty much stratospheric. Not only is he displaying some of the worst cognitive dissonance I’ve ever seen in him, but he even manages to end his post with one of the weakest anti-evolution statements in history. Apparently, we no longer not only lack empirical evidence, but it seems we never felt we needed it in the first place! I wonder why, exactly, Darwin then felt he needed to come halfway around the world to study it, when he could have just sat at home and made stuff up.

Anyway, it’s too short to quote without copying it all at once, so hit the link above for some serious brain-hurting nonsense. However, I’m not going to let you leave without a little bonus at least. The second worst case of cognitive dissonance (and plain ignorance) comes from blog regular starbuck:

However, I can think of no greater example of misplaced trust than the faith that believers have in the theory of evolution. They are an example of “blind” faith, with no need for any empirical evidence. The only “evidence” they have is a belief that what they have read or have been told, is true.

True! However atheists will say “please provide proof that evolution is false”.. or something like that.

No… If you as an atheist cannot provide proof then it is not true.

Don’t tell me to go to a museum, don’t tell me to go to school. Don’t tell me that it is in the DNA, that proves nothing. I could always say that is how the Creator made it that way. Which proves nothing as well. But it does negate the DNA arguement.

Tell me why evolution is true without the silly arguements you have so far provided. Maybe I will listen. You won’t convince me, but I’ll listen.

Last but not least, one of the most concise descriptions of Ray Comfort that I’ve ever seen, courtesy of another blog regular, BathTub:

Once again Ray shows his obsession with death and evolution.

He can’t do anything about the former, and he knows nothing about the latter.

Sums up Ray really, doesn’t it.

Yes, actually, it does.

- Ray Comfort, Atheist Central

Look around the room you are in. Name anything that wasn’t made or designed. Unless you’re in the kitchen you’d be hard-pressed to argue that everything in the room wasn’t made or designed by someone (and even then only an atheist could put fruit or veggies on the list).

Yet atheists believe the whole world and everything in it, fell into place through random chance and was created by nobody. Yet we’re not just struggling life forms on a planet that barely has the necessities for life to exist. We have an abundance of natural resources, water, oxygen, countless varieties of food, happiness, love, the ability to continue our race through procreation. And that was just a short list. Our life is good, if not great, compared to what it could have evolved into. And it is believed that all this, evolved before (or as) we had a need for it.

So why didn’t the things in the room you are in (chairs, desks, pens, TV and even planes and cars) evolve too? After all, these items are used by nearly even human on the planet and some would say they are a necessity in life. They are certainly less complex than the items mentioned in the first list above. Is it not a fair question to ask of evolution and Mother Nature as to why we had to give up waiting and create them ourselves? DJC

Yes, this is actually what “DJC” wrote. He’s apparently serious.

A grown man (maybe that’s too much of an assumption) that actually argues that evolution is false because microwave ovens don’t evolve.

You know what? I’m not even going to bother commenting on this any further. The stupidity speaks for itself. This “guest blogger” couldn’t think himself out of a sandbox, not to mention grasp the general outline of the theory of evolution. I pity him, and I pity those who actually think this is a good argument.

While they’re right in that the copyright of Darwin’s original text has long-since expired, this is a textbook example of what is popularly called “a dick move”. They don’t expect anyone to actually read the book, but they do hope that people will believe their ridiculous diatribes on “paintings and their painters” and the eternal love of their particular variant of an omnipotent Sky-Daddy (oh, and his zombie son as well).

Most of us realize how pathetic this all is. However, what most of us don’t realize is how great it is to emphasize this by satirizing it all with the help of two crabs in some sort of forest. Behold!

To begin with, let’s take today’s post: “Evolution is exactly like the story of Pinocchio!”

Yes, because we all know the Theory of Evolution proposes that you must believe in wooden replicas of species magically coming to life, giving birth to mutated wooden replicas that in turn magically come to life as well. See? Not evolution, but Rayvolution.

I don’t blame him, really. I totally get it. It’s much easier to just boast and claim that you’ve knocked down that really big, tough bouncer at the bar, instead of actually showing everyone how you did it. Likewise, it’s much easier to disprove Rayvolution than it is to disprove evolution.