Not So Polite Dinner Conversation – “Who’s on the side of science now?” how saying something doesn’t mean it’s true

Caroline (a Christian who I’ve tangled with before) certainly has written an amusing piece on her blog, insisting that science supports theism.  No matter how much she wants to “boldly proclaim that not only are science and faith not in conflict with each other, theism is the worldview better supported by science” it isn’t even remotely true.  It is notable that she doesn’t’ say it supports Christianity.  That’s what she means. 

Caroline tries to falsely claim that it is really Christians who are “on the side of science.”.  Of course, Caroline also makes this claim “For instance, I believe that I am not going to contract COVID-19 unless God allows it to happen, and that for a morally justifiable reason.”  And “A bug is no match for God.“ and “I live without fear of things I can’t see because I know he sees them and has absolute control over them.“

oh and isn’t this a typically conservative Christian bit of nonsense “What the parable doesn’t teach is that we are obligated to put ourselves in need to possibly extend the lives of some who are mere statistics to us.”  This is regards to if humans should care about others and if the locking down for the pandemic was necessary. It’s very nice to see such honesty.

So much for Caroline’s claim about being on the side of science.  I wonder if she regrets these word “ I’m praying that our government leaders increase their concern for the wrong being done to many of our neighbors in their directives meant to protect the lives of a relative few. And to also hold as of primary relevance that God ultimately decides who lives and who dies.”  This was written back in May of 2020.  And hundreds of thousands of deaths later….

Caroline’s claims aren’t supported by the science she claims she supports.  Her lies about abortion are quite pitiful.  Science supports the fact that a fetus is not the same as an adult or a child.  Science supports that a fetus requires a human to exist (at least so far).  Science supports the fact that if Caroline prevents women from having legal abortions, they have a chance to die from illegal abortions.  One has to wonder about Caroline’s disregard for life as indicated here and above. 

“Honestly, it’s like they really don’t know how babies are made. You rarely hear from pro-abortion folks, “practice safe sex,” and never hear, “refrain from sex if you’re not open to conceiving a child by it.” They fail to make the connection between sex and reproduction. Science, people!”

Funny how people like me, like Planned Parenthood, etc always are saying practice safe sex, advocating for easy access to birth control, etc.  Quite unlike Christians like Caroline.  She is an incompetent liar as usual. We aren’t the ones having a fit about condoms being handed out. 

Caroline is confused about gender and sex.  Science supports that there is gender and there is sex, and does not support the conservative claim that things are only binary.  Caroline of course simply ignores the science that contradicts her claims.  Psychology is one of the sciences and it is bemusing to see Caroline run to it when she wants to claim how the poor children are being somehow injured if they are told that gender isn’t a fixed thing but try to claim it isn’t important otherwise.  Caroline is also terribly ignorant about DNA and genetics, if she thinks gender is “hardwired” there. 

In that not all Christians agree with Caroline, there is no reason to think she or they have any knowledge at all about some magical being in the sky. 

The next claims are even more pitiful.

1.  Physics does indicate a beginning for the universe we have now.  We have no evidence that some magical being is required.  She does try hard with the philosophical argument of a first cause.  It is not scientific.  We do have examples of things “popping” into the universe. 

2. She tries the argument from beauty, which is a common Christian tactic and reveals just how ignorant and selfish they are when they have no problem ignoring that there is a good bit in this universe that isn’t beautiful at all.  She also tries the “complexity” argument and cannot show that a god is needed for that either since we get to see how complexity is evolved into being and it can be evolved out too.  There is nothing scientific about either of her arguments. 

3.  Then we get the ol’ “fine-tuning” argument.  That isn’t scientific either.  We don’t know yet what exactly is needed for life to be or how far things can vary.  She lies again when she says that fine-tuning is accepted by “most cosmologist and astrophysicists”. 

The wave that Caroline mentions doesn’t exist and we currently are watching religion fail since it doesn’t reflect reality.  The recent poll about how acceptance of evolutionary theory is rising terrifies Christians like Caroline.  So much for her claims about science.

27 thoughts on “Not So Polite Dinner Conversation – “Who’s on the side of science now?” how saying something doesn’t mean it’s true

  1. Interesting that she says a bug is no match for god and countless believers have died with COVID or is it the case that only the godless are dying in this pandemic. Morally justifiable reason for catching a disease! Now, that’s a first. And justifiable to who? Carol or her deity?

    Liked by 3 people

  2. I don’t think Caroline realizes the consequences when she lies about science. If she can’t make accurate statements about things that we can actually observe, test and measure, any statement she makes about her unobservable, untestable and unmeasurable god is probably several orders of magnitude less believable.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. It’s a proven fact that access to contraception greatly reduces the rate of abortions. But christians still find it objectionable because according to their bible; sex should only happen within the confines of a married, heterosexual union for the purposes of procreation. It’s unrealistic.

    Liked by 2 people

  4. Did you people directly observe darwins macro evolution?. What is the evidence that one species turning entirely in to different species?. No one has seen one ape or chimps giving birth to a human. Still atheist claim that they are more logical and intelligent in accepting those unobserved facts.

    You people are the one who didn’t even understand what Caroline had said. She said “”I believe that I am not going to contract COVID-19 unless God allows it to happen, and that for a morally justifiable reason””. So it is applicable for everybody irrespective of who they are. Moreover it is not that person’s who have contracted covid dies. Many people have recovered from covid. Therefore you clearly misrepresented the facts.

    You are so intelligent to believe unscientifically that life in this earth came by random chance. Sorry, random chance is not the scientific explanation for explaining about life.

    “I’m praying that our government leaders increase
    their concern for the wrong being done to many of our neighbors in their directives meant to protect the lives of a relative few. And to also hold as of
    primary relevance that God ultimately decides who lives and who dies”. This is very much rrelevant to the current situation all over the world. There are more covid recoveries reported in the news channels.

    “a fetus is not the same as an adult or a child. Science supports that a fetus requires a human to exist (at least so far). Science supports the fact”. Science is not absolute they change in time and science also corrects its previous observations as wrong. So, what is science now may not be science in future.

    Bad science has once again made news headlines by ‘reclassifying’ a previously declared ‘extinct’ species of frog as a ‘living fossil’ when this creature
    was discovered alive and well in northern Israel (

    In 1811, Johann Friedrich Meckel predicted that human embryos would have gill slits. But the
    evidence available
    after embryo neck slits were discovered in 1827 certainly made Mecklel’s theory appear persuasive. It was only when Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution
    took hold in the second half of the 19th century that it became totally clear that Meckel’s idea of a linear series of biological perfection was completely

    These few examples certainly clearly shows that science can’t be trusted completely. It’s more possible for evidence to be very misleading and, usually, radically
    false theories don’t produce successful, accurate predictions (and usually they produce radically false predictions). Science is a process of constant
    refinement, with a knack for ironing out unhelpful twists and turns in the long run. And we all know that even the most trustworthy can occasionally let
    us down.


    1. And now another pile of lies from anan aka dravid. As usual, he is simply a lazy and willfully ignorant failure, attacking that which he has no knowledge of.

      That which evolutionary theory predicts has been observed. Our fraud here isn’t aware of this since he must keep himself stupid to cling to his faith. We see the process of evolution right now in the changes in the covid 19 virus.

      We also see speciation and as expected, it doesn’t happen as poor ignorant Anan thinks it does. He finds he must lie about it. Speciation can be a gradual process depending on the changes.

      We also have our little Christain liars, both anan and Caroline, trying to claim how “just” their god is, when they have no evidence for those lies either. It’s expected to see our failures insist that their god has a “reason” to kill and harm people. Such pathetic sycophants. They would be both at home excusing any tyrant. Happily, both are evidence that no god exists since these TrueChristians(tm) can’t do what their god promised. They, and it, are frauds.

      Our poor dear is right, random chance isn’t an explanation of how life came about. Random chance has nothing to do with it, which is something anan aka dravid would know if he didn’t keep himself so stupid.

      There is no wrong being done to anyone in requiring them to wear masks and get vaccinated if they can be. Anan aka Dravid and Caroline lie again. How expected. Yep, science can change, and still no evidence for poor ol’ anan aka dravid’s god. What a shame. 🙂

      Meckel was a product of his time and thus ignorant about a great many things. it’s a common thing to see creationists having to mention long superseded nonsense since they have nothing else. Our poor TrueChristian(tm) fails again. It’s even better when our idiot shows that Darwin was right, when he tried to claim otherwise earlier. That takes some pure fail. Science advances; religion fails.

      Science should be questioned. And so should religion and its lies. We can fix science if it is mistaken. Theists are stuck with their baseless claims. Thanks, anan aka dravid for underlining that religion is radically false and never produces accurate predictions.


      1. yep, it’s the same moron. I do absolutely love when Christians lie repeatedly. ST aka ananthadhaya aka dravid All showing that he ignores his god when convenient. What a sad little man.

        poor lil’ fellow

        “I don’t want to waste my time in speaking to lying assholes, anti science evils and dishonest morons.

        Goodbye.” – st 2021/08/05 at 11:14 pm

        poor dear, no self-control at all. what a little nutless wonder


  5. What a display of insane answers from Cf. I love Cf struggling like a crippled Duck. Lol. Congrats once again for your lies and ignorance about evolution as you know nothing about what evolution really means. Darwin spoke about macro evolution and not about micro evolution.

    Covid virus is about its variation in its micro level and not macro level poor ignorant Baby. Scientists still says covid virus new stain as it modified its protein structure in a slightly different way. Still covid is a covid. You don’t see covid virus turning in to duck or dinosaur. You totally escaped from answering my question about macro evolution about apes turning in to man.

    Did you see a ape or a monkey giving birth to a human?. I questioned about macro evolution and you are answering micro evolution about covid which is totally irrelevant answer to my question.You don’t even able to understand my question and you claim that you know science. What a terrible liar you are.


    1. Stop pretending you understand evolution, Dravidianman. You’re execrably bad at it – and, considering the vast amount of information available on the subject, I can only conclude that you don’t understand it because you don’t want to understand it. So much cozier and safer to believe that you have an “in” with a god who’ll grant you eternal life, despite the total lack of evidence that such a thing is even possible.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. And still our dear st/ananthadhaya/Dravidanman is failing. I know what evolutionary theory is. you do not, and it is hilarious to see you attack something you are totally ignorant of.

      I also always love when an ignorant creationist tries the “micro” vs “macro” evolution argument. It shows very well how religion fails and is always the latecomer to reality. A few generations back, creationists wouldn’t have even admitted to evolution at all. But when the evidence is too strong even for them, they have to accept evolution, but claim that other evolution doesn’t work – when the mechanism is the same.

      Thanks, my poor dear, for showing exactly how ignorant and dishonest a Christian can be. Hell will be full up with Christians who decided that they could lie and this god wouldn’t notice. And poor dear st/ananthadhaya/Dravidanman, still a fraud since even his god doesn’t recognize him.


  6. .

    See, you are escaping from answering my question. The way in which you replied shows that you don’t want to admit that you are also a fanatic atheist. You admitted that you haven’t observed Darwin’s macro evolution. Yet you people want to foolishly believe that man came from apes.

    So, you boast as if you know science. You boast as if you speak the truth but you are No.1 Liar. .


    1. Dravidianman, the information you want is easy to locate… if you want it.

      We are under no obligation whatsoever to educate you, and I for one consider it a waste of time to even try. Suffice to say that we did not “come from” apes – we are a species of apes, related through a common ancestor that lived six million years ago. (This, too, will be lost on you if you’re one of those idiots who think the earth is only six thousand years old, and that Adam and Eve were real people.)

      Your accusation of lying, BTW, is unforgivable and I hope life treats you very, very badly. 😀


    2. I do love to see such an incompetent liar for christ, dear. Trying to come here as three different people, and there is only one sad failure behind it all.

      Thanks for showing how impotent and imaginary your god is and how pathetic its followers are.

      Evolution has been observed. Humans *are* primates. You are amazingly inept.


  7. Hi,

    “ We do have examples of things “popping” into the universe.”

    Could you elaborate what you mean by this?

    You appear to be accusing the original blogger of lying that many cosmologists or astrophysicists believe the fundamental constants of nature are fine-tuned. They are quite correct, as the physicist Paul Davies said “There is now broad agreement among physicists and cosmologists that the Universe is in several respects ‘fine-tuned’ for life”.

    The difference of opinion is over the whether this fine tuning can be explained without recourse to an intelligent designer, not if this fine tuning exists in our universe.



      “Quantum physics explains that there are limits to how precisely one can know the properties of the most basic units of matter—for instance, one can never absolutely know a particle’s position and momentum at the same time. One bizarre consequence of this uncertainty is that a vacuum is never completely empty, but instead buzzes with so-called “virtual particles” that constantly wink into and out of existence.

      These virtual particles often appear in pairs that near-instantaneously cancel themselves out. Still, before they vanish, they can have very real effects on their surroundings. For instance, photons—packets of light—can pop in and out of a vacuum. When two mirrors are placed facing each other in a vacuum, more virtual photons can exist around the outside of the mirrors than between them, generating a seemingly mysterious force that pushes the mirrors together.
      This phenomenon, predicted in 1948 by the Dutch physicist Hendrick Casimir and known as the Casimir effect, was first seen with mirrors held still . Researchers also predicted a dynamical Casimir effect that can result when mirrors are moved, or objects otherwise undergo change. Now quantum physicist Pasi Lähteenmäki at Aalto University in Finland and his colleagues reveal that by varying the speed at which light can travel, they can make light appear from nothing.”

      Yep, I have problem accusing and demonstrating the lies of theists. For all of the claims of “many” they can’t give who these “many” are.

      Now, why would be? Paul Davies, a known creationist, simply lies. He can’t show evidence for his claim either. You might want to read about him and his problem with facts:

      Fine-tuning is a hilarious fail, nothing more than a god of the gaps argument. It depends on humans never doing another second of research, and insists “if we don’t know, goddidit!” We do not know how far from the “constants” we can be to still have what we do. We do not know if these are truly constants. We also see that, if this god was a “designer”, it is either malicious or a moron. Thsi god managed to make 99.999…% of the universe inimcal to humans. It managed to make our energy source, the sun, give humans and animals cancer. It managed to make a molecule that often fails, giving cancer, birth defects, spontaneous abortions, etc.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Even if a person doesn’t want to read/accept scientific conclusions, your last three down-to-earth sentences simply cannot be denied. A LOVING God (as so many proclaim) ???!!? Not hardly.


      2. Hi,

        Thank you for your reply.

        Paul Davies is an eminent physicist who is responsible in part for developing the Fulling–Davies–Unruh effect, and the Bunch–Davies vacuum in quantum theory, amongst other contributions to science. He is perfectly in his right to be a theist as well, as many scientists are.

        Besides, almost every atheist physicist believes in fine tuning as well. Stephen Hawking said:

        “The laws of science, as we know them at present, contain many fundamental numbers, like the size of the electric charge of the electron and the ratio of the masses of the proton and the electron. … The remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers seem to have been very finely adjusted to make possible the development of life.”

        (A Brief History of Time, 1988)

        Other prominent physicists I can name of the top of my head, such as Allan Guth, John Gribbin, Peter Woit and John Polkinghorne all admit the fundamental constants of nature are precisely fine tuned to allow the existence of life. They come from various belief systems, whether atheist, agnostic or theist. The existence of cosmic fine tuning is the underlying impetus behind theories positing the existence of a multiverse, such as the various String Theories, including Hawking’s ‘M-theory’.

        Yes, if you read the article you linked to carefully, it explains virtual particles can arise from a relativistic quantum field, an extremely complex structure and certainly not the definition of ‘nothing’. This doesn’t really explain anything about the origin of the universe.


      3. Davies is a creationist and thus a liar. All you are doing is trying the argument from authority, and alas, Davies has no authority here. He has no evidence for his claims about “fine-tuning” no matter how manyother theories he may have contributed to.

        and geemore lies “Besides, almost every atheist physicist believes in fine tuning as well.” I do love when ignorant theists quote mine scientists and try to make it look like they agree with them. Alas, for your lies, Hawking said it “seems”, and that it was ‘possible” that this oculd be evidence for intelligent design.

        He also said:

        ” Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist. It is not necessary to invoke God to light the bluetouch paper and set the universe going.” The Great Design.

        “Newton believed that our strangely habitable solar system did not “arise out of chaos by the mere laws of nature.” Instead, he maintained, the order in the universe was “created by God at first and conserved by him to this Day in the same state and condition.” It is easy to understand why one might think that. The many improbable occurrences that conspired to enable our existence, and our world’s human-friendly design, would indeed be puzzling if ours were the only solar system in the universe. But in 1992 came the first confirmed observation of a planet orbiting a star other than our sun. We now know of hundreds of such planets, and few doubt that there exist countless others among the many billions of stars in our universe. That makes the coincidences of our planetary conditions—the single sun, the lucky combination of earth-sun distance and solar mass—far less remarkable, and far less compelling as evidence that the earth was carefully designed just to please us human beings. Planets of all sorts exist. Some—or at least one—support life. Obviously, when

        The Grand Design the beings on a planet that supports life examine the world around them, they are bound to find that their environment satisfies the conditions they require to exist” The Great Design

        Hawking wrote The Great Design in 2010. HE wrote Brief History of time in 1988. He left your nonsense behind. Now, since you are so desperate to appeal to authority, is he right now?

        You claim all of these other physicists agree with you. Okay, quote them. I’ll be waiting. I’m not surprisied you included Polkinghorne, and funny how he became a priest, and was paid money to claim that science and religion could work together. when someone says something like this “”there is just one universe which is the way it is in its anthropic fruitfulness because it is the expression of the purposive design of a Creator, who has endowed it with the finely tuned potentialty for life.” it’s entertaining how much they have to lie since the universe is singularly inimical to human life.

        Oh and do show how fine tuning is behind M-theory. This should be fun.

        Yes, if you read the article, it has that something can come from “nothing”. It’s so sweet to see theists trying to change the meaning of things, when they never accept quantum theory when it shows their god not existing. No one needs this god, and if it existed, we would find evidence.

        happily, your ignorance and lies show that any time yuo say “doesn’t really explain” is simply a baseless bit of nonsense. That particles can “pop” in, this shows your god isn’t needed at all, or designs anything.


Leave a Reply (depending on current posters, posts may be moderated, individually or en masse. It may take a day or two for a comment to be released so don't panic). Remember, I control the horizontal, I control the vertical. And also realize, any blog owner can see the IP address and email address of a commenter.)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.