Saturday, April 30, 2005

News 2

Hey all. Well, happy birthday to me then, i just got a new skateboard deck!!! Oh yea, its the zero board i mentioned in "News 1". I got it at One Off, the best skateshop in Stockholm. i was going to get the almost board, but at Core, the other skateshop, the guys didn't even show any interest in me the potential customer. i walked in, wasn't even greeted, i asked a question, got no answer, and i went on my way. Sorry, but if you are going to get my money, make me interested in the product you are selling. So i went over to One Off and i chatted with this cool dude about skating while we set up my board. From now on im getting all my stuff there, they deserve it.

also, today is the day all the Swedes will be getting drunk around a bonfire. Funny thing is, after 2 weeks of dry weather, it decided to rain today, the only day they want to light a bonfire. hahahahaha!

anyhoo, 2 days till birthday.

peace dudes.

Friday, April 29, 2005

Hotel de Ville long 5, making us all look bad...

the master...

death 2...

the beginning of the end 2...

Jordan style kickflip!!!

the Parmelan laughing his butt off at my signature move!

Man, did i need haircut!

um, why the retarded look there?

News 1

Hello all.

Well, the infamous show-down between creationists and evolutionists that was due to unfold today was postponed if not cancelled, due to the absence of our beloved teacher Lesley Cooper. Though i had a good plan for the day (ie: let the others dig themselves into the ground, that means you, Simon), it was all laid to waste. So, instead, i had a chat about the class with a friend before he went off to drink for the weekend, i went board shopping in Stockholm and found a nice almost rodney mullen bowling board () , but im leaning towards a zero skull() more right now, though these euro board prices are a joke, and on the way back up i had a discussion with a friend on evolution and Christianity, and some new age person explained to me how the mind is in every cell in your body. Sweet.

I also got some new pics of my über friends and me skateboarding, so i'll give a bit of space to those pics after this.

Remember, my birthday is this monday, and i want cash.

peace dudes.

Monday, April 25, 2005

Creationist Rant 1.02

Hey all. well, i've been havin' somekind of discussion with this Umpire person in the section of Mynyms blog where you post comments, and here is what i have said so far. in here i raise a bit of points that i will probably comment on later on. im having a hard time getting a drive, so if one of you guys from my class could tick me off, that would be great.

ok, i guess this is a final comment for me.

so basicaly, you, mynym, has gone around looking for people who have posted "anti creationist" points of view, correct? and to each of them you sent a message, the same message, pointing to this post, correct?

well, i must say, that you are wrong in sending anything whatsoever to me, unless it be to let me have a link to some very interesting reading for my friends, because i agree with you.
im completely creationist and anti darwinian notions of macro evolution. i completely agree with what those 50 scientists have said on the subject of birds pointing towards intelligent design, because i believe God created us, and i would call his design intelligent.

therefore, i took offence that you point me to a pat on the back that you give people you are "beating" in logical debates, because, you haven't had one with me, you are preaching to the choir. so whatever, i thank you for pointing out your blog, that i must say is a very good read, but your indirect relations with whoever you send the message you sent me to is stupid, since you don't remember who and why you sent it, and you tick people off who agree with you.

so whatever dude, peace.

and for the guy who posted this to you: "There is no credible scientific movement questioning whether or not evolution happens.". what do you mean? do they say it all heppended 100% the way darwin says, or 100% that it didn't happen? i don't think you are right about this.

peace dude.
Patrick Webster | Homepage | 04.25.05 - 11:50 am | #

and for the guy who posted this to you: "There is no credible scientific movement questioning whether or not evolution happens.". what do you mean? do they say it all heppended 100% the way darwin says, or 100% that it didn't happen? i don't think you are right about this.

No, that is the point. Science is constantly revising. Science has moved far beyond Darwin's original work, just as physics has moved far beyond Newton and Einstein. But the question of whether or not species evolve from ancestors is not scientifically controversial--it is a matter of refining our understanding of the mechanisms.

Again, Creationsim is psuedo-science. You can argue against evolution all you want, but it is as widely accepted in science as is gravitation. Does this mean it can't be challenged should something come along that radically changes our scientific understanding? No. But that challenge will come from experts working in the scientific fields, not in the Vatican. Sorry. That is just the way it is. Scientists approach the world as skeptics and evidence and hypothesis testing is the name of the game. There is no evidence of creation the way you describe, especially because the mechanism of "intelligent design"--some God--has not been discovered nor are the psuedo-scientist "creationists" willing to discard that belief in the face of evidence. So read all you want about it, but you are barking up the wrong tree if you want to understand the way the world is.
Umpire | Homepage | 04.25.05 - 12:57 pm | #

i don't take orders from the vatican, im protestant. almost everything that comes from the vatican, i disregard, they are just a farce now.

also, i believe in evolution to a certain degree, but that term is misleading, i would call what i believe in, and what is scientifically proven , is adaptation of species.

Macro evolution, the amoeba-fish-reptile-bird-apes-monkeys thing, is completely unscientific, unproven and illogical. sorry, it is.

and i do believe there quite a few christian scientists, and not Vatican "specialists", and im pretty sure they don't accept evolution like you say they do gravitation. Read Creation Magazine, its pretty interesting.

so there is no evidence of intelligent design? what? did you read mynyms post, the quote from the book? the fact that chance evolution could not have produced the birds feather structure points to a design.
the fact that animals need to have been a certain way from the start to be viable is proof for design.

Who else but God could have designed it? unless you count little green men, no one. Oh, maybe Nature? right.

what is this evidence that disproves us "psuedo" scientists in our belief in a God? not to include myself on purpose.

that some animals "evolved" from ancestors i don't deny, but they have remained the same animal: the 3 finches Darwin based his premise on were still birds, just with different beaks.

i don't know if mynym wanted a debate or whatever in his comments, but anyways.

im not barking up the wrong tree, im peeing on the established, planted one, to kill it off and give my beliefs a bit of light.

i think that i shouldn't have to argue all i want, like you say, that means you REAL scientists aren't listening.

and its "pseudo"

peace dude.
Patrick Webster | Homepage | 04.25.05 - 1:17 pm | #

Ha ha, Creation Magazine?

From that rag:

Answers in Genesis is an apologetics (i.e., Christianity-defending) ministry, dedicated to enabling Christians to defend their faith, and to proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ effectively. We focus particularly on providing answers to questions surrounding the book of Genesis, as it is the most-attacked book of the Bible. We also desire to train others to develop a biblical worldview, and seek to expose the bankruptcy of evolutionary ideas, and its bedfellow, a "millions of years old" earth (and even older universe).

Are you serious? They think "millions of years old" is the scientific claim? They aren't even up to speed on the age of the earth (4 billion years) according to their "opponents" who supposedly won't give them the time of day. Gee, maybe they would have more of a clue if they had read a scientific journal during the last century. That is not science, my friend; that is Gospel. Where are the experiments? Where is the analysis?

Look, the problem with creationism is that it sees science as being impermiable because it doesn't understand what science is. Scientific inquiry, in fact, subsumes all of these arguments and encourages dissent--something creationism quite freely admits it cannot tolerate. Creationists are committed to a belief in God and that is the basis for their "inquiry" even though it is only even relevent to the question of evolution because some fundamentalist Christians can't tolerate the possibility that Genesis was not literal. Science requires repeatable experiments and then rigorous peer review.

I will just ask you this: what do you think science is?
Umpire | Homepage | 04.25.05 - 1:51 pm | #

i said to read the magazine, not the site.
and, um, they are right, 4000 miilion years is, in fact, 4 billion years. i agree that they aren't up to date there, but read the magazine.

but whatever.

honestly, do you think that the main theories, evolutionnary and a big bang, are really questionned as much as you would have it? why is it then that we (that is the masses) have only ever heard about these 2? its because you can't have religion in school, and you can have "science", so what is indoctrinated is accepted, and the scientific community embraces that and keeps the same appelations and theories.

creationism sees it as impermiable, because, in this case, it is. the major theories haven't really been changed, and the scientific community has failed to give any sort of experimentation proving its basic premises.

In the national geographic special about evolution, it entirely avoided main topics of debate, brought nothing new to the floor, and completely disregarded flaws in the theory. all it did was proclaim it as fact.

as for the genesis being taken literally, you could say that the stroy of creation must be taken literally, as there is a time line, dictated by God to Moses. that there are metaphors, of course, like God walking through the garden, his voice etc.

is science really submitted to rigorous peer review? it would seem to me that the reason you don't hear any good light about any challengers is proof of quite to opposite.

also, do you think scientists would be willing to lose their funding and their jobs to challenge the religion imposed upon the community? has any experiment proven the basic premises of the theory that us creationist deem unacceptable? Has there really been any open challenging of this theory, non censored by the community?
i do not think so. science isn't that pure. so many parts of the main theories are assumptions, and fact is interpreted through an evolutionnary lens, and is not objective at all.

draw a circle, but omit a section of it. an evolutionnist will say it was once a full circle, when actually it was drawn this way, and there is no way for the circle to have been a full one and lose the right parts to make the design. thats somethjing i cannot understand. the leaps of faith evolutionnary scientists do.

what is science? Its observation.

man cannot create anything, except out of already present materials. science is observation of the world by man, of how it works. man can only observe, and deduce. when you do an experiment, all you are doing is recreating results to observe further. only when something is observed enough does it become "proven". i can prove Gods, or at least an intelligent designs, existence by observing nature. if something isn't observed, like macro evolution, it isn't scientific. if it hasn't been observed in a controlled experiment, it hasn't been "proven". keep that in mind: man can only observe. science is just observation, deduction, guesses, and then more observation. often the guesses are so far from the truth, it cannot be proven, so it hangs in the air. the evolution theory is just hanging, and everyone wants it to be observed, but it cannot, as it is impossible.

so then i leave you with these questions which i don't think you need to answer to me: does it not bug you, the fact that you know that science can't prove everything? that at some point spirituality takes place? that you are really if you believe in evolution just some randomly assembled chemicals, given enough time to use freak chance to become cognisant enought to realise you are part of the equation time+chance+nothing=everything?

if we are just animals, then we should only have the basic instincts intrinsic in our survival, right? so, we would have no reason to come up with some God. but, the fact that you can comprehend a being superior to yourslef and think about this, proves it exists, right? how would you answer this question: are you a body or do you HAVE a body? if you answer the first one, then respect to you, you actually believe what you say about evolution. if you answer the second one, you are admitting that God exists.

peace dude.

mynym, please explain to me why you wrote please!
Patrick Webster | Homepage | 04.25.05 - 4:26 pm | #

Umm no, I can certainly envision a unicorn and an enormous mosquito dressed like Mrs. Doubtfire, but that does not prove that either exist.

Really, Creation Mag is a rag. And I am calling bullshit on your description of the scientific community. You seem to mistake "scientific community" for "what I know after being introduced to material in freshman biology class." Scientists are specialists. They constantly refine theories. You are just flat incorrect about this. Factually incorrect.
Umpire | Homepage | 04.25.05 - 6:23 pm | #

oh, wow. that really proved me wrong right there. call a bullshit all you want, if the theory is so refined, you would think more people would have seen any kind of flaw in it, or at least have disproved my point of view since then, if it is sooooo widely accepted as you say.

and for any future reference, as im not gonna respond here anymore, its PSEUDO, not "psuedo".

peace dude.
Patrick Webster | Homepage | 04.26.05 - 10:09 am | #

well, that will be it. he completely disproved me man, like completely! i have no more leg to stand on! all structure for my arguments was completely destroyed!!


peace dudes.

Sunday, April 24, 2005

Creationist Rant 1.01

Hey all. well, it seems i have a reader.
i would like to thank the persona of Mynym who posted a comment to my previous hate filled ranting post on Darwin (Creationist Rant 1, see link in sidebar) with a link to a very interesting post of his own about creationism, which is a very interesting read: take a look: Mynym post and creationists

some chosen quotes: There is no genetic information within reptile scales to allow such a unique device as the sliding joint of a feather to be made. The tortuous route suggested by some of small “advantaged mutations” to scales leads to clumsy structures which are, in fact, a disadvantage to the creature. Not until all the hook and ridge structure is in place is there any advantage, even as a vane for catching insects! Unless one invokes some “thinking ahead” planning, [Mommy Nature making selections?] there is no way that chance mutations could produce the “idea” of the cross- linking of the barbules to make a connecting lattice. Even if the chance mutation of a ridge/hook occurs in two of the barbules, there is no mechanism for translating this “advantage” to the rest of the structure. This is a classic case of irreducible complexity which is not consistent with slow evolutionary changes, but quite consistent with the notion of design.

As one might expect, however, the story does not end there either, for a bird can fly only because it also has an exceedingly light bone structure, which is achieved by the bones being hollow. Many birds maintain skeleton strength by cross members within the hol low bones. Such an arrangement began to be used in the middle of this century for aircraft wings and is termed the “Warren’s truss arrangement.” Large birds, such as an eagle or a vulture, would sim ply break into pieces in midair if there were some supposed halfway stage in their skeletal development where they had not yet “developed” such cross members in their bones.

(Essay by Andrew Mcintosh
In Six Days: Why Fifty Scientists Choose to Believe in Creation
Edited by John Ashton)

read the comments after his post too.
as far as i can tell, mynym agrees with me about how incredibly illogical and unfounded the evolution theory is and how people try to justify it imaginarily. you should too ;)

peace dudes.

Saturday, April 23, 2005

Dan the Man! sweet as heck nosegrab down 4!

you know you want me...

Laura? what are you doing there?

MMMMM, doggay!

Ahhhhhh!!! he bit me!! that stupid $*%§, he bit me!!!


the beginning of the end...

4, count with me, 1 2 3 4.

Dan the man!




w00t??? camera scare stinks0rz to the 13370rz!

United we stand...

Band of Brothers

Forever Annecy

Beautiful Annecy.

Skate mission to france.

Hey all. This just in, the pics from my dads camera of the skate mission to France this past easter break. Im still waiting for the humpty Dumpty dudes over there at Bad Label to follow through with the rest of their pics from the skate dream.

Anyhoo, the next few posts will be selected pics from this journey.

peace dudes.


New album cover man!!!! you gotta love animated bands!!!

Music update.

I love Gorillaz. Their first self intitled album is one of my favorites, i can listen to every one of their songs in a row and never get sick of them. Well, they are coming out/have come out with a new album, intitled demon dayz (album cover next post), and their first single can be sampled at

In other news, Daft Punk has come out with an absolutely awesome new album intitled Human After All, which i listened to in its entirety on someones iPod on the way back from Åre. Man, i need me one of those. Their kick butt song Robot Rock can be heard here: and let me tell you, its awesome.

so there we go, 2 new albums, must haves i might say.

peace dudes.

Wednesday, April 20, 2005

Creationist Rant 1

He was right. Darwin. All right the whole way. When he said: "I will be the most detested person in history", well, he was right. I hate to say it, but score one for the dude.
But i wouldn't say i hate him because he is against my faith. Heck, a lot of people i know and love are contrary to what i believe in; this IS Sweden after all. No, its not that.

I don't really know where to start on this one. I've been like: "ohh, i just got a blog, i need to write a final thesis once and for all against Darwin and his insult to science!". But whatever i say/type, it will always be incomplete, and will never be perfect in my eyes. I will never meet an end to accusations i can find against this pseudo-scientific theory that is his theory of evolution. As much as i trust God, i don't see any end to whatever mockery for non conformists like myself. And there will never be an end to new arguments to disprove it, even though the arguments that would end it forever are already out there. Just ignored.

Why start typing now? Because im on a roll. Im so ticked off at so many people in my entourage right now, i might aswell profit on this surge in distaste for what this theory has done to human logic, reason, and free thought. Today, and let the record show it is the 20th of April 2005 right now, in history class, in a school that wants freedom of opinion so much as to forbid any kind of Nazi group to form, we watched what i hoped and expected not to be shown, knowing the context of the class: a show teaching the evolution theory as fact, and "exposing" skeptics like myself as people who refuse to see the light, and people who would have made genetics and modern day science a dream.

Bullshit. Im sorry, that's what it is. Genetics was added onto the theory, it did not spawn from it. Modern day science was well on its way before Darwin came around. Total, utter, BS, doing what people at war(which that is where we are at right now, right? war?) do and try to paint the adversary as a "bad" person, who doesn't want the greater good, and who is completely mistaken, forever and always, and must come to see the truth, by force if necessary.
And it is working: separation of church and state makes the theory of evolution the only taught "origins of the world" concept in schools, leaving creationism and any other far out there. People might only have been confronted with it when we are at my level, here in Gymnasium. But by this time, its almost too late: if its the only truth ever taught, then people will already be too indoctrinated to change their view on the world, and let alone listen to any other point of view.

that's the first thing that bugs me: its taught as fact. Not as something that is proposed, not yet proven completely, and really just the anti-religious theory thought up and changed by scientists from Darwins original work to fit a populace still clinging to a notion of God (no, no, no God, but Nature? Yea, that's good, Nature. Sounds better.).
No, its taught as cold, hard fact. And with evidence to support it!!! Really? Because it seems to me that every scientific find is looked at through the evolutionary lens: we adapt fact to the theory, and not the theory to the fact. Which is logically stupid and completely non scientific. Everything we find in science somehow seems to point to evolution immediately, without ever any question be brought against it. So is this proof of evolution then, if everything points to it? No. Because similarity doesn't equal relationship, and because the leaps of faith made to attribute something to the evolution theory are completely absurd scientifically (more on that some other time.).

We live in a world constantly changing, that defies the understanding of man, and that cannot be explained except through cosmic accident and freak evolutionary chance. Or so they would want you to believe. All this why? Because it keeps God out of the picture. Safer, right?

Fact is, there are tons of other theories, but that don't get any funding, are shut down, and the scientists who would want to research other ideas to better help human knowledge are ridiculed and often lose their jobs. Yea, you don't really think about this, do you? I mean, the scientific world looks united behind a solid front in evolutionism, right? Nah, not really. Like i said, anyone who doesn't agree with the established "religion" will lose funding. So people shut up, keep quiet and forget about it. You can't fight the man, he owns your soul already. Wow, where have i heard this before? Oh right, its what people say about the Catholic Church: its corrupt! It doesn't realize when its wrong! New breakthrough people get persecuted! They killed everyone who doesn't agree with them! Well, with a closer look, it looks as if the scientific community does the same thing, no?

Seriously now, if the schools really wanted that goal, to educate the students on how to think, reason and enounce clearly, do you think they would still teach one dogma as fact, only confronting another predominant theory when it gets in the way? No, i don't think so.
But wait! that's propaganda! Brain washing! Huh? that's what they are supposedly preventing when they censor the Nazi group!!!?? Nah, the school doesn't want any trouble with the scientific community, and being a religious school (read: teaches 2 points of view) isn't very attractive to most of these atheist Europeans right? right. So good to see we agree.

But so what is so threatening about 2 points of view? I mean, then the kids can decide for themselves right? None of my friends here are stupid. They can decide for themselves what to believe and know when they are being lied to.
Well, this is what every dictatorship feared: if you give any other point of view, human freedom of thought starts going, and next thing you know, people start seeing holes in the system, glaring logical fallacies in the states truths, and most importantly, they start questioning the establishment and realize this isn't something they need to take intravenously: imagine if tomorrow, all billion and a half of Chinese people get free, unrestricted access to the internet, do you think they will keep accepting the communist government's brainwash and censorship? No, not really.
Its the same here, if the established theory were questioned more often, then the now enlightened populace could decide for themselves what the truth is, what they are willing to be taught, and what the truth actually is. How can anyone disagree with me here: if the evolution theory were to be challenged more often, maybe even in debates, whatever, and it holds water against accusations, then this will strengthen the theory, right? If it can stand up to all adversaries, then by all means let it compete and i will shut up forever if it does indeed win.
Come on Darwin, show the world what you are truly made of, so that any one against your theory will get served his butt with all the trimmings! Hahahaha!

But that won't happen. I know that, and i hope you realise that too.
What took the Berlin wall down and caused the fall of communism? Yes, a bit of the late Pope, but mostly a renewed freedom of expression and speech and a realization of being manipulated and wanting what is rightfully theirs: freedom.
What knocked the French monarchs out of power? The English out of America? The revolution in Ukraine? Yea, the same: a realization of being manipulated and wanting what is rightfully theirs: freedom.

But i doubt that'll happen. This is a very powerful dictatorship to topple, this Darwinian absolutism. Why? Because the population actually believes it, and doesn't want to confront what will happen sooner or later: a realization that this isn't all there is, and that i whish to have a meaning in this seemingly meaningless world.

yea, its a stretch, and the likes of me are reeeeeaaaaally a threat to most people. OOHH BOY! Don't let the kid tell anyone something that might provoke their intellect! Here in Sweden though, they have it figured out: no confrontation, you' re right, im right, lets find common ground and leave it at that, lets not discuss anything i don't want to hear anything about. Basically: don't confuse me with another version, I've already made up my mind.
When my older sister was here, we developed a thing to explain the general European sentiment towards religion, and how they cope with told what they don't want to hear:

It used to be that you could lead a horse to water, but not make him drink. Well, nowadays, its more along these lines: you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him believe there is any water. Heck, your water is fine for you, and my water is fine for me, and in the end, its all the same water. What? How dare you insinuate that my water isn't as good as your water?! I've been searching a long time, and this is the water that suites me, its comfortable. Hey dude, you know, you actually can't know that there is any water at all.

Pretty interesting right? But its all there, almost every single reply to me is there, in that metaphor.

Today on the train, i had a discussion with a friend on Darwin, and among other things that i might mention later (rhetoric and the like), there was a thing she said to me that hit hard: " well, you are so sure about what you say! You've already made up your mind on the matter, and you aren't open to anything else." I've heard this before, from many people: keep an open mind! Keep an open mind!

Well, guess what? My mind is open, its just that at one point in time, i decided i won't compromise what i believe in on grounds of conformity and non aggression. You can't keep an open mind on a matter where the 2 main ideas are directly opposite: there is almost no common ground, you have to choose on or the other. And i have chosen. Now, that i don't listen to any other arguments is not true, i listen, but i have an answer for most of them, because they are wrong, wether logicaly unsound or just easily disproven, and that i don't accept them without a fight, that i won't leave anything at that and not disprove it is probably what annoys people the most: i never shut up. I never stop debating when i have a valuable argument, and when i am sure i can WIN. im French, i fight for what i believe in, even if its an unpopular revolution. It appears as if i don't listen, don't keep an open mind, that's only because i have yet to be proven wrong, and that i have answers to the questions and counter arguments that i belive are enough to disprove the arguments that i have heard fom the opposite party: i haven't, and won't, lose in this matter, because a lie cannot win over truth. Ever.

Yea im a cocky self praising sun of a gun, right? Well, whatever dude. If i were to be proven 100% wrong tomorrow, i would of course not believe in this anymore. im not that stubborn. I do recognize when im wrong. But i can't be proven wrong here. Yah, its because it about God, and you can't prove he exists/ doesn't exist is what you are saying right? Well i guess its partly due to that, but also its because your dogma is flawed: it has holes the size of a us truck driver in it, It cannot win against the Truth, and a number of things in it are blatant logical errors and completely unscientific, hypocritical and contradictory. And these aren't just some details im talking about, the whole thing stands in quicksand: the whole thing is a Titanic, looking strong and insurmountable, but that can and will be sunk by the faintest of icebergs.

But that will be for some other time. In the mean time, ponder these Bible passages:

For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.
For they exchanged the Truth of God for a lie, and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
-Romans 1:20, 25

peace dudes.

Sunday, April 17, 2005

Åre part 2

this is an awesome collage thanks to picasa. my dad had the perfect angle on these pics. 360 madness!

Åre part 1

I see the Lords magificence in this world. How extraordinary is His Creation's beauty!
this picture is one of the best anyone has ever taken of me. its just beautiful. thanks dad!

Lo Bob.

Hello everyone.

well, i guess my e life has just gotten even more interesting, im finally getting into this blog thingy.
i don't want to be like one those failed novelists, just hoping someone will read this to continue living in denial about my sorry life. this is just another excuse to hog the computer.

truth is, my life kicks butt. tremendous butt. ginormous butt.

this blog, paying tribute to my american nationality, is pre emptive, in the sense that i might need it for school purposes, and it will help me keep up with my friends when we eventually part ways. also as a tribute, it will be completely self centered and ignorant of other people's problems.

this blog, paying tribute to my french nationality, will be full of opinions and ideals that won't be compromised ever, for anyone: im right, you're wrong, end of story, deal with it.

also, this will alow me to reflect on my impact in sweden as the first TEAM MK to sweden, serving God in this lost country.

anyways, peace dudes.
God Bless.

(most pictures posted via hellos bloggerbot: