Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Tornado was ‘God’s wrath’ for civil partnership

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. The world was considered to be flat once by the christians so why should we be surprised by this!

  2. Reverend James Tallach is clearly an idiot, he lacks the mental capacity for rational and logical thought. How anyone can connect random weather patterns with the actions of people getting married is beyond me.
    I love how running a ferry service is ‘immoral’, the guys a joke.

  3. Another deluded soul who imagines they have a hotline to god. Are all weather forecasts defined according to God’s moods now, or just homophobic ones?
    It’s like predicting the weather in a Disney feature isn’t it: “God’s feeling narked with the gays now, so we can expect thunderclouds and hailstorms spreading from the west!”
    These people should grow up and realise life isn’t like cartoons and no big invisible guy is controlling the weather!

  4. Simon Murphy 31 Jul 2009, 12:36pm

    James Tallach of the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland is a member of the same denomination as Iris Robinson. The Free Presbyterians truly are a hateful shower of bigots.

    “Reverend” Tallach’s email address is wc.ftpchurch@btinternet.com

  5. perhaps we can turn the argument a around and say that the earthquakes and fires that plagued California at the beginning of the year were God showing his/her/its anger a the vote in favour of Proposition 8?

  6. Kelvin Holdsworth 31 Jul 2009, 1:01pm

    Funny, isn’t it, that there seems to be no chance that the tornado was God’s judgement on bigotry.

  7. just sent this:

    Dear Reverend Tallach,

    I was very interested to read in the press about your pronouncement that a recent tornado over the Isle of Lewis was the result of God’s Righteous Wrath for allowing civil partnerships. It is indeed quite wonderful to be able to find God’s work in nature everywhere.

    I couldn’t help thinking myself recently that the forest fires and earth tremours that plagued California at the end of last year and the beginning of this, were indeed God’s way of telling the inhabitants of the golden state that they should not have voted for Proposition 8 which made gay marriages illegal. After all, God is love, Jesus has told us to love our neighbour as we love ourselves and neither of them can be very pleased when one part of the population gangs up on another one simply to try and re-ascertain its ebbing power and influence.

    I trust that God will guide your thoughts towards matters more worthy of your energy and abilities such as perhaps charitable work in aid of those who are in need.

    Regards,

  8. Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:

    wc.ftpchurch@btinternet.com

    :(

  9. Ah, here we go:

    Rev Dr James R Tallach.
    Address: 2 Fleming Place, Stornoway, HS1 2NH.
    Tel: 01851 702501.
    E-mail: jrtall@fpchurch.org.uk.

  10. doesn’t work either

  11. Well, of course he would say that! Well this is pretty standard stupidity for Free Presbyterians.

  12. no-ones as enslaved as a good old ‘free Presbyterian ‘

  13. Gods wrath . . . here we go again . . . Yawn Yawn Yawn

    Have people never heard of the Jet Stream, its position over Europe during the summer months is very variable; hence the lowsy weather at the moment.

    When people abandon science for fantasy fables and the fantastical . . . this is one reason why religous people should not be given positions of power, authority or a seat in the house of Lords.

    If there is a God . . . God gave you a Brain for one reason . . . for Goodness sake Reverend James Tallach . . . use it.

  14. He also says sea monsters are just two miles north of the Isle of Lewis and if you get your photo taken it will take your soul!!!

    :D

  15. Brian Burton 31 Jul 2009, 2:23pm

    Rev. James Tallache,
    What a Crazy thing to say: Tornado–Gods wrath! It’s that time of year, we are experiancing tornadoes just about every where in the UK!

  16. Oh well, not surprised at all. I noticed that the more sex I have with my boyfriend, the worse the weather tends to get on the weekends. I went on a ski trip with some lube in my suitcase and the area had the warmest Winter in 30 years, all the snow was gone. And also, when I start Sunday at church, it tends to be sunny. When I take the holly communion, temperature rises into the upper twenties. If I go to confession, birds sing in the trees. I thought I was suffering from some kind of neurosis, but there, the right reverend just said it. Gosh, how happy I am I really thought it was only me…

  17. Joe E in California 31 Jul 2009, 3:02pm

    Yeah, let’s blame it on the witches of Salem!
    WTF, this island is part of which country? Affiliated with which cult? LOL Land of the nuts, fruits and flakes… hey wait, that’s California!

  18. Wow… I didn’t realise I could affect the weather. there must have been a hell of a lot of bumming before noahs flood, god must have been pretty pissed, everyone must have been at it.

  19. Hey – you know what this means… we have the power to control the weather depending on how gay we are! It’s like being ‘Storm’ out of X-men but using sex and campness instead of sci-fi mutant abilities!
    How much sex do I have to have before I can shoot lightning bolts from my fingers? I must try that one later ;)

  20. I feel sorry for him if he really believes in such a nasty, spiteful god who would do something like that.

    Perhaps it was god’s wrath at the homophobes on the island who caused a fuss about the civil partnership…

  21. Rick George 31 Jul 2009, 6:19pm

    There is no such thing as the wrath of God. The concept is a fallacy.

  22. Might I suggest that, in future, weather forecast on the BBC and all other channels be accompanied by the moral implications.

    Light rain over Yorkshire and the Humber will punish local volers for electing a BNP MEP.

    Last night’s sudden and apparently inexplicable downpour in Milton Keynes has been attributed by the Met Office to Mrs Higgins of No. 37 being no better than she should be, and yes she DOES know what we’re talking about.

    You know it makes sense…

  23. Scarcely credible idiocy on the part of that cleric! For my part, I believe the tornado was the expression of God’s wrath at the absence of a mosque on Lewis.

  24. Carl Rowlands 31 Jul 2009, 7:27pm

    If these two events cause a tornado I shall be thinking against going into Manchester this weekend. The havoc that could happen!

    There is only one word ‘Tosser’

  25. Let us no forget that American clerics earlier claimed that Hurricane Katrina was god’s wrath over the gay depravity in the French Quarter, with his particular anger over the Southern Comfort weekend scheduled for a couple of weeks later. Strangely, the hurricane’s destruction seemed to hit nearly every part of New Orleans except the French Quarter.

  26. Let us no forget that American clerics earlier claimed that Hurricane Katrina was god’s wrath over the gay depravity in the French Quarter, with his particular anger over the Southern Comfort weekend scheduled for a couple of weeks later. Strangely, the hurricane’s destruction seemed to hit nearly every part of New Orleans except the French Quarter.

  27. Reverend…?
    That is… ‘to be revered’…???

    My arse..!

    Do you find my comment insulting?

    I SINCERELY HOPE SO…!

    It is MEANT to be, you tit..!
    YOU are insulting MY intelligence with your bible-thumping shite..!

    Stick it up your arse, page by bleeding page!

    It, your blood-soaked comic book, has caused more death and destruction, from the interpretation of it by gumps like you, down the ages than soft Mick.

    I heard this softly spoken, bog-trotting clod on Radio 4 just before I left to go on holiday; I am still laffin’..

    “Get back to the 4th. Century…MR. Tallach, you daft old sod..!

    Gimme yer address and I will come and tell you to your face..!

    Go shite and use yer bible to wipe yer Harris.

    Keith.
    SALFORD.

  28. lady-tanya 1 Aug 2009, 6:36am

    Hello, all it is just like that film with Jody foster in contact where she go in to inner space
    Why oh why do people STILL think, there is a being that made us all,
    We live in a world where people kill for saying there god is wrong –were a woman is STONED for having sex with a married man, that she is not married to,,,, is the man stoned as well NO,,,
    Religion has caused more deaths in the world than a nuclear bomb
    These religious people run the world that is the scary part
    How in this day and age do people STILL think that there is some one up there saving us ,,,,,, where has SHE –HE-IT been then,
    The people who say there is a god
    All I can say is that this god is a right twat then letting all these people die in its name
    All these people who kill in his name why don’t the god come down-up whatever
    And say something
    THE YEAR IS 2009 GET A FUCKING LIFE
    I AM A TRANSSEXUAL LESBIAN I LIVE BY MY CODE I RESPECT PEOPLE
    I TREAT PEOPLE HOW I WANT TO BE TREATED
    I do not go around killing people if they are not like me
    If I and like minded people could go and live on another planet
    I would fucking go at the drop of a hat and let all the fucking wankers of this world
    Blow it up, as that is the way it is going and I hope I am not hear to see that and to say I told you so
    There are enough bombs on this planet to blow it to shit and with all of us on it
    In addition, there go man the DUMEST TWATS on this planet
    And behind them religion
    Enough said
    Lady-Tanya

  29. Reverend James Tallach has obviously not read his Bible and knows nothing about it. The Bible does not mention anything about gays getting married or having civil partnerships and I wonder where he finds the Biblical reference to ferries operating on Sundays. I must have missed that.

  30. The only way to rid the island of fierce winds is to build a giant man of wood and straw, fill it with homosexual sacrifices, and set fire to it.

    Well it worked for Christopher Lee, apparently.

  31. lithotomist 1 Aug 2009, 8:21am

    Look, Rev Tallach is a retard, and our best defence is to make sure we safeguard and extend our own rights by not giving our support to political parties who have always opposed us, and by kicking up an almighty stink in the media whenever one of these ignorant bigots pops his head up.

    Try reminding them that in their Bible, God himself smote Onan dead for what seems to have been either masturbation or coitus interruptus – God never did that to anyone gay, so ask ‘em why they ain’t out there gunning for the occasional wanker!

  32. Sugar Plum Fairy 1 Aug 2009, 8:35am

    When do all you guys get picked up by mummy from the kindergarten?

  33. Coemgenus 1 Aug 2009, 9:06am

    Cretin. Does he get paid to force this stone-age rubbish down people’s throats? There you go – doing it for the money.

  34. Brian Burton 1 Aug 2009, 9:43am

    RobN,
    Your Priceless. You had both my Partner and I rolling around with helpless Laghter!

    I wonder who Jerked the Sugar Plumb Fairy’s Chain? What a Camp Clara Cluck!

  35. Hey SPF, before we move on to discussing your meteorological work, can you please elaborate on your gay suicide at uni study? When? Where? Methodology? Conclusions? A link to the text perhaps? You do not want any of the intellectually challenged, childish sodomites up here to think that you are a liar do you?

    If you believe in the name of God as I believe you mentioned you did, do this out of compassion for your sinful neighbours. Do you not realise you have a mission SPF? You cannot escape your destiny!

  36. Sugar Plum Fairy wrote
    “When do all you guys get picked up by mummy from the kindergarten?”

    SPF . . . if the Kindergarten is too advanced for you. stay at home with mummy untill you are old enough to tie your own shoes, blow your own nose and engage in the rough and tumble of “Creative Discourse.”

  37. It is surprising and frightening that anyone still takes these religious crackpots seriously. And that applies to Islamists also!

  38. Will the Scouser 1 Aug 2009, 2:34pm

    We can all make these far-fetched connections if we want to. For instance, I think that my car got pranged a few months ago because I’m a Gemini.

  39. I think they call it a confirmation bias. I’d like to ask
    Reverend James Tallach what he imagines was happening on all the sunny days when there were no tornadoes and zero lightning bolts? Were we all abstaining from sex and gay marriages on those days or what?

  40. I finally managed to track the Reverend’s email address and sent him the text i posted above. He has now responded to me:

    “Dear Mr C
    Thank you for your thoughtful email.
    During my interview about these matters I was asked whether I saw the tornado as a judgment for the breaking of God’s commandment. I said specifiically that I did NOT make that connection and spoke of changing weaather patterns.This was correctly reported in at least one account. I did not see all the reports in all the papers but obviously from your remarks at least one newspaper wrongly reported my remarks. I made no such pronouncement.
    Kind regards
    James Tallach”

  41. I was saying to one of my friends a while back that I want a girlfriend who I can dance with in the rain, apparently getting a girlfriend would make it almost inevitable.
    And I do apologise, it wasn’t punishment on Lewis for allowing gay marriage, it was punishment on me and my family for daring to choose that day to take the tent down. He missed.

  42. Yo…Abi1975 you said,
    “The world was considered to be flat once by the christians so why should we be surprised by this!”

    Before you criticize the Bible and Christians, do your research
    first.

    1. The Bible said the earth is round and is suspended in space:

    You may be surprised to learn that the Bible revealed that the earth is round. Job 26:10, Prov 8:27, Isaiah 40:22, Amos 9:6. Today, we chuckle at the people of the fifteenth century who feared sailing because they thought they would fall over the edge of the flat earth. Yet the Bible revealed the truth in 1000 B.C. 2500 years before man discovered it for himself!

    In various verses, the Bible says the earth is round and hangs in space. It took a long time for science to catch up and reach the same conclusions. Copernicus made the discovery in 1475. But the Bible always knew. Here are two related Bible verses that were written more than 2500 years ago, and more than 1000 years before Copernicus:

    “He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth…” (Isaiah 40:22,NIV). (By the way, the Hebrew language at that time did not have a word for “sphere,” only for “circle.”)

    The implication of a round earth is seen in the book of Luke, where Jesus described his return, Luke 17:31. Jesus said, “In that day,” then in verse 34, “In that night.” This is an allusion to light on one side of the globe and darkness on the other simultaneously. [JSM]

  43. Zefrog – so the rev. says he never mentioned anything to do with god’s wrath at gay marriages manifesting itself with a tornado over the isle of Lewis then?
    Seems like someone’s been telling porkies, though I’m not sure who.

  44. A health warning!!!

    Ignore “Hank”

    He is an Exgay Fundamentist Christian Nut case

  45. Ah, Hank is back and his religious intrepretation of science.

    I suppose the bible mentioned the existence of dinosaurs?

    Ah, no. Of course, you believe that the dinosaurs played blissfully with Adam and Eve in the garden with the talking snake, don’t you? A 6000 year old earth, or so your bible says. And so you believe.

    So, you seriously expect us to assume the bible is AHEAD of science?!?

    Please. Don’t insult our intelligence.

    But do explain the dinosaurs for me, its enlightening.

  46. Reverend James Tallach is wrong. God was angry because he knew that the Reverend was going to make these comments!

  47. Hey John K, you said, “Ignore “Hank” He is an Exgay Fundamentist Christian Nut case”

    I see the above phrase over and over used by homosexuals. Please
    give me your definition of Exgay Fundamentalist Christian
    Nut Case it’s loaded with potential argument from a number
    of viewpoints and I’d like to discuss them with you.

    Also I’d not make comments if you people would get your facts
    correct about the Bible when you end up making stupid statements
    about what you say is in the Bible.

    I’ll comment on the dinosaurs soon.

  48. What the Rev James Tallach didn’t mention that the island of Lewis had two twisters in a single month during Autumn last year.

    This is just a perfect example of someone using religion as an excuse to bully and scare people into thinking they will be damned to Hell if they don’t follow the God’s way of life.

  49. “I’ll comment on the dinosaurs soon.”

    I simply can’t wait! This is going to be great!

    Now be sure to explain the fossil record, please Hank. Lets not leave any good stuff out.

  50. Oh, please, let me:

    Exgay Fundamentalist Christian Nut Case

    Ex-Gay: Because you’re are obsessed with homosexuality. That’s not normal. Experience tells us that this unnatural obsession with gay people and their PRIVATE sex lives is usually done by ex-gays, who are never really ex-gay as ex-gay doesn’t exist and is the figment of religious bigotry, or closet gays trying to hide their sexuality.

    Fundamentalist Christian: Your ideals, opinions, and understanding levels are that of medieval farm helps (serfs) who rape their cousins for laughs.

    Nut Case:- People who have mental impairment, or a acute learning difficulties leading to abnormal social behaviour. e.g. going around saying the bible is more scientific than science, stating the earth is 6000 years old, especially when shown the overwhelming evidence to the contrary which could be understood by a 5 year old child with a lobotomy, or obsessive abnormal behaviour on a gay site when you’re supposed to be “straight”.

    Now Hank, can you see how John K could easily think you’re a “Exgay Fundamentalist Christian Nut Case” when you fit the bill so well. Its an obvious error, and I do admit to be guilty of it myself. And so does every one else in here. But if the shoe fits….

    So, on to the dinosaurs…. did Adam and Eve have a favourite dinosaur? And what did T-Rex eat in the garden of eden? Probably should have eaten the talking snake, don’t you think! And tell me, the fossil record, where does this come from? And if its a lie like you claim, why does carbon dating lie to us?

    Isn’t this SO exciting!

  51. Will the Scouser 2 Aug 2009, 8:35pm

    “In various verses, the Bible says the earth is round and hangs in space. It took a long time for science to catch up and reach the same conclusions. Copernicus made the discovery in 1475.” – Hank

    No, he didn’t. People knew centuries before Copernicus that the earth was round, and they didn’t need to get their information from the Bible either.

    Yes, it’s true that the roundness of the earth is referred to in the Bible. The Bible also assumes the truth of the Ptolemaic theory that the earth stands still and that the rest of the solar system revolves round it – see Joshua 10:13-14; Psalm 93:1-2. As the French astronomer Camille Flammarion observed, that’s rather like thinking that to roast a fowl on the spit you have to turn the fire round it, and the fireplace, and the room, and the whole house, and the whole country!

    Copernicus’s belief in the roundness of the earth was by that time thoroughly commonplace; what was revolutionary was his theory that it was the earth and the other planets that revolved around the sun – although even that theory wasn’t new, since the Pythagoreans held it centuries before. It was for his insistence on this theory (among other things) that Galileo Galilei was persecuted by the “Holy” Inquisition, since it clearly contradicted the Biblical assumption that the Ptolemaic theory was correct. It wasn’t just the Roman Catholic Church that condemned Galileo either; most “Bible-believing” Protestants condemned him as well on the same grounds.

  52. Appalling. How is it that these people exert any influence in this day and age?

  53. The crackpot minister is the one who is blasphemous, because he is suggesting it took god 2 days to react to the news, that one tiny part of the world has rejected his commands about the sabbath (which was supposed to be saturday in any case) and gay marriage.

    It appears god couldn’t even strike the right building. Who is the more blasphemlous??

  54. Yo Will, you said, “ Exgay Fundamentalist Christian Nut Case”
    Ex-Gay: Because you’re are obsessed with homosexuality. That’s not normal. Experience tells us that this unnatural obsession with gay people and their PRIVATE sex lives is usually done by ex-gays, who are never really ex-gay as ex-gay doesn’t exist and is the figment of religious bigotry, or closet gays trying to hide their sexuality.

    WILL….you are totally wrong about my having homosexual feelings, being gay, etc. I am one of the most heterosexual guys around…had no problem having a great love life with desireable women for the past 40+ years. Have never had homosexual thoughts…desires…or watched homosexuals having sex – not even with any pornography sites.

    To me, homosexuality is not normal, and is even abnormal in most situations. I can’t imagine any normal male desiring a male rather than a female. I read this site to see what kinds of
    kinky thoughts, behavior and ideas you have about homosexuality. It’s insightful… and some comments border on weirdness as many psychiatrists would believe.

    Also, when the APA voted on changing its classification of homosexuality in 1973 it was not representative of the will of the body of its entire membership. Of the majority of those members who responded and voted to change the classification of homosexuality (but note that only one-third of the membership responded and had their views counted).

    Also…four years after the change in classification the journal Medical Aspects of Human Sexuality reported the results of a survey it had conducted. The survey demonstrated that
    69% of the psychiatrists disagreed with the decision and still considered homosexuality a disorder.

    Also, of those psychiatrists who voted to classify homosexuality not as a disorder I would like to know how many cases each one “treated” and for what length of time and what methods they used with these homosexuals. Also, I’d like to know how many of these psychiatrists were either homosexuals or bisexuals themselves. It’s been believed that individuals who go into this type of profession have many unresolved problems and find fascination with listening to other’s deep seated difficulties. So just because a group of psychiatrists said that homosexuality is just another choice for sexual behavior, doesn’t make it so.

    YOU SAID :Fundamentalist Christian: Your ideals, opinions, and understanding levels are that of medieval farm helps (serfs) who rape their cousins for laughs.

    HOW DO YOU ACCOUNT FOR THE FOLLOWING?

    Our American Founding Fathers depended upon Judeo-Christian values; — as outlined in the Declaration of Independence where they pointed to our God-given and irreversible right to Life, Liberty and Creativity was asserted; as well as the values of Biblical faith and morality, and the Western value of reason. The church, but not the Biblical God, was separated from government; and we therefore have in America a 1789 Constitutional separation of church and state with a pre-existing 1776 Declarational unity of God and state. .

    The genius of our Founding Fathers was to reprocess and reintegrate the best of East and West. American Judeo-Christian values assert the infinite value of the individual made in the image of God, and promote the unity of free individuals rather than the coerced group conformity of Europe-based Western Socialism…so if you consider this belief system as being that of mediaeval farm helps who rape cousins for enjoyment, you have a perverse understanding of our fundamental heritage and I recommend that you study the beginnings of Harvard, Princeton, Dartmouth, Yale Universities and 119 of our first colleges and universities – all established on the Word of God and dedicated to the Lordship of Jesus Christ and for the training of disciples of our Lord.

    I can see you’re totally deceived, biased and ignorant of the basics of the Holy Scripture.

    YOU SAID:, Nut Case:- People who have mental impairment, or a acute learning difficulties leading to abnormal social behaviour. e.g. going around saying the bible is more scientific than science, stating the earth is 6000 years old, especially when shown the overwhelming evidence to the contrary which could be understood by a 5 year old child with a lobotomy, or obsessive abnormal behaviour on a gay site when you’re supposed to be “straight”.

    WILL…You’ll have to tell all these scientists that they all have a mental impairment, learning difficulities leading to abnormal social behavior….that would be a shock to them after being considered experts and accepted by their peers worldwide.

    The Creation Research Society (CRS), a scientific society with worldwide membership, is recognized internationally for its firm commitment to scientific special creation. Memberships over the past few years have been steady with a total of over 1700 worldwide. About 700 are voting members. Foreign members/subscribers number about 250.
    The CRS was founded in 1963 by a group of ten like-minded scientists who had corresponded with each other for a number of years. A major impetus for this effort was a problem that each one had experienced. They had been unable to publish in established journals scientific information favorable to the creation viewpoint. Believing that there were probably other scientists with similar experiences, these men saw the need for a journal in which such information could be published.

    A number of principles were established from the beginning. First, members of the Society, which include research scientists from various fields of scientific accomplishment, are committed to full belief in the Biblical record of creation and early history. Thus, they advocate the concept of special creation (as opposed to evolution), both of the universe and of the earth with its complexity of living forms.

    WILL… if you want detailed information from experts below, contact CreationResearch.org and you’ll get facts that will destroy your erroneous mindset and get you on the path to reality about evolution, creationism, Holy Bible, and any of your questions.

    Don DeYoung – Ph.D. Physics –Astronomy and Creation ,Dinosaurs and Creation
    Michael Oard – M.S. Atmospheric Science, Is Evolution a Fact?
    Eugene Chaffin – Ph.D. Physics Accelerated Decay: Mechanisms and Evidence,
    David Kaufmann – Ph.D. Human Anatomy, Can A Real Scientist Believe in Evolution?,
    Kevin Anderson – Ph.D. Microbiology, The Four Flawed Assumptions of Evolution
    Mark Armitage – M.S. Biology, Microscopic Design in Biology

  55. Sugar Plum Fairy 3 Aug 2009, 4:06am

    BB34-What a Camp Clara Cluck!

    Col 4:6 Be gracious in your speech. The goal is to bring out the best in others in a conversation, not put them down, not cut them out.

    A35-You do not want any of the intellectually challenged, childish sodomites up here to think that you are a liar do you?

    I think facts are beyond your comprehnsion.

    JK44-He is an Exgay Fundamentist Christian Nut case

    Evidence please?

    W45-Please. Don’t insult our intelligence.

    We can’t as you don’t have any or you wouldn’t be homosexuals.

    W49-Now be sure to explain the fossil record,

    Evidence for Evolution – The Fossil Record:
    (ex) Supposed “missing links” between distinct kinds of animals which can be extrapolated as transitions between kinds. For example, Archaeopteryx is thought to be a transition between reptiles and birds. (crit) There are no unambiguous transitional fossils. Archaeopteryx was thought to be a transition between reptile and bird because of its teeth and the claws on its wings. The fact is some fossil birds had teeth, and some didn’t. Some reptiles have teeth, and some don’t. Some mammals have teeth, and some don’t. As far as claws on its wings, there are birds living today that have claws on their wings. Nevertheless, they are obviously birds, and no one disputes this. Besides, superficial similarities do not imply genetic relationship. “There is not one such fossil for which one could make a watertight argument. The reason is that statements about ancestry and descent are not applicable in the fossil record.” – Colin Patterson, Senior Paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History and editor of a prestigious scientific journal. Patterson is a well-known expert having an intimate knowledge of the fossil record. (Reference: Colin Patterson, personal communication. Luther Sunderland, “Darwin’s Enigma,” 1988, p. 89.)

    W50- Experience tells us that this unnatural obsession with gay people and their PRIVATE sex lives is usually done by ex-gays, who are never really ex-gay as ex-gay doesn’t exist and is the figment of religious bigotry, or closet gays trying to hide their sexuality.

    Evidence please, that is if you have any which you don’t. If you do, prove me wrong.

    W50-Fundamentalist Christian: Your ideals, opinions, and understanding levels are that of medieval farm helps (serfs) who rape their cousins for laughs.

    Fundamentalist; a person who adheres to fundamentalism
    Fundamentalism; orthodox religious beleif based on a literal interpretation of the Bible.

    No mention here of serfs who rape thier cousins. Perhaps you are educationally challenged that’s why you can’t get definitions right?

    At53-Who is the more blasphemlous??

    It depends whether you approach the topic from a Gnostic understanding or use the views of the Montanists. Then again you could refer to the Augustinian School for enlightenment. Failing that Jerome had some good insight into the topic. If none of these impress you there is always Origen, Clement, the Alexandrian theologians or the Platonic school of thought to name just a few.

  56. Oh goddess Hank and SPF?!? Well, there goes the thread.

  57. We should not be running down God or the Christians for this reference as it is not God that is doing all this, it is the narrow minded minority that is spreading the lies, God does love us all even if we sin he has forgiven us, through his son Jesus who died for our sins, so please dont attack the Church for this mans lies, because unfortunatly the Church gets bad press all the time when in fact it is just the opinion of the few narrow minded people in power that instead of teaching hate should be showing love.

  58. During the Birmingham Tornado, three years ago, the roof of one church was ripped off, another sustained damage and a school tower collapsed. I understand that a little girls house was swept up and landed on a green faced old hag….(!)

  59. @Hank (post 54): It may seem “normal” to you for a “very” heterosexual* person to spend his spare time on a gay website drowning thread after thread with dodgy ideas gleaned from “scholarship” that’s always at least 30 years old, but it seems more than a little unbalanced to me, and I suggest you try and assess your motivations with some degree of objectivity, if possible. In the meantime, your contributions are seldom relevant and appear to verge on the hysterical – and are therefore rather boring. (One begins to understand why you appear to have so much time to post at such length.)

    Oh, and I agree it’s been believed that individuals who go into psychiatry have many unresolved problems and find fascination with listening to other’s deep seated difficulties; so just because a group of psychiatrists said that homosexuality is not just another choice for sexual behavior, doesn’t make it so.

    * Is that as opposed to an ‘only quite’ heterosexual?

  60. SPF: Making daring claims and failing to prove them upon repeated request amounts to lying. In addition to the items I had mentioned last week:

    - Emotional and financial exploitation of innocent, harmless and healthy people who never did you any harm
    - Gay suicides caused by homophobia

    You are now also guilty of LYING. I will have to believe this until you share the information about your university studies of gay suicide. The information I requested was: when did you do this study? Where? What was your methodology (what sources did you consult in your research design, how did you gather data and how did you analyse your data)? What were your conclusions? Any link to the text of this study?

    I also called upon you to CONVINCE us that your daring claims are right. If you are indeed a Christian as you claim you are, you ABSOLUTELY SHOULD do this out of compassion for us. If you fail to do this you do not only let us down, but God, Jesus, and, depending on your ideological stance all the saints.

    I ask you again: are you not afraid of the kettle and bad porn I mentioned before awaiting you in hell if you fail to help us???

    And I have to ask you something else now too: are you not afraid of bad weather if you fail to live up to your duties before God?????

    How very dare you…

  61. “Biblical record of creation and early history”

    I hav read this. What a load of bollox. IS there somethign wrog with you, Hank?

    The bible hold no light to the very existence of extinct creatures and the fossil record.

    These people you quote are not scientists, they are frauds. They take one shred of biblical quote, find some erroneous data in science, and attack the too. This isn’t science, and if their so called education was anything to go by, they’d know this. Ergo, they are not scientists, they are frauds. Like you Hank, charlatans and fools. You do not dismiss the overwhelming evidence of Evolution because of a few gaps or omissions in the fossil record, so therefore conclude god make the world 6000 years ago! Such nonsense! Even most CHRISTIANS do not believe in creationism

    The overwhelming majority of scientists are in agreement that the claims of science are necessarily limited to those that develop from natural observations and experiments which can be replicated and substantiated by other scientists, and that claims made by creation science do not meet those criteria. [statement by National Academy of sciences • National Academy of Engineering • Institute of Medicine • National Research Council - NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS, Washington, DC, 1999]

    And this is where Creationism is not a science, and is totally false:

    * Creation science is not falsifiable : Theism is not falsifiable, since the existence of God is typically asserted without sufficient conditions to allow a falsifying observation. If God is a transcendental being, beyond the realm of the observable, no claim about his existence can be supported or undermined by observation. Thus, creationism, the argument from design and other arguments for the existence of God are a priori arguments.
    * Creation science violates the principle of parsimony : Creationism fails to pass Occam’s razor. Many explanations offered by creation science are more complex than alternative explanations. Parsimony favours explanations that make the fewest assumptions and postulate the fewest hypothetical entities.
    * Creation science is not empirically testable: Creationism posits the supernatural which by definition is beyond empirical natural testing, and thus conflicts with the practical use of methodological naturalism inherent in science.
    * Creation science is not based upon controlled, repeatable experiments: That creationism is not based upon controlled, repeatable experiments stems not from the theory itself, but from the phenomena that it tries to explain.
    * Creation science is not correctable, dynamic, tentative or progressive: Creationism professes to adhere to an “absolute Truth”, “the word of God”, instead of a provisional assessment of data which can change when new information is discovered. The idea of the progressive growth of scientific ideas is required to explain previous data and any previously unexplainable data as well as any future data. It is often given as a justification for the naturalistic basis of science. In any practical sense of the concept, creation science is not progressive: it does not explain or expand upon what went before it and is not consistent with established ancillary theories.

    Your are a proven fool Hank, and I will not debate this with a man of such low rational. You can only be pitied and laughed at.

    Its sad but true, but the a belief in creationism is a mental deficiency of biblical proportions.

    Oh, and as for “I am one of the most heterosexual guys around…had no problem having a great love life with desirable women for the past 40+ years”

    Yeah, right…. there are LOADS of straight men on gay sites. Its PERFECTLY normal, isn’t it? No, its no. You’ve, at least got obsessional problems, at best, your a closet case queer who’s only way to rational the self loathing is to this they are doing “god’s work” in battling gay people. You protest too much anyway about your so called straight life…. I smell a liar.

    You are a poisoned mind, Hank.

  62. GOd the Father – “And the Lord Sayeth I will sent my strongest winds against these people for their sins against me; two people have love for one another and it is evil and I will smite them down.”
    JC “Oh comeon dad; just cos two dudes want to get married? Take a chill and save the big bad winds for all the murderes and hypocrites, child molesters and downright nasty terorist folks!”

  63. Hey Will, (#61)…you said “These people you quote are not scientists, they are frauds. They take one shred of biblical quote, find some erroneous data in science, and attack the too. This isn’t science, and if their so called education was anything to go by, they’d know this. Ergo, they are not scientists, they are frauds.”

    Wow…what a powerful statement.Please give me examples of evidence for your above quote, if you have any to give.

    Also I’ll address other absurdities you offer in another post,
    because they are numerous.

  64. Hey Will again…you make all kinds of wild comments trying to negate creationism. Since you are such an evolutionist thinking person, please explain how your evolution/natural selection process answers this as opposed to the Intelligent Design/Creationist explanation.

    In the creation/formation/etc. of the elephant. Where did your
    natural selection get its “model” to form the elephant having
    4 legs. Did it first experiment with giving it 1 leg, saw that
    that didn’t work, so it gave it 2 legs, and saw that didn’t work,
    so it gave it 3 legs, etc., and eventually gave it 4 legs?

    But then when your “natural selection” process saw that 4 legs
    worked, why didn’t it give it 6 legs to perhaps make it work
    better. If 4 legs were “good”, maybe 6 legs would be better…RIGHT?

    How did your “natual selection process” get its model to follow
    for creating/evolvinig all the different aniamals? Was it by
    trial and error? If so, them where are all the fossils showing
    the creatures with 1 leg, 2 legs, etc? I have a difficult time
    trying to understand where “evolutions natural selection” found
    out how to create the animals perfectly as they are today. Seems
    like there must have been some intelligent design/purpose/planning
    behind it all — perhaps as the ID/Creationists offer.

    I would like to start with the topic of dinosaurs, but since we
    have none that we can see today, I’ll use the elephant for an
    example. (This has nothing to do with the missing link question)

  65. “please explain how your evolution/natural selection process answers this as opposed to the Intelligent Design/Creationist explanation.”

    Er, I already have… didn’t you read my last comment? Don’t you understand what I’m saying? Please, don’t tell me that you THAT stupid?

  66. Oh, but PLEASE, explain the dinosaurs? You saying now that they NEVER exited?

    Please, I’m dying to hear more.

  67. Hank, my god, you ain’t half stupid. Did you EVER read ANYTHING on evolution??? Will makes the effort to show you where creationism is just a fable, and you come back with THAT response!

    Lets pick a few holes in your lack of learning, shall we:

    “If 4 legs were “good”, maybe 6 legs would be better…RIGHT?”

    No. Would a 6 legged elephant run faster? What about an 8 legged mouse? Only if it has an evolutionary survival purpose. THIS is evolution. Ants have 6 legs. Spiders have 8. Dogs have 4. Originally life had none. Again, see the wikipedia article on evolution and early life. The fossil record shows legs evolved, where once there were fins.

    “please explain how your evolution/natural selection process answers this as opposed to the Intelligent Design/Creationist explanation.”

    Look up wikipedia “evolution”. Its not our place to educate you.

    “How did your “natural selection process” get its model to follow
    for creating/evolving all the different animals? Was it by
    trial and error?”

    Simplistic, but yes. But you like simple, don’t you. Okay so. The proof? The fossil record is full of species that didn’t change sufficiently to adapt, and became extinct. And who said there was a model to follow? That’s creationism. Can’t you see past the crap and open your mind? Evolution is about survival, not a blueprint model like an IKEA sofa! Please, see past the simplicity of your silly creationism.

    “I have a difficult time trying to understand where “evolutions natural selection” found out how to create the animals perfectly as they are today.

    Difficulty? I can see why. You don’t understand science or evolution, that’s why. But who said that animals were perfect today? Are you saying that animals are fixed in time today and are perfec? How absurd. If that was the case, there would be no extinctions…. and there are extinctions happening on a daily basis. Was the Woolly Mammoth perfect (since you keep talking about elephants)? If it was so perfect, where is it now? Hiding? Going to “perfection school”?

    I’ve also taken the liberty to correct your numerous spelling mistakes in your quotes, consider it a gift from one intelligent person to one less fortunate.

    You really need to read more, you’re quite backward and simplistic in your reasoning, Hank. Kinda like a child.

    Your “theories” hold no water. They are base and foolish. Evolution is supported by the entire scientific community, creationism is not a theory, and is only supported by people poisoned by religious dogma…. see Will’s excellent critic above.

    I write this, not in the hope you will learn, that is a lost cause, I write this to show that you and your kind should always be smacked down as the fools you are. The days where religious snuffs out the light of reason in lieu of darkness and ignorance can never come again. No more burning scientist because they prove their stupid bible book wrong. No more Galileo being branded a “heretic”, when he was right. Reason will always prevail over your stupidity Hank, you and your daft pals SPF and Skinner.

  68. “I write this, not in the hope you will learn, that is a lost cause, I write this to show that you and your kind should always be smacked down as the fools you are. The days where religious snuffs out the light of reason in lieu of darkness and ignorance can never come again. No more burning scientist because they prove their stupid bible book wrong. No more Galileo being branded a “heretic”, when he was right. Reason will always prevail over your stupidity Hank, you and your daft pals SPF and Skinner.”

    Bravo Linda! Very well said! And thank you for the backing and additional proof against his tiresome crap.

    I am not answering any more until he explains the fossil record to me, and carbon dating. He can explain how they’re “wrong”, for the laugh.

  69. Hey Linda, I said, “If 4 legs were “good”, maybe 6 legs would be better…RIGHT?”

    You said, “No. Would a 6 legged elephant run faster? What about an 8 legged mouse? Only if it has an evolutionary survival purpose. THIS is evolution. Ants have 6 legs. Spiders have 8. Dogs have 4. Originally life had none”

    You’ve still evaded my question: How does your evolution/natural
    selection “knon” that an elephant wouldn’t be better off with
    6 legs? Did it try it and find out it doesn’t work? Or did it
    somehow “know” that 4 legs are sufficient? Where and how did
    it “know” this? What is its model of sufficiencey based upon?
    There must be some “perfect knowledge” that says it’s OK to stop
    with 4 legs. My Creator knows this and He stopped with 4 legs.
    How did your evolution creation system arrive at this correct
    point? Give me a straight answer — where and how did your
    evolution model” know all this?

    I’ll get back to the other assertions soon. And there are no
    rebuttals to my comment on the ex-gay, fundamental Christian
    nut case, with all my positive input.

  70. Hey Will, you said, ” Creation science is not based upon controlled, repeatable experiments”

    OK..can you show me how evolution’s theory that life started
    in a swamp, filled with a few chemicals, hit by lightning
    and the result was simple life? (Has that been replicated in
    experiments?)

    Of if that’s not evolution’s theory of life’s beginnings, please
    show me how evolution science has replicated the start of life.

    I’ve got other comments to your post shortly

  71. Hey Will, you said, “You can only be pitied and laughed at.
    Its sad but true, but the a belief in creationism is a mental deficiency of biblical proportions”

    Please show me proof that “but the a belief in creationism is a mental deficiency of biblical proportions”

    I believe that’s your opinion and is “not true” just because
    you say it is.

    If you say something like that say that it’s your opinion and
    not a universal truth as you imply. But then people like you
    say things to justify your belief system, regardless whether
    you have facts or not.

  72. Allow me…

    “You’ve still evaded my question: How does your evolution/natural
    selection “knon” that an elephant wouldn’t be better off with
    6 legs?”

    If the 6 legs survives due to its advantage, then its “fitter” and more likely to reproduce. This means the adaptation survives and gets passed on genetically, and the species evolves. Its not a “knowing” thing.

    This is evolution in its simplest form… and I stress simplest. If you don’t get that, forget it. Please stop wasting my time, you’re beginning to look like a bigger fool that you already are.

    “Of if that’s not evolution’s theory of life’s beginnings, please
    show me how evolution science has replicated the start of life.”

    This is just a down right stupid ting to say. Really. Very, very stupid. Science doesn’t need to replicate life to prove its origins! Its like saying the elephant needs to be replicated in a lab to prove its an elephant, and without that replication its not an elephant. How absurd you are. Science has proven evolution. Its in theory in name only.

    Please stop your stupid rantings and read about evolution. As Linda said, use wikipedia, if layman’s science.

    Look, YOU prove creationism, evolution has ample proof. Where are the experiements and the evidence of creationism. Explain the fossil records in creationism. Please, enlighten me. I’ve earned my science degrees, I don’t have to educate you. The onus is on you to prove your silly “theories”, as you don’t know what you are talking about with evolution.

  73. Hey Linda, you said “Look up wikipedia “evolution”. Its not our place to educate you”

    If you use wikipedia for your information and to educate yourself
    you’re more stupid than you think me to be. That site can
    be filled with inaccuracies, incomplete information and even
    false information — you can do better than that if you try.

  74. Hank, she suggested wikipedia for you. Not herself. She seems to have a fairly educated view on evolution, its YOU who she’s helping to start at a beginners stage. Some of your stuff is just down right stupid.

    Please, keep you beliefs. I don’t care what you think. They are offensive because they are so base, go away with them. Find anopther site with more dumbed down people to converse with. You’re just not able to understand what we’re saying.

    Its the reason we see hundreds of programs on TV on evolution, and fuck all creationism programs (outside the fire and brimstone “god” channels that is)…. no one with an IQ over 5 believes in this nonsense.

    Please, you’re humiliating yourself.

  75. Hey Will, you’re talking in circles. You say, “If the 6 legs survives due to its advantage, then its “fitter” and more likely to reproduce.

    BUT, I’m asking and you’re not answering, “How
    does your system KNOW that the present 4 legs is “fitter” unless
    it tries out using 6 legs? Unless it tries to use trial
    and error, your system doesn’t know when to stop adding legs.

    And if it does try using 6 legs, how long in its trial testing
    does it go before it aborts it and reverts to the 4 leg animal.

    Also why aren’t there fossils of 6 legged elephants — if there aren’t any, than how did your system know not to try evolving to 6 legs? How did it know that 4 legs would be fittest? Soomehow
    there has to be knowledge when to go and when to stop. Your system has loopholes that make it lack credibility.

    The Creator knows when to go and when to stop, even if evolution
    is flying blind on trial and error to find its “fittest” end.

  76. Hey Will, you said, “Hank, she suggested wikipedia for you. Not herself. She seems to have a fairly educated view on evolution, its YOU who she’s helping to start at a beginners stage. Some of your stuff is just down right stupid.”
    YOU KNOW WHAT SHE CAN DO WITH HER “SUGGESTION.”

    You said, “Its the reason we see hundreds of programs on TV on evolution, and fuck all creationism programs (outside the fire and brimstone “god” channels”

    Will…, you just gave the evidence that evolutions are intolerant and paranoid when it comes to
    evaluating creationism as an opposing theory.

    Below is a common, fearful example of how evolutionists behave when challenged with a different theory or opinion or anything that shows a weakness or error in their theory.

    Eugenie Scott was trained as an anthropologist, and has now emerged as one of the most prominent advocates for keeping evolution an integral part of the curriculum in U.S. public
    schools. She received an award from the Hugh Heffner Foundation for her efforts in defending the First Amendment (What a laugh).

    She “consults” with attorneys involved in court cases over creation, Intelligent Design, and evolution, and occasionally testifies as an “expert” witness. She insists that institutions expose and expel scientists who don’t hold firmly enough to the evolution gospel.

    So Will…when you combine what’s permitted on television and from people like Scott, all I can say is that evolutions are fearful, paranoid, and intellectually deficient in accepting the challenge of Creationism, Intelligent Design and any other program that attacks evolution and shows its weaknesses – yes indeed, evolutionists are narrow-minded when evaluating
    their THEORY.

  77. Will, you say, ” Science has proven evolution. Its in theory in name only.”

    Please show me where science has proven that life began as
    evolutionists believe. Sorry for my stupidity, but I’ve never
    seen where anybody has started life from chemicals. Please
    educated me with THE FACTS.

  78. Hank – your questions are just ridicuous. ‘did evolution experiment to see if 4 legs were best?’

    That’s the whole point, nobody is ‘doing’ any experiment!

    You have AT LEAST 2 magic creations to explain: complex life, completely out of NOTHING; and the designer of that complex life, completely out of nothing. And you have to go back and back and back, explaining who designed the creator who invented the inventor, ad infinitum. You cannot do it.

    Evolution gives us the best explanaiton available -0 the most plausible, the most parsimonious explanation, as to why we are here. And we make no such arrogant claim, as to know all the answers – that is what you as a Christian, does.

    To say the earth is 6000 years old is as ridiculous as saying the width of America is about 8 feet.

    We have been through all these before in an extremely lengthy thread in February. Youdr answers and claims were banal then, as they are now.

  79. Will, you said, “Really. Very, very stupid. Science doesn’t need to replicate life to prove its origins!”

    WOW…it involves the most basic beginning for all life forms, and science doesn’t need to replicate life to prove its origins…so I guess science can make an unproven statement and create an entire theory without actually proving its first principle! Then how do they know they’re right? If it’s not proven fact, pure and simple, then how do they know they’re basing everything on truth and not error? How many other questionable pathways are they following without knowing fact from fiction?

    Doesn’t sound like evolutionists are being scientific.

  80. ?????? Hank – we have had this conversation before.

    Evolution does NOT explain with certianty the origin of the first cell. We have plausible explanations – crystalline structures now replaced by More sophisticated replicators, for instance; theories such as lightning.

    Your explanation is far more improbable because evolution tells us that complex, intelligent, statistically improbable beings come into existence late in the universe, not at the beginning. whatever created all life around us must have been both. If it were to exist.

    Eugenie Scott – a womderful woman, a credit to Science. She did an excellent job in keeping junk science intelligent design creationism out of the class. It is whacko religious nonsense, sponsored by the far right. What the creationists want to do is present ID as a plausible alternative, when in fact it is no such thing, because there is no evidence for ID. Young, vulnerable schoolchildren should not be indoctrinated with what is really, religious propaganda. The purpose of ID is to promote a Christian supremacist agenda. It is nothing to do with science.

    Intelligent design creationists say “there’s a gap in our knowledge, we don’t know what happened here, therefore God did it”. Also known as the Theory of Personal Incredulity.

    No Intelligent Design paper has EVER been accepted or taken seriously by a respected peer reviewed scientific journal.

    For more informaiton about the Wedge of Intelligent Design, read Creationism’s Trojan Horse by Barbara Forrest, in which all ID theories are completely blown out of the water.

  81. “Please educated me with THE FACTS”

    Of, for the love of god…. again. And Again. Thats YOUR job.

    YOU educate yourself. I’ve already spend 8 years in university educating myself. When you catch up with me, please, by all means we’ll have a civilised conversation of equals.

    “Then how do they know they’re right”

    Empirical evidence. Creationism has no empirical evidence.

  82. O dear

    . . . what a load of Sugar Plum tooth decay, and Hanky Panky. Well aleast I gave out an early “Health warning”

    Congratualtions to all you stalwarts in pursuit of
    * Logic
    * Reason
    * Rationality

    . . . that does not include Hank or SPF

  83. Mihangel apYrs 4 Aug 2009, 1:14pm

    HAnk has successfully derailed this thread to bable (again) his religious beliefs.

    I know it is so tempting to respond: the educated always feel the need to help the unenlightened since knowledge is a beautiful thing, but you can’t educate the sullenly and stubbornly dogmatic. You could show people like Hank the big bang, the evolution of elephants and they’d still say “goddidit” and ignore the evidence of their own eyes.

    However, as true hypocrites, they’re only too willing to accept the benefits of the research done by godless evolutionists and atheists.

    Please don’t feed the trolls, you will never satisfy them….

  84. Yo Adrian, you said, “Evolution gives us the best explanaiton available”

    OK, where and when did the evolution process begin? Did it
    always exist — perhaps in the same category that God always
    existed?

    If there is a process, than it’s necessary that something/someone
    started it, and evolution is no different. Or did it all mysteriously start from nothing and become something?

    So tell me when did
    it begin, and more importantly, why? Is there some mystical
    force that’s behind had the universe behave start and continue in such an organized manner.

  85. I think Hank has finally asked a question that is easy to answer. Evolution started when life started. Asking who started evolution is like asking who started the weather. Evolution, as I am sure you know Hank, is based on the process of natural selection: traits that lend certain life forms competitive advantages in certain sets of circumstances become more frequent over time. That is all there is to it. When there is life and change, there is evolution. When you call it a process, this choice of word should not suggest a planned and conscious sequence of activities; when you say evolution happens it does not mean that something starts at a point in time, goes on for a while and then stops – it does not even happen in that sense. It really is a phenomenon rather that does lead to changes in the world which then look like sequences. But all there is to it is that species change with reproduction by coincidence and some of these changes create advantages while others create disadvantages. Period. You are certainly welcome Hank :)

  86. Well Hank, the best understanding we have, so far, is that DNA in its current form began replicating successfully, approximately 3.8 – 4 billion years ago. The vast majority of time, life was extremely simple.

    This video, a little dated but still valid, comes from an edition of Carl Sagan’s Cosmos programme. (I have no idea how one is supposed to embed a link on here, but click on AdrianT below this message otherwise it is : youtube. com/watch?v=5kOLIHi9pTY )

    Importantly, we do not know all the answers. Somethings we simply cannot know. I don’t see any reason why a reliiogus person can have better answers then anyone else. If anyone wants to make that claim, then they must provide some pretty convincing evidence to make their case. A case that is not based on wishful thinking.

    We should admit this and simply say, ‘we will roll up our sleeves and try to find out’.

    If a process is necessarrily started by an intelligence, then that applies to the designer, too. You just shove the problem one stage further back. Evolution is bottom up: simplicity breeds complexity, not through purpose or design. The elements, the heavy elements, at some point – we can only suppose – a simple replicator, leading to more complex replicators.

    To ask ‘why’ it began – well, it began because it began. And it only had to begin once to start the train of cumulative adaptations that eventually led to intelligent life.

    And by the way, evolution has been punctuated by several mass extinction events, like asteroid collisions, global freezes and even supervolcanoes, without which we would not be here. we are overdue something similar, and there is no special reason why our species should survive any longer than any other (if we did disappear, virtually all trace of humanity would go in a few thousand years).

    In a few billion years, there will be nothing again. Soem scientists predict that the universe will self destruct at some stage in an event called the Big Rip.

  87. Yo Adrian(#80) You say, Eugenie Scott – a womderful woman, a credit to Science. She did an excellent job in keeping junk science intelligent design creationism out of the class.”
    Plus you have the mainstream media doing their own censorship
    or the Creation explanation.

    What are evolutionists afraid of? They don’t want Creationism
    to get their explanation out on a fair trial. If evolutionists
    are so confident, then why don’t they take on one-on-one
    critical discussion of where each stands. In the class on
    evolution, do the teachers tell all the positive and negative
    aspects of evolution? Or they just present the positive and
    ignore any negative ones? Also why aren’t they required to present
    the Creation version of the facts — both positive and negative
    and discuss both issues.
    No, the evolutionists would not want a fair presentation. They
    have the only RIGHT ANSWER and end of discussion.

    Why doesn’t the scientific/educationalreligious system bring this
    out in the open with a public forum of bringing together the
    very best of both camps to have debates in all avenues of
    information? It’s because the evolutionists don’t want the
    public to hear any criticism of evolution and perhaps see there
    are many issues to be decided as to having evolution giving the
    truth of the whole matter.
    )

  88. “They don’t want Creationism
    to get their explanation out on a fair trial.”

    Well then, what “proof” exists for creationism, that exists OUTSIDE the bible?

    Go on, lets hear it. Scientifically tested proofs please, and evidence. No bible quotes. Just observable facts. Do include the fossil record.

    I’m waiting….

  89. To repeat Will’s challenge – what evidence is there for Intelligent Design creationism? No evidence: not science.

    No evolutionary biologist is remotely afraid of taking on any ID proponent, because so far, no ID proponent has produced a scrap of evidence for it. No ID proponent has prodiuced one peer reviewed paper in support of their ‘theory’.

    There is no debate to be had. Young children should be provided with the best knowledge – and importantly that requirees telling them that the evidence for evolution is rock solid, supported by the DNA record, the fossil record, the geological record, anthropology, astronomy, chemistry.

    Telling children that there are alternative viewpoints will ruin their understanding of science. It isn;t as if there is any doubt, Hank. There is one theory which works, and another which is completely off the scale nonsense (Creationism).

    By the way, the people who really want American kids to learn about ID Creationism, are the Chinese and the Indians – believe me, they are only too happy to make idiots of your nation: they want your jobs.

    The only way Creationism gets into schools is by bypassing the scrutiny of science, and appealing to know-nothing rebuplican politicians like in Texas and Oklahoma, who know no science and aren’t qualified to understand the evidence, or even, what evidence actually is.

    And ank – if you are going to rush off to find some obscure mis-dating of a rock, to disprove Evolution, then you had better put an explanation in its place, and moreover, explain why the millions of other dating readings turned out AS EXPECTED! Answers In Genesis will not help you much there I am afraid.

  90. If [Evolutionary biologists] are so confident, then why don’t they take on one-on-one critical discussion of where each stands. In the class on evolution, do the teachers tell all the positive and negative aspects of evolution? Or they just present the positive and ignore any negative ones? ”

    - There is no need for a discussion about whether Evolution happened or not. It’s a fact.
    - There are no negative points about Evolution.

    “They have the only RIGHT ANSWER and end of discussion.”

    - Precisely. Case closed!

  91. “The only way Creationism gets into schools is by bypassing the scrutiny of science, and appealing to know-nothing republican politicians like in Texas and Oklahoma”

    Precisely Adrian…. creationism and its long list of falsities is only “requested” by a small minority of inbred hicks in middle America. None in their right mind who cares for their children’s education would suggest such a silly thing as to “teach” creationism…. something which is just a whimsical idea with zero proof.

    And this is the simple reason as to why evolution is not only taught in schools world wide, its accepted universally (except for the handful of uneducated silly people as mentioned above) by scientists, seen on every Discovery channel, and taken as gospel (excuse the pun!). If anyone doubts evolution, all they have to do is follow the studies done, see the evidence, and apply the logic to see its true…. or at least more true than God sticking his finger up his arse and wishing a universe into existence, with talking snakes, forbidden apple trees and naked dumb chicks flapping around a garden full of dinosaurs!

    Creationism on the other hand only exists on the “god” channel, and in the minds of these foolish few.

  92. Yes Will, exactly.

    Now here is a great video that shows the link between geography and the evolution of fruit flies in hawaii -

    youtube .com/watch?v=x-r_YhATOYA&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Ericharddawkins%2Enet%2Farticle%2C4094%2CRDF%2DTV%2D%2D%2DNebraska%2DVignettes%2D6%2D%2D%2DHawaii%2Das%2Da%2DNursery%2Dof%2DEvolution%2CRichard%2DDawkins%2DJosh&feature=player_embedded

  93. Very interesting Adrian, thank you.

    What’s I don;’t understand is that this evolution all makes perfect sense to me…. its logical, plausible, and likely. If I don’t understand something, or don’t accept something, I can follow the proof and evidence and see where the . Is it just a simple and obvious problem here that these “creationists” are just not as smart as us?

  94. Well, what they fail to understand is that an article on a website is not evidence in itself. People come one here and are satisfied with some creationist or rabidly anti-gay screed – they’ve seen it on narth.com or answersingenesis.com : Ken Ham says there are no fossils, no more questions needed.

    And then they also do not understand that it is not our job to prove a negative. ‘prove god did not create the first single celled organism’. That line of thinking is necessary for Intelligent Design as a movement to survive, as the theory can only be based on nothing but gaps.

    Carl Sagan’s ‘baloney detection keit’ (see his book, Demon Haunted World, comes to the rescue. have all the possible causes been investigated? (thousands of other gods such as the cherokee, poseidon, thor etc) Have all natural explanations been ruled out?(we have never known nature to go out of its course; misreading the data, and so on). Click on AdrianT to see link.

    youtube .com/watch?v=eUB4j0n2UDU

  95. And another observation, the ones who spout homosexuality is an “abomination”, seem to all have extremely uneducated narrow views of the world around them:- They all seem to deny the fossil record, believe in a 6000 year old earth, and the talking snake who’s an apple seller. But still not accept other parts of the “good” book such as god’s so called love of slavery or the “abomination” of shellfish. Curious. How do they draw the line? Its like, as you said, they immediately jump at the “divine” solution, because they can’t figure it out for themselves…. is it laziness, or a deficient mind?

    The mind is a wonderful thing… seems theirs is a combination of it been broken, and not exercised enough. Shame really, to go through life with such a small dim view of the universe…. looks like evolution failed them, when the rest of us are marching on ahead of them. They don’t even understand what they’re missing, and that’s the sad part of it!

  96. David North 7 Aug 2009, 4:34pm

    Isn’t anyone going to defend a literal interpretation of the Bible as THE revealed word of God?

    My downstairs neighbor used to believe that if you asked a question and then opened the Bible at random whatever verse your eye fell upon it would provide the answer.

    OK, so he was a schizophrenic alcholic racist who abused his wife and sometimes used to think he was a shrub, but……..;-)

  97. This is a long comment and I’m trying to send it in 3 or 4 parts because this site won’t let me send it as is.

    Adrian…There’s an different approach I’m taking about showing that the Holy Bible can be trusted to find truth for today.

    Christianity is a historical faith based on actual events recorded in the Bible and archaeology has played a key role in biblical studies and Christian apologetics in several ways.
    Not that I’ve acceptged evolution’s theory about facts it uses for giving itself credibility, I have archaeology to confirm the historical accuracy of the Bible. It’s verified many ancient sites, civilizations, and biblical characters whose existence you and the academic world often dismissed as myths. Biblical archaeology has silenced many heathens such as you as new discoveries supported many facts of the Bible.

    Adrian….in due time, the Holy Bible will have all of its important dates, places, people and writings as totally undeniable and Creationism will take its rightful place and replace evolution as the
    truth and answer to all creation !

    This information is detailed, because I know you appreciate the greatest details for proving one’s point. If you want to discredit any of the below, be my guest.
    Archaeology improves our understanding of the Bible. While we don’t have original writings of the authors, thousands of ancient manuscripts affirm that we have an accurate transmission of the original texts. Archaeology helps us understand more accurately the nuances and uses of biblical words as they were used in their day. – helps llustrate and explain Bible passages.

    The events of the Bible occurred at a certain time, in a particular culture, influenced by a particular social and political structure. Archaeology gives us insights into these areas. Archaeology also helps to supplement topics not covered in the Bible. Much of what we know of the pagan religions and the intertestamental period comes from archaeological research.

    To this date, only a fraction of available archaeological sites have been surveyed, and only a fraction of surveyed sites have been excavated but things are changing for the better . In fact, it’s estimated that less than two percent of surveyed sites have been worked on.

    TIME IS ON OUR SIDE
    The problem we face is that once work begins, only a fraction of an excavation site is actually examined, and only a small part of what is examined is published
    For example, the photographs of the Dead Sea Scrolls were withheld from the public for forty years after their discovery.
    It’s important to understand that the Scriptures remain the primary source of authority. We must not elevate archaeology to the point that it becomes the judge for the validity of Scripture..

    Noted archaeologist Nelson Glueck writes, “As a matter of fact, however, it may be clearly stated categorically that no archeological discovery has ever controverted a single biblical reference. Scores of archeological findings have been made which confirm in clear outline or exact detail historical statements in the Bible.”

    Here are facts uncovered by archeologists, scholars and secular experts – and more are being uncovered regularly. I am quoting these from various websites, the facts are widley accepted in the area of Biblical research.

    The Discovery of the Hittites – just as for your evolution theory, the Bible has uncovered facts hidden in ancient rocks that prove the reliability of the Holy Scriptures.

    The Hittites played a prominent role in Old Testament history. They interacted with biblical figures as early as Abraham and as late as Solomon. They are mentioned in Genesis 15:20 as people who inhabited the land of Canaan. 1 Kings 10:29 records that they purchased chariots and horses from King Solomon. The most prominent Hittite is Uriah the husband of Bathsheba. The Hittites were a powerful force in the Middle East from 1750 B.C. until 1200 B.C. Prior to the late 19th century, nothing was known of the Hittites outside the Bible, and many critics alleged that they were an invention of the biblical authors.

    In 1876 a dramatic discovery changed this perception. A British scholar named A. H. Sayce found inscriptions carved on rocks in Turkey. He suspected that they might be evidence of the Hittite nation. Ten years later, more clay tablets were found in Turkey at a place called Boghaz-koy. German cuneiform expert Hugo Winckler investigated the tablets and began his own expedition at the site in 1906.

    Winckler’s excavations uncovered five temples, a fortified citadel and several massive sculptures. In one storeroom he found over ten thousand clay tablets. One of the documents proved to be a record of a treaty between Ramesses II and the Hittite king. Other tablets showed that Boghaz-koy was the capital of the Hittite kingdom. Its original name was Hattusha and the city covered an area of 300 acres. The Hittite nation had been discovered!

    Less than a decade after Winckler’s find, Czech scholar Bedrich Hronzny proved the Hittite language is an early relative of the Indo-European languages of Greek, Latin, French, German, and English. The Hittite language now has a central place in the study of the history of the Indo-European languages.
    The discovery also confirmed other biblical facts. Five temples were found containing many tablets with details of the rites and ceremonies that priests performed. These ceremonies described rites for purification from sin and purification of a new temple. The instructions proved to be very elaborate and lengthy. Critics once criticized the laws and instructions found in the books of Leviticus and Deuteronomy as too complicated for the time they were written (1400 B.C.). The Boghaz-koy texts, along with others from Egyptian sites and from a site along the Euphrates called Emar, have proven that the ceremonies described in the Jewish Pentateuch are consistent with the ceremonies of the cultures of this time period.

    The Hittite Empire made treaties with civilizations they conquered. Two dozen of these have been translated and provide a better understanding of treaties in the Old Testament. The discovery of the Hittite Empire at Boghaz-koy has significantly advanced our understanding of the patriarchal period. Dr. Fred Wright summarizes the importance of this find in regard to biblical historicity.

    Now the Bible picture of this people fits in perfectly with what we know of the Hittite nation from the monuments. As an empire they never conquered the land of Canaan itself, although the Hittite local tribes did settle there at an early date. Nothing discovered by the excavators has in any way discredited the Biblical account. Scripture accuracy has once more been proved by the archaeologist.

    The discovery of the Hittites has proven to be one of the great archaeological finds of all time. It has helped to confirm the biblical narrative and had a great impact on Middle East archaeological study. Because of it, we have come to a greater understanding of the history of our language, as well as the religious, social, and political practices of the ancient Middle East.

  98. upandatem 9 Aug 2009, 4:09am

    W95-But still not accept other parts of the “good” book such as god’s so called love of slavery or the “abomination” of shellfish.

    No wonder you are unintelligent and boring. You bring up the same old red herrings as if they had some relevance for today. Your paucity of knowledge of the scriptures shouts from the housetops.

    In your stupidity, you would rather rabbit on about slavery and shelfish and ignore the fact that you are going to hell and your ignorant pride won’t allow you to see the obvious. What a warped and distorted understanding of reality you have.

    “Shame really, to go through life with such a small dim view of the universe….”

    Which must mean that yours is even smaller, dimmer and self defeating as yours is the gospel according to the gaystapo which is ALWAYS right according to you and you have the temerity to tell others that they are fools if they think they are always right.

  99. Part 2 — still trying to send

    Sodom and Gomorrah.
    The story of Sodom and Gomorrah has long been viewed as a legend. Critics assume that it was created to communicate moral principles. However, throughout the Bible this story is treated as a historical event. The Old Testament prophets refer to the destruction of Sodom on several occasions (Deut. 29:23, Isa. 13:19, Jer. 49:18), and these cities play a key role in the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles (Matt. 10:15, 2 Pet. 2:6 and Jude 1:7). What has archaeology found to establish the existence of these cities?

    Archaeologists have searched the Dead Sea region for many years in search of Sodom and Gomorrah. Genesis 14:3 gives their location as the Valley of Siddim known as the Salt Sea, another name for the Dead Sea. On the east side six wadies, or river valleys, flow into the Dead Sea. Along five of these wadies, ancient cities were discovered. The northernmost is named Bab edh-Drha. In 1924, renowned archaeologist Dr. William Albright excavated at this site, searching for Sodom and Gomorrah, and discovered a heavily fortified city. Although he connected this city with one of the biblical “Cities of the Plains,” he could not find conclusive evidence to justify this assumption.
    More digging was done in 1965, 1967, and 1973. The archaeologists discovered a 23-inch thick wall around the city, along with numerous houses and a large temple. Outside the city were huge grave sites where thousands of skeletons were unearthed. This revealed that the city had been well populated during the early Bronze Age, about the time Abraham would have lived.

    Most intriguing was evidence that a massive fire had destroyed the city. It lay buried under a coating of ash several feet thick. A cemetery one kilometer outside the city contained charred remains of roofs, posts, and bricks turned red from heat.
    Dr. Bryant Wood, in describing these charnel houses, stated that a fire began on the roofs of these buildings. Eventually the burning roof collapsed into the interior and spread inside the building. This was the case in every house they excavated. Such a massive fiery destruction would match the biblical account that the city was destroyed by fire that rained down from heaven. Wood states, “The evidence would suggest that this site of Bab edh-Drha is the biblical city of Sodom”.

    Five cities of the plain are mentioned in Genesis 14: Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zoar, and Zeboiim. Remnants of these other four cities are also found along the Dead Sea. Following a southward path from Bab edh-Drha there is the city called Numeria. Continuing south is the city called es-Safi. Further south are the ancient cities of Feifa and Khanazir. Studies of these cities revealed that they had been abandoned at the same time, about 2450—2350 B.C. Many archaeologists believe that if Bab ed-Drha is Sodom, Numeria is Gomorrah, and es-Safi is Zoar.

    What fascinated the archaeologists is that these cities were covered in the same ash as Bab ed-Drha. Numeria, believed to be Gomorrah, had seven feet of ash in some places. In every one of the destroyed cities ash deposits made the soil a spongy charcoal, making it impossible to rebuild. According to the Bible, four of the five cities were destroyed, leaving Lot to flee to Zoar. Zoar was not destroyed by fire, but was abandoned during this period.

    Although archaeologists are still disputing these findings, this is one discovery we will be hearing more about in years to come.

  100. More
    Evidence of Caiaphas’s tomb.
    The tomb of this priest was discovered in 1990. Israeli archaeologist Zvi Greenhut, who confirmed the finding, describes the event: “It was a cold day at the end of November when I received word at the Antiquities Authority that an old cave had been discovered . . . When I arrived I observed that the roof of the cave had collapsed. But even while standing outside, I could see four ossuaries, or bone boxes, in the central chamber of the cave. To an archaeologist, this was a clear indication that this was a Jewish burial cave . . . So it was that we discovered the final resting place of the Caiaphas family, one of whose priestly members presided at the trial of Jesus” (“Burial Cave of the Caiaphas Family,” Biblical Archaeological Review, September-October 1992, pp. 29-30).
    Two of the 12 stone boxes found had the name Caiaphas written on the side, and one contained the entire name “Joseph, son of Caiaphas.” Inside this box were the remains of a 60-year-old man, along with the bones of a woman and four younger people, probably those of his own family.
    Archaeologist Ronny Reich provides further details of the find: “The most elaborately decorated ossuary found in this cave contains two inscriptions relating to Caiaphas . . . The elderly man buried in the highly decorated ossuary was apparently Joseph. It was probably a forefather who had acquired this nickname [Caiaphas was apparently a nickname that meant "basket," probably from "basketmaker."]
    “A person named Joseph with the nickname Caiaphas was the high priest in Jerusalem between 18 and 36 A.D. The New Testament provides only his nickname in the Greek form: Caiaphas (see Matthew 26:3, 57; Luke 3:2; John 11:49, 18:13-14, 24, 28; Acts 4:6). Josephus [the first-century Jewish historian] gives his proper name as well: Joseph Caiaphas, or elsewhere, ‘Joseph who was called Caiaphas of the high priesthood.’ In short, we are explicitly told by Josephus that Caiaphas was indeed a nickname” (“Caiaphas Name Inscribed on Bone Boxes,” Biblical Archaeological Review, September-October 1992, p. 41).
    Archaeologists have thus confirmed the existence of this important New Testament figure. They have also proven the existence of another leading character instrumental in the events surrounding Jesus’ arrest, trial and execution.
    The Pilate inscription.
    Once Jesus was arrested, on Caiaphas’s orders, He was tried before Caiaphas and later sent to the Roman governor Pontius Pilate. The New Testament portrayal of Pilate agrees with other historical accounts. “Philo and Josephus unite in attributing dire and evil practices to Pilate, so that a dark character is ascribed to him” (The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, 1989, Vol. 3, p. 813).
    Philo, the Alexandrian Jewish philosopher (20 B.C.-A.D. 50), described Pilate as “a man of a very inflexible disposition, and very merciless as well as very obstinate.” He says Pilate’s rule was characterized by “corruption, . . . insolence, . . . cruelty, . . . continual murders of people untried and uncondemned, and his never ending, and gratuitous, and most grievous inhumanity” (The Works of Philo, translated by C.D. Yonge, “On the Embassy to Gaius,” pp. 301-302).
    Years after Christ’s crucifixion, Pilate was sent to Rome to undergo a humiliating trial after ordering the massacre of some Samaritan pilgrims. Eusebius, the fourth-century historian, notes that Pilate was found guilty and exiled. In his shame he later committed suicide. Such was the end of this proud and corrupt governor.
    For centuries Pilate was known only from scant historical records and the Gospels. No direct physical evidence had been found. Then, in 1961, a stone plaque engraved with Pilate’s name and title was discovered in Caesarea, the Roman port and capital of Judea in Christ’s day. “The two-foot by three-foot slab, now known as the Pilate Inscription, was . . . apparently written to commemorate Pilate’s erection and dedication of a Tiberium, a temple for the worship of Tiberius Caesar, the Roman emperor during Pilate’s term over Judea.
    “The Latin inscription of four lines gives his title as ‘Pontius Pilate, Prefect of Judea,’ a title very similar to that used of him in the Gospels (see Luke 3:1). This was the first archaeological find to mention Pilate, and again testified to the accuracy of the Gospel writers. Their understanding of such official terms indicates they lived during the time of their use and not a century or two thereafter, when such terms would have been forgotten” (Randall Price, The Stones Cry Out, 1997, pp. 307-308).

  101. Even more evidence that the Scriptures are truth and factual

    The Walls of Jericho.
    According to the Bible, the conquest of Jericho occurred in approximately 1440 B.C. The miraculous nature of the conquest has caused some scholars to dismiss the story as folklore. Does archaeology support the biblical account? Over the past century four prominent archaeologists have excavated the site: Carl Watzinger in 1907-1909, John Garstang in the 1930′s, Kathleen Kenyon in 1952-1958, and currently Bryant Wood. The result of their work has been remarkable.
    First, they discovered that Jericho had an impressive system of fortifications. Surrounding the city was a retaining wall fifteen feet high. At its top was an eight-foot brick wall strengthened from behind by an earthen rampart. Domestic structures were found behind this first wall. Another brick wall enclosed the rest of the city. The domestic structures found between the two walls is consistent with Joshua’s description of Rahab’s quarters (Josh. 2:15). Archeologists also found that in one part of the city, large piles of bricks were found at the base of both the inner and outer walls, indicating a sudden collapse of the fortifications. Scholars feel that an earthquake, which may also explain the damming of the Jordan in the biblical account, caused this collapse. The collapsed bricks formed a ramp by which an invader might easily enter the city (Josh. 6:20).
    Of this amazing discovery Garstang states, “As to the main fact, then, there remains no doubt: the walls fell outwards so completely, the attackers would be able to clamber up and over the ruins of the city.” This is remarkable because when attacked, city walls fall inward, not outward.
    A thick layer of soot indicates that the city was destroyed by fire as described in Joshua 6:24. Kenyon describes it this way. “The destruction was complete. Walls and floors were blackened or reddened by fire and every room was filled with fallen bricks.” Archaeologists also discovered large amounts of grain at the site. This is again consistent with the biblical account that the city was captured quickly. If it had fallen as a result of a siege, the grain would have been used up. According to Joshua 6:17, the Israelites were forbidden to plunder the city, but had to destroy it totally.
    Although the archaeologists agreed Jericho was violently destroyed, they disagreed on the date of the conquest. Garstang held to the biblical date of 1400 B.C. while Watzinger and Kenyon believed the destruction occurred in 1550 B.C. In other words, if the later date is accurate, Joshua arrived at a previously destroyed Jericho. This earlier date would pose a serious challenge to the historicity of the Old Testament.
    Dr. Bryant Wood, who is currently excavating the site, found that Kenyon’s early date was based on faulty assumptions about pottery found at the site. His later date is also based on the discovery of Egyptian amulets in the tombs northwest of Jericho. Inscribed under these amulets were the names of Egyptian Pharaohs dating from 1500-1386 B.C., showing that the cemetery was in use up to the end of the late Bronze Age (1550-1400 B.C.). Finally, a piece of charcoal found in the debris was carbon-14 dated to be 1410 B.C. The evidence leads Wood to this conclusion. “The pottery, stratigraphic considerations, scarab data and a carbon-14 date all point to a destruction of the city around the end of the Late Bronze Age, about 1400 BCE.”{8}
    Thus, current archeological evidence supports the Bible’s account of when and how Jericho fell.

  102. As years go by, we’ll have many more facts uncovered that prove the Holy Bible is filled with facts that God’s words are the truth and evolution is simply a theory that shows some excellent findings but are not the truthful way to understand the cosmos and mankind.

  103. “TIME IS ON OUR SIDE”

    Pity intelligence isn’t, eh?

    All dribble. Not worth reading.

    Your god has all the charisma of a spoilt child:- angry, temper throwing, spiteful and hateful.

    Like you both, ironically.

    Pathetic.

  104. Oh, just one thing, I can’t resist laughing at a fool (its wrong of me, I know)…

    “we’ll have many more facts uncovered that prove the Holy Bible is filled with facts”

    No you don’t. You have evidence the PLACES existed. So what? You have no proof of the rest of the garbage in these fables.

    The bible is simply myths based on real events. Warped with the narrow views of small people like you both.

    All you have written proves nothing, other than you are desperate to convince others of your lies.

  105. Brian Burton 10 Aug 2009, 9:14am

    Hank,
    Dream on you Silly Cow Bitch! You Keep on telling us what a Devils Advocate you are.
    TIME IS ON OUR SIDE, you say. What you obviousley don’t know is that TIME IS A THEIF, so time cannot and never will be on anyones’ side. You sad deluded Bitch! Carry on with your whoring elsewhere. Your local nut-house will accept you.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all