Peanut Butter: The Atheist's Nightmare?
Mikey 9 comments
I am not too sure what to make of this one, because it comes across as quite serious but at the same time I find it gob-smacking to believe these people would be genuine.
Satire? Or a laughable creationist theory? You be the judge.
While you are at it, check out this one which is along the same lines but meant to be taken seriously.
Aldo
Sunday 4th November 2007 | 01:57 PMWhat a f*cktard. Is he really comparing the energy created from a bolt of lighting (around 120 million volts) and the heat of a typical volcano (around 1000 degrees celsius) with the ambient light/energy present in a peanut butter jar? And is he expecting to find life? Did he conveniently leave out the part that life still takes millions of years to evolve?
The funny think is his whole argument actually works more in favour of evolution.
Rodney
Sunday 4th November 2007 | 02:09 PMIn typical Internet comment style, I haven't bothered to watch the movie but plan to comment anyway :-p
(Actually I have seen this one a year or so ago... and yeah, it's really dumb).
None the less, coz these topics provide such fertile ground for long rallies (discussions), I'm going to provide the 'devil's advocate' viewpoint here.
As a quick disclaimer, I am not agreeing with the peanut butter movie nor do I subscribe to the crazy intelligent design theories it comes with. Of course I believe in evolution. But let's just play the game properly - one rule has to suit all sides. Please remember I'm kicking this conversation off for fun, not coz I believe the peanut butter man!
Firstly: "This is because lightning is a concentrated burst of energy and generates a significant amount of microwave radiation".
Microwaves are produced when electrons are sped up massively then slowed down rapidly, i.e. by firing at a metal plate (this is how your home microwave does it). They are best known for exciting water molecules by increasing their kinetic energy (commonly called "cooking"). This has a disastrous effect on living tissue, in large amounts.
How do you then equate this to bringing about life through a lightning strike?
That aside, let's flip the same old argument back around. People always say, if God created everything, who created God. Okay fine. If lightning created life, what did it create it out of? If you strike mud (silicon + hydrogen + oxygen) and lava (iron + silicon + other heavy metals) with lightning (electricity), exactly how does this result in a complex Carbon based life form instantly springing into existence (and even the most simple single cell organism is pretty complex, really)?
Let's assume the lightning hit a block of carbon in the ground and vaporised it. This then mixed with other elements near by causing the exact necessary carbon-chain organic mix for a single cell organism. So explain why if in a laboratory, you artificially mix the exact same ingredients they don't live. You get the right carbon-chain but it doesn't reproduce and breathe, unless you allow it to become contaminated with an external sample containing something already living, like non-sterilised air. How does that fit into the lightning argument?
At the end of the day, we can always play the same game... so where did x come from. There's really only two answers to that question. Either you always say "something before hand" and then repeat the game or eventually you say, something bigger than we understand and call it God. None the less, it's a fun game! :-)
Hoggy
Sunday 4th November 2007 | 03:12 PMWell after watching that this image can finally be taken as literal
Rodney
Sunday 4th November 2007 | 04:40 PMhaha gold! Love Family Guy's approach... :-)
Brian
Sunday 4th November 2007 | 07:30 PM"Its peanut budder jelleh tarm!!!!"
andrew
Monday 5th November 2007 | 04:21 PMpeanut paste eh, well didn't we evolve from apes and what do apes like to eat, peanuts!!! so there u go there is life in that jar of peanut paste......
Aldo
Monday 5th November 2007 | 05:59 PMAndrew you are forgetting that creationists have a brain the size of a peanut.
Jake
Sunday 4th November 2007 | 12:25 PMThis is a grossly simplified argument. The lightning theory is quite viable and plausible. This is because lightning is a concentrated burst of energy and generates a significant amount of microwave radiation. The lightning being produced at the time, billions of years ago, would have also been significantly different to that which we experience today. It is likely that it would be similar to that generated in the pyroclastic atmosphere and resulting clouds that follow a volcanic eruption. Many different types of intense radiation can be generated in such clouds simultaneously as the atmosphere is totally different inside those clouds (i.e. not just N, O2 and CO2).
In saying that, this is absolutely the type of demented, closed minded, deluded and poorly researched propaganda that I've come to expect from the fundamentalist creationists.