“Jurassic Park II: The Chaos Continues” Rips

I ripped some sprites from “Jurassic Park II: The Chaos Continues.” As is, they can be used for rm2k3 monster graphics, but creative RMers will find other uses, I’m sure.

The License and what-not
You can use these faces in your own RPG Maker project as long as…
1.) Credit is given in-game at some point to Jurassic Park II: The Chaos Continues for creating the original sprites.
2.) Credit is given in-game at some point to Abyssal for ripping them.

Odd Synesthetic Experience

Speaking of my aberrant psychology, this afternoon when I was petting my dog (awww…) I had an odd synesthetic experience. When I did a certain motion with my fingers I perceived a noise. I’ve never had a tactile –> sound experience like that before. I only remember having grapheme –> color and timbre –> color before this. That was an odd thing.

Pterodactyls in my Bedroom! ZOMG!

Last night I experienced some rather vivid hypnogogic imagery. As I was laying in bed to go to sleep I saw little silhouettes of pterosaurs flying above my bed, specifically, Pteranodon longiceps.

They swooped and dived and were behaving rather life-like, to be honest about it. It was unnerving to be seeing things you know aren’t real, but I really really like pterosaurs, so it was hard to get too freaked out.

Eventually a mosasaur entered the scene. Yeah, I know, aerial and aquatic animals don’t belong together, but I was hallucinating, so forgive me. It was one of the smaller Tylosaurus species. It had a paddle on the end of its tail. You should have seen this thing in motion. Stunningly fluid. Serpentine. Gorgeous.

I think I lost consciousness at about that point. Damn.

The AEON-[#] System: A Proposed Classification Scheme for Reports Describing the Observation or Interaction with Anomalous Entities

Introduction

The creation of this proposed classification scheme was spurred on by my reading a book about alien abductions wherein the author was forced to frequently use awkward phrases such as “alien abduction-like cases.” I realized that the Close Encounter scheme devised by Hynek, being completely UFO-centric, was in some cases inadequate to classify cases of encounters with anomalous entities where UFOs are absent from or secondary to the case.

On further reflection I realized that all UFO related classification systems suffered from the same or similar maladies, and that there was no simple standardized system that operated in a “cross disciplinary” fashion within the paranormal research community that was specifically applicable to entity-related paranormal phenomena.

Description

AEON-[#] means…

Anomalous Entity Observation or interaction of the Numbered type: [#]

The AEON-[#] system is reminiscent of the Close Encounters system designed by Hynek. However, instead of applying to UFOs, the AEON-[#] system applies equally well to a range of paranormal “subdisciplines” that focus on the observation of anomalous entities. The goal of the system is the categorization of various types of cases in which one or more witnesses observe or interact with anomalous entities.

The AEON-[#] system is divided into 10 numerical “types” that are numbered from -2 to 7. Negative numbers denote cases where the alleged anomalous nature of the case has been discredited. The type-0 category is something of a wastebasket for phenomena that resemble or are related to living entities but are not such entities themselves even though these type-0 are still possibly anomalous.

Positive numbers label claims of anomalous entity observation or interaction which have not been adequately discredited to demote them to the negative numbers. In general, the higher the number describing the entity case type, the “weirder” the phenomenon is.

Glossary

Alien-

A living entity which is in any way of non-earth origin, or is of unusual earthly origins (e.g. a secret underground civilization). Examples: Angels, Demons, Grays, Nordics, Reptillians, Chupacabras, interdimensional beings, Atlanteans, Deros, etc.

Anomalous-

A phenomenon or entity whose existence or actions is not believed to be any combination of the following: true, acknowledged, or explainable in terms accepted by the consensus of the mainstream scientific community.

Entity-

A living thing, or anomalous phenomenon believed to be closely related to living things. Examples: Animals, people, angels, ghosts, extraterrestrials, orbs, unidentified animal remains, etc.

Living-

Biologically active in the case of organisms, or possessing an apparent functioning consciousness in the case of immaterial or artificially constructed entities.

Sentient-

An entity which possesses a level of intelligence and/or self awareness approaching, equaling or surpassing that of a human being.

Pronunciation examples:

AEON-[#] = “Aeon number.” The number sign is a placeholder for a number used in examples.
AEON-[-2] = “Aeon minus two.” Or “Aeon negative two.”
AEON-[5] = “Aeon five.”

Brief Comments on Notation

AEON is an acronym and would most appropriately be typed in all-caps. Saying “Aeon number” to refer to a specific type is redundant because the N stands for “Number.” Numbers are bracketed to separate the dash from potential negative ratings (AEON–1 looks ridiculous).

The Numbered Divisions

AEON-[-2]
Deliberate Deception

An entity observation report will be reclassified from its initial AEON-[#] to AEON-[-2] in the event that sufficiently convincing evidence is put forward to demonstrate that the initial entity observer(s) was participating in an act of deliberate deception. The motivation for such deception is irrelevant to the report’s classification. Even guerilla marketing campaigns and the like would fall under this category.

Example: The Gulf Breeze UFO affair.

AEON-[-1]
Misidentified Mundane Entity

An entity observation report will be reclassified from its initial AEON-[#] to AEON-[-1] in the event that sufficiently convincing evidence is put forward to demonstrate that the initial entity observer(s) had been mistaken about the anomalous nature of the observed entity, and that an explanation currently acknowledged by the mainstream scientific community accounts for the reported observation.

Example: The Zuiyo Maru carcass.

AEON-[0]
Life-Associated Entity

A Type-[0] anomalous entity observation is one in which the entity observed is not biologically alive, nor does it show evidence of a functional consciousness. However, type-[0] entities are strongly associated with such living entities, or are widely perceived to be associated with entities that are. The apparent remains, manifestation or images of entities that meet the prescribed definition noted in the glossary are what constitutes an AEON-[0] report.

Examples: Globsters, orbs, “ghosts” that don’t act like they posess a functioning consciousness, etc.

AEON-[1]
Unacknowledged Terrestrial Life-Form

A Type-[1] anomalous entity observation is one in which the entity observed or interacted with appears to be biologically alive and to be a native part of Earth’s biota while remaining unacknowledged in the general consensus of the mainstream scientific community.

Examples: Sea serpents, Bigfoot, Nessie, Mokele Mbembe, Ropen, mysterious big cats, etc.

AEON-[2]
Terrestrial Immaterial Entity

A Type-[2] anomalous entity observation is one in which the entity observed or interacted with appears to be of earthly origin and have a functioning consciousness despite lacking a material biological body as it is commonly understood.

Example: Channeled spirits, “ghost playmates” of children,

AEON-[3]
Non-Sentient Alien Entity

A Type-[3] anomalous entity observation is one in which the entity observed or interacted with appears to be biologically alive but to be of non-earthly origins. The apparent non-earthly origins may be surmised by an inability to even conceptually classify the non-sentient alien entity within the standard taxonomic system used by biologists.

Examples: Chupacabra, Mothman, Jersey Devil, Dover Demon,

AEON-[4]
Sentient Alien Entity

A Type-[4] anomalous entity observation is one in which the entity observed or interacted with appears to be biologically alive, or artificially constructed to act as if it was biologically alive but is of non-earthly origins. Additionally, it appears to have intelligence and/or self-awareness approaching, equaling, or surpassing a human’s. The entity’s sentience can be inferred from communication, wearing of clothing, use of technology, or humanoid body form.

Example: Grays, Nordics, Androids, Reptillians, etc.

AEON-[5]
Immaterial Alien Entity

A Type-[5] anomalous entity observation is one in which the entity observed or interacted with appears to be of non-earthly origin and have a functioning consciousness despite lacking a material biological body as it is commonly understood. Non-earthly origin is usually established by communication with the entity.

Example: Channeled extraterrestrial spirits of the New Age and Contactee movements, Angels, Demons, Jinn, interdimensional beings, etc.

AEON-[6]
Transportation by an Alien Biological Entity

A Type-[6] anomalous entity observation is one in which the entity observed or interacted with appears to be biologically alive but to be of non-earthly origins. Additionally, this entity will permit or force some sort of transportation upon the witness. This frequently involves forced abduction to the interior of a UFO or subterranean extraterrestrial base and a medical examination.

Examples: Betty and Barney Hill abduction, George Adamski’s contactee and interplanetary touring experiences, etc.

AEON-[7]
Transportation by an Alien Immaterial Entity

A Type-[7] anomalous entity observation is one in which the entity observed or interacted with appears to be of non-earthly origin and have a functioning consciousness despite lacking a material biological body as it is commonly understood. Additionally, this entity will permit or force some sort of transportation upon the witness. This is often within the context of religious visions or near death experiences.

Examples: Religious visions of heaven or the future, near death experiences, out of body travel to the astral plane, etc.

Conclusion

That’s about all there is to say. Comments, criticism, or anything else you can think to say about this proposed scheme would be very appreciated.

Re: Sometimes Backsliding Can Be A Good Thing

Creationist JerryK wrote:
A blog entry detailing a conversation he had with an evolutionist. He implied that because Darwin’s famed book contains the subtitle “by Means of Natural Selection, or The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life,” that evolution naturally led to the conclusion that some human races are superior to others. Thus, under the evolutionary scenario for the origin of biodiversity, racism was justified. His friend, an anti-racist, was understandably stunned by these “revelations” and decided to rethink his perspective on evolution.

I posted the following rebuttal in his comments section:

Do you really not have any clue how evolution works, or are you just being a sophist? Whether you realize it or not, you used the term race much more literally than it was originally meant. Darwin used the term in a loose sense to mean any distinct groups with inherited differences. Obviously human races do qualify technically, but the tone you used implied that Darwin, a British 19th century evolutionary biologist, meant “race” in the same way that an American 21st century layman would mean it.

This subtle bit of dishonesty gave the term a pointed emotional aspect the term otherwise would have lacked. Your discussion is a testament to the effectiveness of such methods in rhetoric, but such verbal manipulation only muddies the water of discourse. Not the attitude of someone interested in the truth, just someone interested in winning arguments. Just like the sophists Socrates held in such low regard.

As for the “favoured human race,” your insinuation that natural selection logically leads to racist conclusions is absurd. Different environments exert different selective pressures. Evolutionary fitness can only be assessed within the context of the given environment and its selective pressure. Adaptive “superiority” is a completely relative phenomenon, and as Dan said, only discernible in retrospect. And by retrospect I mean “Looking back after thousands or millions of years.”

If you want to know what human race has been “favoured” in a given environment, on the other hand, it’s a rather simple task: you only have to observe what race is native to the area. Note how fair-skinned people are native to higher latitudes and darker skinned people tend to have ancestors that lived closer to the equator. Natural selection is directly responsible for the biogeography of human races.

Comparing groups of people in different environments with their differing selective pressures is a useless exercise of the apples-to-oranges variety. Dan is on the right track when he says the Chinese currently hold the closest position to “highest Darwinian fitness level among humans” (well, they did before the One Child Policy anyway).

However, it should be stressed that there is nothing about the Asian race biologically that is increasing its fitness. So really, they don’t have any well-founded claim to being evolutionarily “more advanced” at all. If you study the differences between human races you will find that the differences are so slight and so closely tied to minor environmental differences in their respective places of origin that evolution cannot be sensibly invoked to justify racism. Your obliviousness to this fact betrays your level of understanding of evolution and its implications. I recommend that you invest time into additional study of evolutionary ideas before participating in similar discussions in the future.

Sorry to sound so hostile,
~ Abyssal

My Edited Roco Facesets

I’ve made some more facesets. They’re Roco edits, both of which are from my non-Legacy projects. Go figure. Anyway, hope you like ‘em.

The License and what-not
You can use these faces in your own RPG Maker project as long as…
1.) Credit is given in-game at some point to Roco for creating the original faces.
2.) Credit is given in-game at some point to Abyssal for editing them.
3.) You don’t remove the little ad at the bottom of the images themselves.

I’m Not a Girl, Retards!

Got some interesting traffic today. <_<

Seriously, wtf is up with that?

I waited 2 Hours to Attend a Canceled Class

Due to shitty weather, my Uni instituted a two hour delay today. This would have been a good thing, but I didn’t know about it. I woke up at the usual time and went to class. No one was there. I tried checking the teacher’s PC to see if school was canceled or delayed, but the stupid thing was swarming with bizarre error messages.

So I ran to a computer lab. Closed. Ran across campus to another computer lab. Also closed. And so, I went back to class and sat. And waited for two fucking hours until people started flooding in.

Then I realized that I didn’t recognize a single damn one of them. So I ask the kid in front of me what class was meeting. He says Geology. Not physics. Geology. Apparently “Two Hour Delay” means “Two Hour Cancelation” in Westvirginia-ese. I hate life.

Sorting Porno Files in Class

Note: This post was written yesterday.

Physics is a boring subject. If attendance wasn’t madatory I would skip every non-exam class period. Sadly, I must attend the lectures or fail. So, what’s a bored guy do? Search desperately for entertainment. Luckily (or so I thought) there’s a nerdy kid that sits in front of me that brings his laptop everyday.

He’s into some of the same type of stuff I am apparently, amateur game design and spriting and what-not. So I pass the time by watching this kid change Megaman’s armor from blue to black and making a crappy anime guy-that-looks-like-a-girl and then programming him/her to jump and, ZOMG point a gun. Not exactly high brow entertainment, but given the alternative (listening to detailed explanations of “If you let go of a rock it will fall instead of flying away into the negaverse”), it is sufficient.

So today, when I see him scrolling through folders of image thumbnails, it seemed like business as usual. When I saw that they were anime images, I wasn’t exactly surprised given his other “nerdy” interests. I joked to myself “lol he’s browsing his ““Hentai.” I meant that as a joke, not prophecy, but that’s about the time when I noticed that a lot of those pics looked like girls. I thought I was just letting my imagination run away with me. He may be looking at anime images, but surely not his personal fap library But some of those thumbnails looked vaguely like girls in very sexual poses… I went into denial. There’s no way in hell he’s browsing porn in class. Then I saw an image I recognized from my own harddrive saw a very explicit thumbnail.

I couldn’t deny it any more. He was sorting his apparently endless collection of anime porn in a public classroom in broad fucking daylight, with me in the background awkwardly trying to ignore it, but you can’t really ignore something like that no matter how much you want to. And it got worse. As the hour went on, he was obviously getting more brazen, since he would occasionally actually open the friggin’ images in the Windows image previewer full size before moving them to other folders.

So that’s how I spent my first class period today. Trying to avert my eyes from a freaking weird little twerp sorting his anime porn collection. You can’t make this shit up. I swear, all my classes are filled with fucking nutjobs.

Re: Back to Genesis #1: Bishop or Bible? A Question of Authority [Part II]

I am continuing my response to an article called “Bishop or Bible? A Question of Authority” written by Ken Ham for the ICR’s “Back to Genesis” series.

Claim #11: How many different dinosaurs were there? Secular books on dinosaurs give the idea that there were hundreds of different kinds of dinosaurs. Children are indoctrinated to believe that these hundreds of different types of dinosaurs lived during the dinosaur age millions of years ago. Thus, they are led to believe that evolution is true and the Biblical account of creation wrong.

You’re just equating your own interpretations with God’s again. Whatever happened to Christian humility and quaking in awe before God? And you’re denial of the sheer vastness of known dinosaurs is pathetic. Anyone can check out the Wikipedia article on the subject themselves and call your bluff.

Claim #12: However, one begins to lose faith in “science falsely so called” when a careful dinosaur investigation is made.

I think it should be noted that the science falsely so-called verse is from the King James version. It does not refer to the modern institution of science where nature is learned about by observation and experimentation, but rather all types of false knowledge. Note also that other non-KJV bible translations are used in this article. With this Ken Ham is taking advantage of the wording in different translations in order to twist the Bible into fitting his own preconceived ideas.

Not to mention that the science falsely so-called argument is listed in the Answers in Genesis’s “Arguments that Should Not be used Against Evolution” article. Good thing creation scientists are upright moral Christians who would never abuse Scripture when it’s convenient but tell others not to do the same thing just to put up a false front. Hypocrites!

Claim #13: Paleontology should be doubted because new dinosaur species are sometimes described on the basis of fragmentary evidence.

This objection is easily refutable by someone acquainted with paleontology, even if they are only acquainted enough to call it a hobby. Since most people arent even this familiar with the science, Ill instead turn to an analogy from an area of wider reaching appeal: cars. I admit to not being interested in cars myself, but its common sense that you can determine the make or model of a car based on the construction of certain parts. Thus if a knowledgeable mechanic looks at a part he can say, Thats a Ford, or Thats a Mercedes. Its the same way with paleontologists attempting to classify fossils.

To a layman a spark plug is a sparkplug, and to a layman a dromaeosaur tooth and tyrannosaur tooth probably look the same as well. However to an expert, a tooth can almost always be narrowed down to the family level, and sometimes even straight down to species level classification. Thus if a tooth is distinct enough, it would appear to not belong in any known group, and since this tooth is obviously real, and not a hoax on the part of Satan as some people have tried to convince me, it means that it belongs in a category all its own- it is the first known fossil of a previously unknown organism deserving a new binomial.

Claim #14: Paleontology should be doubted because paleontologists sometimes misclassify fossils.

This should hardly be surprising, considering that if creationists are right human reasoning can’t be used to discover truth! Despite this “fact” creationists expect scientists to know the truth about everything all the time with one hundred percent accuracy, while we’re supposed to overlook dozens of hoaxes that have been used to advance creationism, right? Looks like creationists have double standards.

Obviously scientists make mistakes on occasion in identifying fossils. This isn’t to say that they don’t know what they’re doing, however. I’ll return to the automobile analogy. Perhaps a certain type of piston is used primarily used in one model of car. If a piston is discovered that closely resembles it, a mechanic might be forgiven in his misidentification, right? Shouldn’t it be the same with scientists?

They are usually able to classify animals by obscure materials, but creationists don’t talk much about the successes, do they? No, they like to point out the occasion or two when a dinosaur known only by vertebrae is misclassified. Id ask the creationists if they could classify species any better, but since species are just variations within a kind, I doubt they feel a need to give them accurate classifications although they think evolutionists should be required to do this flawlessly.

Claim #15: Supersaurus is possibly a diploma docid (page 119).

There is no such thing as a diploma docid. He is probably referring to the term “diplodocid,” which refers to dinosaurs in the family diplodocidae. Examples of diplodocids include Dicraeosaurus, Apatosaurus (aka “Brontosaurus”), Diplodicus, Barosaurus, Supersaurus and Amphicoelias (this list was roughly in order from smallest to biggest). I dont know why he should even write this here, Supersaurus has been considered a diplodicid from day one as far as I know, its not a big surprise or anything. Except to creationists, I guess.

Claim #16: ICR has some excellent books

Shameless plug. And a lie as well.

Claim #17: This will involve hands on experiments for parents to help them develop skills to teach their children how to understand science from a Christian basis

What? Christian basis? Science and Christianity have nothing to do with each other. Science is done by observation, formation of a hypothesis, experimentation etc.

None of those require, or can be done effectively when you base your research on supernatural assumptions. One can be a “Christian scientist,” but doing “Christian science” is impossible because of the very nature and philosophy of science. Basically what’s happening here is people are being indoctrinated to view science from the assumptions and presuppositions of the ICR, and to base their research and results on this false foundation. And we all know what happens to house not built on sturdy foundations!

Another shameless plug for some seminar.

Claim #18: A wombats pouch could not evolve to face backwards.

A user who knows more about the mutative processs and genetics than me posted a response to this claim on Talk.Origins. Here is what he wrote:

A Talk.Origins poster wrote:
Evidence of the migration of features (ex: the movement of a whales nostrils from its face to the top of its head) do exist in transitional forms. In a recent article by Gould, he discusses a case of inversion where in earlier forms the gut is below the nerve chord, and later cases above. (Or it may be a mouth moving from ventral to dorsal.) Its very likely that the pouch of the wombat developed as follows:

a) Due to unexpressed mutations, the genetic potential for an inverted pouch develops, but is supressed by some of the genes which control embryonic
development.

b) A mutation changes the controling genes, allowing the pouch to develop in an inverted manner. Many quick, or even single generation changes are do[sic] to changes in genes which either cause or hinder the expression of features during fetal development, or which change the rate of development. For instance, the major differences between the skull shapes of various dog breeds is largely due to where in the path of skeletal development the breed halts. All puppies tend to have flat, broad faces. In some breeds the skull elongates more than in others. I suspect that the marsupial pouch embryonically either starts out as a tube open on both ends or attached at one end, but not the sides, and then becomes attached during fetal maturation. One of the problems with traditional natural selection is that, until recent advances in genetics, all change was seen as bit by bit, and gradual. (Even Punk-Eeek is gradual, just faster. (i.e, 100s of generations vs. 10s of thousands.) With the realization that profound morphological differences can result from small changes in some of the genes governing fetal development, its possible that a massive change can take place within a few generations. (Given an isolated population.) Take corn for example. Most of the wild relatives have their ears where a corns tassels are, and vice versa. A single gene controls this. In fact, domestic corn occasional mutates into this form. (cf. Natural History, sometime within the past six months.)

Speculative? Yes, but at least it has some basis in facts, unlike Ham’s mere proclamation that such a feature could never evolve.

Claim #19: “Did you know that the domestic dogs, fox, coyote, wolf, colishe [I can't find much info on this], jackal , fennec, and dingo could be the descendants of a single mating pair of dog-like creatures? If this is the case, Noah would have only needed a pair representing the dog “kind” on board the
Ark that would eventually give rise to the large number of varieties”

Maybe I would believe this if some evidence was cited. But it seems like creationists don’t like to provide evidence for their claims. Maybe since ICR is the
Chosen ministry raised up to spearhead Christianity they don’t have to justify themselves to us mere mortals.

Claim #20: This is variation within a kind, not evolution.

Any change in the gene pool of an organism over time is evolution. So yes, multiple species evolving from one common ancestor is evolution. The idea of species coming from common ancestors is the very basis of the idea of evolution. What is being said here amounts to “this is evolution, not evolution!”

Claim #21: Noah needed only the representative kinds of all the air breathing land dwelling animals.

Actually he would have needed representative fish too if the flood was global. Rain water is fresh and such a large and rapid change in salinity like a global flood would be too much for most fish to take. The Noachian Flood as described by creationists would have emptied our oceans of fish. And dont forget plants. If the Flood was able to carve out the
Grand Canyon rapidly, what effect do you think it would have on the worlds forests? How about the thin layer of topsoil needed by people to grow their crops? Can you honestly say that it would carve out the Grand Canyon, yet leave topsoil unaffected, ready for Noah and his kids to start tilling? Puh-leeze!

Well, thats all I have to say for BtG #1. I’d appreciate to hear your thoughts. See ya.

Soulstorm Legacy Logo Redone

Since I couldn’t count on any of you bozos to do it when I asked for some help, I had to do it myself. I think I did pretty well (especially considering my last attempt) and I’m tentatively going to say that this is the final version. Check it out.

Want more info about why the logo is what it is? Click here.

P. S. I already know about the excess bit of white between two of the right hand dragon’s spines.

P. S. S. I’m gonna change the font. I have some options I’m considering, but if you have one you think would look good, then by all means suggest it.

I Has an Occupation

I’ve been working as a security guard for a couple of months now, but just learned some interesting trivia from one of those low-budget TV documentaries about the paranormal; the company I work for is the one that guards Area 51. Oddly enough, I was hired mere days after having my first (and only) UFO sighting. You may begin formulating conspiracy theories right… now.

Re: Back to Genesis #1: Bishop or Bible? A Question of Authority [Part I]

Note:
I wrote the following entry a long time ago (several years) and posted it elsewhere online. I found a copy of it on my harddrive and figured I might as well post it here on my blog after sprucing it up a bit. I’m not going to redo the intro or anything, so just revel in its antique goodness.

I’m a theistic evolutionist, and I thought I’d start throwing in my two cents on the whole origins debate by rebutting the ICR’s “Back to Genesis” article series. I would like more than anything to post annotated copies of the articles here, but I’m not sure if I could get in trouble for violating copyrights. If you know for sure whether or not I can do this please leave me a comment.

Until then I’ll be handling the articles as if they were a list of claims, each of which I will be giving comments on. For the most part these claims will be paraphrased rather than quoted from the article, and will appear in [blockquote]. The original article can be found here. You may find it helpful to read, or at least skim it before reading my comments.

Re: BtG #1: Bishop or Bible? A Question of Authority

Claim #1: The Bible should be trusted more than Bishops and church figures.

I couldn’t agree more! This is truth. Unfortunately a lot of creationists like arguments from authority, and often they themselves fall victim to the same plight as the manager!

Claim #2: The display didnt mention God, and it was therefore atheistic.

Just because it doesn’t say it, doesnt mean it didnt happen, or even that the creator of the display didn’t believe that it happened. It being the creation of the universe by God, of course. Saying “In the beginning the heaven and the earth were created” doesn’t preclude “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth”. In fact it’s a necessity.

Claim #3: Genesis creation account is the foundation of the rest of the Bibles teaching.

No. Just no. It is indeed important that God created the heaven and the earth, but does it matter how long it took? No. Does it matter the order they were created? No. Does it matter whether Adam had parents or was made from sticks or mud? No. None of those things have any impact on the rest of the bible.

You’re just trying to use scare tactics to bully people into having the same interpretation as yours. “If you dont agree with me about the interpretation of one part, youll be wrong about everything in the bible and go to hell,” is all youre saying, and I’m not buying it. Arguments from intimidation have no place in legitimate discussion, especially between professing Christians.

Claim #4: People esteem man’s wisdom higher than Gods word

Well, creation scientists sure do. That’s why they claim their own personal interpretation of the bible is the same as God’s and everyone else is either a “liberal humanist” or a “compromiser.” No room for debate or discussion with creationists, just a “my way or the highway” declaration as if they had any authority to speak on behalf of God.

Claim #5: Peoples’ reasoning powers cannot be trusted to discover truth.

Thanks for the warning. Now I know never to trust creation scientists when they tell me that they have objective secular scientific findings to support creationism! If I was foolish enough to believe people could reason out truth I might have believed that garbage! And if you really mean that, then any and all arguments put forth by creationists are self-refuting, even those based on Scripture, as Scripture requires human reasoning to be understood. Thanks for sparing me the trouble of rebutting you guys. <3

Claim #6: By doubting the literal interpretations of YECs, you doubt Gods word.

The equating of their own ideas with those of Gods is one of the reasons creationists are perceived as being so arrogant. Doubting the authenticity of a particular interpretation of text is not the same as doubting whether the text itself is true. That’s fallacious reasoning as well as being hopelessly pretentious.

Claim #7: Genesis and Christ’s gospel are one and the same

What? The two have nothing directly to do with each other. This is just more intimidation garbage. “If you reject my interpretation of Genesis, you reject the gospel and will burn in hell.” You’re still not scaring me.

Claim #8: ICR is some
Chosen holy ministry that will revolutionize Christianity and save the world from the Satanic evolutionary humanists!

More underserved egotism. I have the feeling Ill be seeing a lot of arrogance as I refute the “Back to Genesis” archives. [Note that that project has been cancelled.]

Claim #9: Evolutionists are pagans.

Are we godless atheists or idolatrous pagans? Creationists never seem to want to give a definite answer to this one. Surely, we can’t believe in no God and many gods at the same time!

Claim #10: Please support this ministry as much as you can…

…by giving us all your money.

Ha, well I guess that’s it for Part I. See ya.

Fourteen Faces

Apparently I haven’t totally given up on RPG Maker, or my project. As proof of this claim, I am posting fourteen facesets for your enjoyment. I’m not just trying to show off here; you’re free to use these facesets in your own work provided you meet the following conditions…

1.) Credit is given in-game at some point to Yosio Factory for creating the original faces.
2.) Credit is given in-game at some point to Abyssal for editing them.
3.) You don’t remove the little ad at the bottom of the images themselves.

Not too constraining, right? Hope you like ‘em.

Click the post title or “read rest of this entry” link to see the twelve remaining faces.