The Chronicles of Descado
New Hatemail: Me vs. Devin













Home | My New Years Eve | The War of Marigold, Part 1 | The War of Marigold, Part 2 | Why all cats should die horribly... | Headbutts good... Whiskey bad... | If at first you don't succeed... | JKD vs. Ninjitsu | Things I hate that begin with "T" and end in "aekwondo" | Adventures in Tae Kwon Do | Battle at Zaxby's | Fighting Alcoholic | Don't send me chain letters!!! | Descado for President | The Asskicking Diary that never went anywhere... | Jail... | New "Rewritten" Chain Email | Viva Las Gaygas | Saturday Night Brawl | My shit don't stink... but yours does!!! | Night of the Black Mountain Nutriders | The Parting of Ways... (newly re-added) | John's Story... | Tank and me: A heterosexual love story... | The Worst Beating Ever | Only the Booty Crickets know... | Phil's Wedding | Adventures in Greenville, Part 1 | Adventures in Greenville, Part 2 | Adventures in Greenville, Part 3 | Adventures in Greenville, Part 4 | Adventures in Greenville, Part 5 | Love, and the soul... Part 1 | Love, and the soul... Part 2 | God DAMN, this story is long!!! | Celebrity Bitches I Hate: Anna Nicole | Irish Luck = World Domination | The Long Awaited Party at Wild Bill's | 3 clichés that piss me off | Everybody was kung fu fighting... | Going out




















September 28th, 2005

 

A few weeks ago, a fan of my site, (who will remain nameless, unless he tells me to post it), emailed in with a link to a site called www.devinswecker.com.  The owner of that site, “Devin”, had written a little diatribe about how he thought women should dress, and the nameless fan wanted me to respond to him.  I did, and it turned into a huge discussion about the existence of God. 

 

As such, I’m gonna post the back and forth here.  I’m citing him as the author of his own works, and I’m giving credit to his website, so I don’t think I’m breaking any laws here.  I also TOLD HIM I was gonna post it, and since he didn’t tell me not to, I guess I have his permission.

 

As usual, I won’t edit his points/counterpoints in any way.

 

Warning: Before you start down this road, just know that this is some long ass shit.  There are a few “funny” parts, but mostly it’s a serious debate.

 

Let’s start with Devin’s original rant, shall we?

 

***

 

A letter to the girls I know

By Devin Swecker

 

There are two kinds of men: Godly men, and worldly men.  What kind of man do you want?  I’m betting most of you said “a Godly man.”  Someday, you want to marry a man who loves God with every fiber of his being because he will be an excellent husband and father.  He will honor and be true only to you.  Most women want a Godly man or at least think they do.  Well, I think I have found a way to tell you exactly what kind of guy you will get.  I don’t even have to know you!  All I have to do is look at you.  The kind of guy you want or will get is advertised by the clothing you wear.  I know what men want.  Trust me, I am a guy.  I know more guys than you do and I know them better.  I know what we think, what we talk about, what we want, and what we look for, and it is different for each one of us depending on our relationship with God.  I’m sure you already know this, but men were created differently than you.  We have different desires and priorities.  Our eyes and minds react very differently to some things than yours do.  It isn’t disgusting, perverted, or wrong; it is wonderful and good!  It is how God made us.  It’s how we handle these differences that separate a Godly man from a worldly man.

 

A worldly man doesn’t control himself, rather, he looks at anything that attracts his attention or gets him excited.  A worldly guy has no problem when girls wear clothes that show off skin, like boxers, high or low cut shirts, low rise jeans, and “cute” little swimsuits.  He’s a fan of tight-fitting shirts and pants that show off your form, he thinks they’re fine!  Worldly guy watches a lot of TV and R-rated movies, isn’t really offended by sexual content or nudity and secretly dabbles in pornography.  He’s a “Christian” and makes up a significant portion of your church and youth group.  He’s a really nice guy and sees you mainly for your body.  If you were to marry worldly guy, he’d bring lots of baggage into the relationship, have intimacy problems, entertain thoughts of other women, and possibly cheat on you.

 

A Godly man is in control of his drives and desires.  He constantly seeks God and reads his Bible.  He “walks in the Spirit” and isn’t set off by everything he sees.  When immodestly dressed girls, magazine covers, or risqué advertisements come into view, Godly guy quickly “bounces his eyes” away from the image.  He’s constantly guarding his thoughts and what he allows into his mind.  He hates being around girls that disrespect him and his struggles by wearing inappropriate attire.  Godly guy doesn’t watch much TV and is selective about the movies he sees.  He views you as a person, knows you and respects you.  He has your best interests in mind and guards against inappropriate thoughts of you.  If you were to marry Godly guy, he would give you the emotional attention you need, he would ignore other women and remain faithful to you no matter what.

 

Unfortunately, there are more worldly men than Godly men.  And to make matters worse, to the untrained eye, a worldly man can look a lot like a Godly man.  So what can you do to only attract a Godly man?  An important way of delineating between them lies in how you dress.  As mentioned before, the clothes you wear advertise what kind of guy you are looking for.  If you dress immodestly, you will attract worldly guys and scare away the Godly ones.  It all comes down to the kind of man you want to spend your time around and eventually marry.  You cannot afford to be complacent in this area of your life!  You will pay the price someday.

 

***

 

Okay.  While I’m fairly confident that this is, word-for-word, Devin’s original rant, I can’t say with 100% certainty because I found it on this site:

 

http://barlowgirl.com/soundpost/forum_posts.asp?TID=9822&PN=1

 

I myself originally read it on Devin’s site, www.devinswecker.com, but as of today, 9/28, that address no longer functions.  I hope he didn’t take it down on account of my response, which you’ll read shortly.

 

Just a quick note: After reading this shit again, I can’t BELIEVE I didn’t lay into Devin right off the bat.  I gave him a mild lashing, (posted below), but nothing like I would normally do.  The simple fact of the matter was, I had no idea it would turn into anything, and I didn’t want to spend any real time on a response. 

 

Regardless, here’s what I sent:

 

Dear Devin,

 

I read your article entitled, “a letter to the girls I know,” and I must say, Devin, you’ve got some serious inadequacy issues.  There’s a lot of guilt in there too, along with a splash of misplaced blame.  Ya see, you’ve been brought up to believe that you should think/act/live a certain way, (which constitutes your definition of a Godly man), but since it is your very nature as an organism to reproduce, you find yourself unable to stay away from thoughts about hot chicks.

 

Wow, your parents must’ve really done a mind fuck on you.  Ultra conservative Christians amuse me.

 

Lemme’ take a shot in the dark here.  I’m guessing you’re either a virgin, or you’ve had only a few sexual encounters.  If the latter is the case, you were fumbling and uncomfortable and probably messed the whole thing up.  (Oh, and rest assured, the girls you were with told their friends how bad you were).

 

Hey, don’t sweat it!  Sex is a skill like anything else.  It takes instruction and practice to become good.  Not so much for women, but us guys really gotta put in the flight time to properly pilot the jet. 

 

Know what I’m talking about?  No?  I thought not.

 

That’s what I’m getting from your article.  First, you feel sexually unsure of yourself and thusly inadequate.  But you’re still a guy, and a girl walking past you with a huge rack pouring out of a white spaghetti string tank top causes a little “lift” in the old crotchial region.  Then you feel all guilty and shit about wanting to nail her to a cork board with your penis.  Why?  Because you’ve been told such things are not Godly.

 

What makes you a douche, however, is that you DARE to blame it on the girl.  You’ve got SOME balls, kiddo.  You think the girls you know should dress FOR you?!?  That they should literally arrange their attire around your bullshit internal struggle with sexual immorality?!?

 

I bet you have to have your pants specially made to fit those enormous testicles.

 

Unreal…

 

Cheer up, though.  God created you in his own image, right?  So God likes hot chicks too.  There’s nothing wrong with it!  You keep thinking like that, and all that guilt will turn you gay.  And OH, how God hates those gays, ya know!  (ß insert sarcasm).

 

Try not to break your leg getting off of that moral soapbox, Chuckles.

 

-Mike

 

***

 

From:               Devin Swecker

Sent:                 Sunday, September 18th, 2005 11:15 PM

To:                   MichaelDescado@hotmail.com

Subject:            Your guestbook entry

 

Hi Mike,

 

Believe it or not, I understand why you feel and believe the way you do.  Most of the points you made are things I have thought about before, if not sympathized on.  I used to think of people who believed the way I do now to be fools, prudes, and ignorant stupid weaklings who simply force their morality on others because of their own inadequacies.  At one time I considered myself an atheist and dictated my own morality.  I thought I knew it all and I was absolutely miserable, though I wouldn’t admit it.

 

Eventually, events transpired in my life that forced me to re-analyze my views about everything, and though I couldn’t see it at the time, I look now and undeniably see the hand of God on my life totally changing my world view, (as ridiculous as I know that may sound to you). 

 

What happened was, I realized that my life wasn’t working, that I really had no clue what was going on, and that I ultimately had absolutely no control over anything.  I knew there had to be more and I made a promise to myself to find THE TRUTH, no matter what it was, no matter what it did to me, because at least I could find comfort in knowing what was real and could then base my decisions around that (self-reliance, God, unity with all things, suicide… etc.).

 

I never thought that Christianity, what I was raised with as a child would ever win out.  Through a lot of studying and searching I eventually realized that beyond a reasonable doubt that God existed, and eventually, that He was the God of the Jews and ultimately the Christians.  Two books from the Christian perspective that eventually clinched it for me were “The Case for Christ” by Lee Strobel and “More Evidence that Demands a Verdict” by Josh McDowell.  For a number of months I didn’t want to believe that the faith I was brought up in actually was the truth (what are the odds right?), despite the mounds of evidence I was unearthing.  I kept searching in other areas of atheism, existentialism, eastern religions, pantheism, and such because I didn’t want to simply accept something because it was the way I was raised, and therefore, possibly the most “comfortable” to me.

 

Eventually, the empirical evidence won out and I admitted to myself the truth I had found.  That God had created the universe, that what the Bible says (on the most part at least) is true and verifiable, and that Jesus Christ was someone who was like no one else, and He was the only way to not only have eternal life, but have meaning in this life.

 

My “Letter to the girls I know”, my morality, my lifestyle, those are all things that are based on the truths I have found, and it would be pointless to try to explain them or argue them to you unless you yourself had experienced those truths as well.  I don’t know you Mike, but I believe that others can find what I have found if they are TRULY open-minded and seek whatever is true.  It takes guts and it can be very painful.  I won’t like to you, my life isn’t perfect.  I’m not happy all the time and I still have some big questions.  But my life is SO much better now.  I have peace, hope, purpose, and I am amazed at how the things in my life, as well as how I have changed for the better.

 

Anyway, there it is.  I’m only sharing this because of how valuable it’s been to me and I really hope you can find the same thing.  I’d love it if you’d write me back man, even if it’s just to tell me how wrong I am.

 

Take care,

 

Devin Swecker

 

***

 

After Devin sent this, he banned my IP address from his website.  Nevertheless, I emailed this back to him on September 19th.

 

Ah, Devin…  It truly pains me to see an individual with such writing prowess fall to the dark side.  While my response to you was unrelated to my own website, I get emails like yours all the time.  Granted, they’re rarely written with coherent sentence structure, but the arguments never change, the fanatically embraced perspectives never change.

 

First of all, I sincerely doubt you understand why I feel the way I do.  I’ve never categorically dismissed individuals that believe the way you do as fools, prudes, or ignorant stupid weaklings.  Those stereotypes are often true, but it has nothing to do with the root of the problem.

 

The root of the problem is choice.  People like you have the luxury of choice.  People like me do not.

 

Your statement that you were “absolutely miserable” is the key factor here, and it is one that is widespread and universal and shared by most of humanity.  An “atheist”, (as people like you label people like me), does not dictate his or her own morality.  Mortality is not an absolute.  It’s a set of rules that society imposes, usually for the good of the whole.

 

Regardless, I don’t kill or steal or rape because I’m afraid I’ll be struck down by God for it.  Nor do I refrain from such things because I fear I’ll go to prison.  No, my sense of what you call “morality” comes from the fact that I have no desire to act that way- even if I would benefit.  Moreover, my restraint comes from the certainty that I don’t want to live in a society where those atrocities would be allowed to be done to ME. 

 

Ah, but the lines of “good” and “evil” are never cut and dry, so morality is never cut and dry.  After all, you might see abortion as evil, or respecting the rights of gay Americans as evil, or upholding the Separation of Church and State as evil… while I do not.

 

I’m sure you had your own epiphany about the supernatural, and have thus become totally convinced that you’re one of the few that have discovered the “way” to salvation.  Hey!  Most of the world agrees with you.  Unfortunately, there are as many versions of that “way” as there are individuals who embrace it.  There are as many “Gods” as there are people who worship them. 

 

Who’s right?  Well, that’s a question that has not, will not, be answered- simply because it’s a matter of faith.  When you embrace the supernatural as your guide for living, you’re robbing yourself of the purifying light of objectivity.  You cannot weight both sides of any given argument because you’re already predispositioned to judge it on the merits of your particular dogma.

 

Where you see the “Hand of God”, I see you embracing a set of mythologies that fit you, that comfort you, that allow you to answer questions you normally couldn’t, (not without doing the required research, at least).

 

The fact is, you DON’T have control.  Neither does your God. 

 

Scary, huh?  Hell yeah it is!  Which is why your particular mindset, (and its uncountable variations), is such an easy sell. 

 

Like all biological organisms, we’re hardwired to survive and reproduce.  That’s it, and that’s all.  The pursuit of those two goals is what occupies the whole of our lives.  Unfortunately, we’re also cognoscente, which makes us intrinsically aware that we will one day die, that we will cease to exist, and that’s horrific for a species like ours to accept.

 

Ah, so what do we do?  We embrace that first drive, the drive to survive, and we expound upon it to foster wellbeing.  You said in your email that, before you succumbed to God, (and I’m paraphrasing), you, “had no clue what was going on”, and that you, “knew there had to be more.”

 

Gee whiz, no shit?  Welcome to the human condition.  You betray yourself, Devin, and in the exact same fashion that 99% of us do.  You said, “I made a promise to myself to find THE TRUTH, no matter what it was, no matter what it did to me,” but you short changed yourself by taking the easy/common way out.  

 

“The Truth” is what allows you to bring order from chaos, complacency from despair, happiness from horror… but it doesn’t make it Fact.

 

I LOVE how you said you never thought that, “Christianity- what I was raised with as a child- would ever win out.”

 

Why?!?  Why did you never think that?  Sounds like a rehearsed line of BULLSHIT to me.  What about Christianity, specifically, did you find unacceptable?  Was it the part about eternal paradise through accepting Jesus Christ as your personal lord and savior?  Or was it the part about God forgiving you- no matter WHAT- as long as you repent?

 

Despite what I’ve said, I really have no problem with whatever your singular brand of faith is.  You’re one of the masses, my friend, and I have no reason to condemn you… as long as you DON’T STICK YOUR FUCKING NOSE IN MY BUSINESS!!!

 

Alas, that’s rarely the case.  And do you know why?  Because you DARE to claim justification!!!

 

Lemme’ get this straight, two of the books that “clinched” it for you were written from the CHRISTIAN perspective. 

 

Hmmm…

 

What perspective were you EXPECTING to come away with, you easily led sheep?  This is the very reason that the Republican Right has the audacity to suggest Creationism should be taught as a science- their research consists of reading morons that embrace the exact same philosophy!!!

 

It’s pretty fucking easy to say, “Yep, I knew I was right!” when all you expose yourself to are those that agree. 

 

And what’s with THIS statement?:

 

“For a number of months I didn’t want to believe that the faith I was brought up in actually was the truth.”

 

Again I ask, WHYYYYY?!?

 

As far as religions go, Christianity is the FUCKING SHIT!!!

What were you rebelling against, James Dean?  No matter what version you put stock in, (and there are many), Christianity has the best life insurance plan all around… except maybe for the Vikings, who have Valhalla… and the Moslems, who get forty some odd virgins…  Wait!  I’m getting off track here.

 

Since I’ve encountered your brand of dog shit about a billion times in my thirty two years on this planet, the general consensus doesn’t bother me.  I’ve heard it all before.  I guess the thing that ultimately pisses me off, is your use of the word “empirical”. 

 

From www.dictionary.com:

 

Empirical- Verifiable or provable by means of observation or experiment.  Guided by practical experience and not theory.

 

How dare you!  It’s one thing to discount science on account of ignorance.  It’s another thing entirely to pretend to know it! 

 

Like I said in a caption under one of your goofy faced pictures, If you were a man, I’d punch you.

 

Try this for me, Devin.  Try learning the history of your religion.  I did.  I did the fucking work, and I didn’t do it from the perspective of an Atheist.  No, I did it from the perspective of a born again Christian that was hungry for God.  My personal trials in this regard are chronicled on my website in various places, so I’ll make no further arguments save one.

 

You waxed all philosophical about what a “struggle” it was for you, and for the third time I ask… Why?

 

Does it take more courage to embrace a comforting/simple/lazy/supernatural explanation for the world?  Or to find out its mechanics without such beliefs… without the certainty that there may, indeed, be no higher reason for it all?  At least not one that distinguishes us from any other life form.

 

An objective pursuit of knowledge is the single redeeming attribute of mankind.  Though rare, it is the driving force behind all of our accomplishments. 

-Mike Descado

 

Remember that the next time someone close to you gets hurt or sick.  Will you take them to a church?  Where Jesus can work a miracle?  Or will you take them to a hospital, where rational science can actually do some good.

 

You don’t have to answer, Devin.  Like all of your kind, faith is steadfast only within the lack of real world opposition.

 

Sleep tight,

-Mike

 

P.S. Oh, and by the way, what a cowardly move banning me from your website.  I mean, your pussy ass has to approve all new entries to your guest book, right?  Then what are you afraid of? 

 

I would never ban someone from my own website.  Know why?  ‘Cause I can back my shit up no matter what…

 

Think about that the next time some hot-as-shit sorority girl comes sashaying by in a miniskirt, you functioning eunuch.

 

Don’t jerk off tonight.  God is watching…

 

***

 

Not my best work, in retrospect, but I thought I got my point across.  Regardless, I didn’t hear from Devin for a few days, so I sent him this on September 21st:

 

Devin’s no response clock: 3 days and counting.

 

I just read your “letter to the girls I know” post again, and since I only skimmed it last time, I really got a kick out of it now.  This is the kinda thing my meager fan base LOVES, so, I’m probably gonna post it along with my response and yours.  I’ll credit you fully, of course, but I just wanted to let you know that any further responses from you will likewise be posted just as they are, (I won’t edit them in any way).

 

Love,

-Mike

 

***

 

I got this later the same day:

 

Hi Mike, I know I haven’t gotten back to you yet as I’ve been quite busy but I hope to respond to you soon.

 

***

Devin did respond on September 23rd, and it was a hum dinger.  Alas, I got about half way through it and clicked off, unable at the time to read his dumbass shit because I was too busy to get pissed enough to answer.  It was only days later, when I’d caught up on my other writings, that I decided to take a second look. 

 

Soooo, I copied his email into a Microsoft Word document, (without reading it), and just started typing away.  For that reason, what follows is a point-by-point response, (which is usually funnier anyway, yeah?). 

 

***

 

Okey dokey, Devin.  I think I’m gonna get to a reply tonight.  I’ve been kind of busy myself.  Honestly, I wasn’t going to reply at all, simply because arguments like yours, (while common), take a little work on my part to address… and I’m lazy.  You see, you’re not stupid, so I can’t just make fun of how much of a dumbass you are.  I have to actually set up points and counter points which will probably not be that funny, and most people come to my site to laugh, (which is why I didn’t make it all the way through you response when you initially sent it.  I’ll try to do that now).

 

Anyway, let’s go line by line.  You started with:

 

I was reading over your last e-mail, and your discussion of what morality is to you, how it’s determined and so forth, and I must say, if I didn’t believe in the existence of God, I would say you are dead-on for the most part.

 

Yes, well, I’m “dead-on” because I’m a Biologist by education, and I’m simply stating what the evolutionary attributes of our species (and all others) dictate.  All organisms are motivated by survival and reproduction. 

 

This isn’t my opinion, it’s merely the conclusions the scientific community has come to.  I’m talking about legitimate science here, in which self-correcting objectivity is the driving force.  There’s no emotion in real science, no goal other than knowledge.  There’s nothing else to be gained or lost, but I’ll get to that later.

 

If God wasn’t the ultimate source and purpose of morality, then it would be derived from the needs of the many. 

 

Here’s where you start to get into trouble, Devin.  Making blanket statements like this don’t constitute objective thought.  For one thing, there’s no “ultimate” source, (as I said before, there are as many worshipped deities as there are people who worship them), and thus, no ultimate mortality, (Christians cannot agree on what is “moral” anymore than the rest of the world can).

 

Man sees the need for morality mostly out of self-preserving motivation.  [To quote you, Mike], “I don’t want to live in a society where those atrocities would be allowed to be done to me.

 

Not quite, Devin.  Those are MY reasons for morality; NOT the way mankind sees morality.  The set of rules Mike Descado lives by are unique to me.  Religion or no, everyone’s behavioral motivations and parameters are different.  I can site very specific examples if you need me to, but I think you’re smarter than that.

 

Like I said, in the absence of God, I’d share your views of morality, which makes God’s existence or non-existence the issue here, I’m sure you’d agree.

 

It’s AN issue, Devin.  Not THE issue.  Again, which God’s existence are we debating here?  When you get down to it, we’re talking about YOUR God, which apparently falls under the Christian version so popular here in America.  No problem, I’ll roll with it.

 

In my last email, I didn’t get into the reasons why I believed God existed, and I hesitate to do so now, simply because of the magnitude of the task. 

 

Believe me, MY task is much more daunting than yours.  I’m the minority here, remember?  I heard a statistic that states four out of five American households contain a bible.  Given the various southern locals in which I’ve grown up, I’d imagine that number is much higher… buuuut I’m not gonna quibble about that statistic since I don’t have it on hand to reference. 

 

I will provide a link to this particular site, however, since it shows a pie graph:

 

http://www.religioustolerance.org/worldrel.htm

 

Not many of us atheists running around: 2.5% of the global population as of 2000.  Now, I’m not gonna pretend that it’s even possible to know the exact numbers.  Statistical analysis itself is based on sample populations.  But I think this gives a close enough picture to argue from.

 

The point is, there are billions more who think like you than who think like me.  Let’s get back to you:

 

Where do I begin?  I could start at the beginning with the Big Bang, and how a singularity necessitates a creator.

 

No, it doesn’t, Devin.  This is a common error in pseudo-scientific thinking.  Evidence for the occurrence of one set of circumstances doesn’t IN ANY WAY lend evidence to the occurrence of something else. 

 

Ya know what lends evidence for a creator?  …EVIDENCE FOR A CREATOR, of which there is none. 

 

Do you know why there is no evidence for a creator? (I’m talking about empirical data here) …because a “creator” exists in the realm of the supernatural, which is beyond science.  Science simply doesn’t address things that cannot be quantifiably observed and tested.  Testability is the purifying and self-correcting paramount of the scientific method.  Without it, the process itself is not “Science.”

 

And by the way, I guarantee that what you refer as the “Big Bang” has nothing to do with current scientific principle.  The origin of the universe is not something that was “discovered.”  No, it’s an ever changing amalgamation of possibilities that increase in certainty as our technological ability to learn about the universe increases.  Hell, I eat this stuff up, but I’m CONSTANTLY having to do research to keep up with the newest discoveries. 

 

If you’re interested, check out this website:

 

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/

 

Those guys have a knack for putting complex concepts into layman’s terms.  And what I think you’ll find is that nobody is making “statements”, nobody is saying, “This is the Truth!!!”.  Instead, theories are put forth and examined, tested, and either debunked or supported.  There’s no “emotion” involved, Devin, which is important to remember.

 

Ultimately, the legitimate scientific community has no problem whatsoever in saying, “Hey, we just don’t know.” 

 

How could we?  We’re one species on one planet in the middle of an infinite universe.  The knowledge we have comes from increasing technological advancement, and the reason that “advancement” will continue to occur, is because the search for knowledge in this way extends only to the natural world, and because it’s objective, and because nobody is making “leaps of faith”.  If we don’t know, we don’t know, but that doesn’t mean we stop learning, or that we “cop out” by going outside of science for an explanation. 

 

Let’s get back to you:

 

Or I could discuss biochemistry, how the irreducible complexity of molecular machines shows that not only could such machines and their parts not be created by chance and separate from each other, but that a creative intelligent force is required to assemble each such perfectly designed invention.

 

I have my bachelors in Biochemistry, and this statement is unequivocal horseshit.  Lemme’ guess, you took that out of a pseudo-science book in which the author was trying to make a case for God? 

 

Uh, huh. 

 

First of all, “chance” has nothing to do with it.  Life, in all its form and splendor, is the logical development of inorganic compounds to organic compounds.  The first part is easy, by the way.  I can take you into a lab, subject inert substances to an electrical charge within a specific environment and show you the formation of Amino Acids.  Is it “rare” in our universe?  Certainly, because you have to have the right recipe to allow the base ingredients to come together.  If it wasn’t rare, we wouldn’t be the only planet, (that we know of for sure), on which it happened.  But this process is certainly not a statistical impossibility.  In an infinite universe, there’s no such thing.  That’s what “infinite” means. 

 

The problem here, again, is that you’re jumping to a conclusion based on insufficient data.  Just because something was unlikely, doesn’t mean you get to “cheat” and play the supernatural card.  Given my background in science, none of this has a mystical quality whatsoever.  But to a layman like yourself, there’s NO OTHER explanation besides God, and I understand that. 

 

But don’t quote horseshit to me. 

 

If you’re not gonna do the research, just say, “I believe what I believe” and leave it at that.  I’d imagine the “scientists” you’ve read are all in the same boat.  Their objectivity is compromised because they’re starting with an explanation, (Creationism, and its thinly veiled cousin, Intelligent Design), and then endeavoring to find facts that fit the faith. 

 

Science doesn’t work that way.  Science works in the exact opposite direction. 

 

Explanation doesn’t lead to facts.  No, facts lead to explanation… and said explanation MUST hold up to testability. 

 

See?!?  This is getting to be fucking work!  It’s a good thing I’ve got some bourbon here.  Your turn:

 

I could mention how the “social philosophy” of macro evolution falls short time and time again in explaining the origin of species, leaving it prophets grasping at straws to avoid what the evidence suggests: an intelligent designer.

 

This is typical religious propaganda.  For one thing, evolution happened.  There’s no debate about it in the legitimate scientific community.  There’s more accumulated evidence for evolution, (and its governing dynamics), than any other scientific principal. 

 

Secondly, nobody is “grasping at straws” here.  Don’t you fucking get it?  WE HAVE NOTHING TO LOSE!!!  Nobody’s sitting in a dark laboratory somewhere desperately trying to find a way to disprove your God, Devin. 

 

Objectivity, remember? 

 

If new evidence came to light tomorrow, (and there’d have to be a lot), that suggested evolutionary theory was without merit, the scientific community would immediately switch gears and incorporate the new evidence. 

 

EVIDENCE is the directing force… period!

 

So to suggest that we’re desperately “clinging” to outdated notions is just plain prejudice.  Again, what do we have to lose except the truth?  YOU’RE the one that has something at stake.  YOU’RE the one who benefits by a disregard of objectivity.  Science is not your God’s enemy, Devin.  In fact, if there was a God, science would be the only way to cut through the dogma and discover what he/she/it truly is.  Back to you:

 

I could go on about the intelligent language of DNA, the missing fossil record, the implications of the second law of thermodynamics vs. the existence of life…

 

For FUCK'S sake!  I should’ve never started this… 

 

Okay, there’s nothing “intelligent” about DNA.  It isn’t a conscious force.  It’s an assemblage of amino acids that code for proteins, and it’s a product of evolution. 

 

Secondly, there’s no such thing as a “missing fossil record.”  If you knew anything about evolutionary mechanics, you’d know how irrelevant a fossil record is.  What you’re looking for is a “missing link” which doesn’t exist per say.  Evolution just doesn’t work that way, and I honestly can’t explain to you why your assessment is so ridiculous.  You’d have to have a base of biological knowledge first.  Regardless, I can take you into a lab and SHOW you evolution with a rapidly reproducing species, like maybe a fruit fly.  It’s not that hard. 

 

Finally, that second law of thermodynamics horseshit is so tired.  I can’t believe creationists are still using it.  Nevertheless, go here for an explanation more detailed than I have the patience to give:

 

http://www.panspermia.org/seconlaw.htm

 

Back to you:

 

But I would suggest an in-depth study of these topics would be more beneficial than my meager e-mail ramblings, (I’d be happy to suggest some excellent starting points).

 

Well, an “in-depth study” was what was required of me to get a Masters Degree in Biology Education with a 4.0 grade point average.  You’re an arrogant little fucker, aren’t cha.  But feel free to pass along some of those “excellent starting points” you mentioned.  I GUARENTEE each one of the references you cite will make mention of the supernatural, which, again, is outside the realm of science. 

 

Your turn:

 

My point is, I have reasons for why I believe what I believe.

 

Oh, no shit?  Why is THIS a novelty?  No, Devin, you don’t have reasons.  You have beliefs.  In your case, the beliefs of others passed down over and over again in the disguise of actual science.  Hey, I get it.  They tried it the other way for centuries.  Proponents of religion tried to match pure faith with pure fact… and they got their shit ruined.  Scopes Monkey Trial, anyone?  So the new craze is to try to infiltrate. 

 

Bring it. 

 

When you suggest that the knowledge of God and his existence is simply limited to the realm of faith, there Mike I must strongly disagree with you.

 

I’ve kind of already covered this, but, there is no testability where the supernatural is concerned.  It’s ALL faith, but please take the Randi challenge if you feel like putting your mouth where my balls are:

 

www.randi.org