Artistry Without an Artist?

Collage beauty 4

Dear Darwinist friend,

You mean to say that the dazzling array of heart-stopping beauty all around us is the result of a huge cosmic accident? That sunsets, strawberries, butterflies, waterfalls, roses, and hummingbirds are simply the product of blind bits of stardust randomly bumping into each other? That all this astounding artistry has no artist, and is merely the result of fortuitous, unplanned, unsupervised collisions of inert matter?

Courageous faith, indeed.

You are aware of the fact that the mathematical probability of such a thing happening is so absurdly remote that it is practically nonexistent. To hang your belief on a thread so slender demonstrates an outrageously massive amount of faith. To replicate the Mona Lisa by dripping colors from cans of paint swinging randomly on strings would be child’s play in comparison. Your unshakeable confidence in Darwin’s theory is astonishing.

Many of us simply can’t muster up that much faith.

The religious fervor with which you cling to this most tenuous hypothesis is remarkable. How did you come up with such an intrepid, daring, gusty, devil may care faith? Your unflinching certainty in a theory that faces such absurdly preposterous odds is incredible.

How did you get there? Is there something other than science that bolsters your belief? Are there other factors giving traction to your conviction? A faith of such astronomic audacity is uncanny.

Could it be there is something out there you desperately want NOT to believe?

Or perhaps someone you desperately want to AVOID?

I have a hunch there is.

And I strongly suspect it is God.

“For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened” (Romans 1:20,21 NIV).

-J. O. Schulz

The New Religion of Environmentalism


Religious bullies: How environmentalists are the new Puritans


Religion is fine, but problems begin when it is forced on others.  Proselytizing is the characteristic of Puritanism, which H. L. Mencken defined as “the haunting fear that someone, somewhere is having a good time.”

Mencken’s quote applied to traditional religious extremists but is equally applicable to extremists of the new religion of environmentalism. I know most people are tired of being bullied from the moral high ground that only these bullies care about the environment. Most want to do the right thing, but weary and turn away from constant moralizing.

It raises another problem I confronted years ago when people accused me of giving comfort to the polluters. Yes, that was a concern in the short term. However, I soon realized the level of deception, exaggeration, and falsification of information would give greater comfort in the long term. It is a classic example of crying wolf.

Later, when a wolf appeared nobody listened. When the people realize the degree of the deception and the damage done to society they will not listen to real problems, to the greater comfort of the polluter.

Environmentalists cried wolf almost from the start of the introduction of a legitimate paradigm shift, namely to living within the confines of a finite planet. They misled, exaggerated and made a multitude of false predictions to the detriment of the environment and people’s willingness to be aware and concerned. Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring was a major starting point. Carson claimed her husband’s cancer and death was due to DDT.  No evidence supported the claim, as Dr. J. Gordon Edwards explained.

I next looked up some of the references that Carson cited and quickly found that they did not support her contentions about the harm caused by pesticides. When leading scientists began to publish harsh criticisms of her methods and her allegations, it slowly dawned on me that Rachel Carson was not interested in the truth about those topics, and that I really was being duped, along with millions of other Americans.

In Eco-imperialism: Green Power, Black Death, Paul Driessen showed that banning DDT led to millions of unnecessary deaths from malaria with numbers that exceed deaths from AIDS in Africa. The figure is at least 90 million people. One authority says,

“One statistic often quoted is that, today, malaria kills about one million people every year, most of them children.”

Thousands of false stories made headlines over the last 40 years. All are conditional, that is prefaced by words like, ‘could’ and ‘maybe’, but the public only remembers the unconditional headlines.  Ultimately, the stories proved incorrect, but that is never reported. Remember the stories of sheep and rabbits going blind in Chile because of thinning ozone. Scientists at Johns Hopkins showed it was due to a local infection.  We heard of frogs born deformed because of human pollution. Biologist Stan Sessions showed it was due to a natural parasite. Each week some natural phenomenon is presented as unnatural and by implication due to human activity.  The question becomes, who to believe…