A Narrow Refutation of Ray Comfort’s Big Lie

Ray Comfort and his slow-witted imp, former child star Kirk Cameron, are committed to the claim that evolution is unsupported by the evidence, and that science demonstrates that there is a god / creator.
Of course, the only one they accept is the Jesus god – they dismiss all other creation stories as pagan devil worship and a ticket to eternal damnation – but they aren’t the sort to let hypocrisy slow them down.
It takes a certain sort of stubborn stupidity to refuse to understand the word evidence so dramatically.

In furtherance of their argument, however, both Ray and Kirk engage in outright lies. There are many, among them that there are no transitional fossils (of course there are – plenty of them), and that there has never been a “crocoduck” (Cameron adores this invented term without the slightest inclination that it demonstrates him a vapid, yammering moron), and that the banana is absolute proof of god because – get this – it’s so easy to hold! (snicker…guffaw!)

One particular lie, however, is both stunning in its depth and breadth, and particularly insulting in that it calls to their service not only one of the great minds in human history, but one which absolutely denied the existence of anything for which Ray Comfort or Kirk Cameron argue.
Both Ray and Kirk are fond of listing great scientists who, they assert, believed in god:

It presents a balanced view of Creationism with information on scientists who believed that God created the universe– scientists such as Albert Einstein, Isaac Newton, Nicholas Copernicus…

One should note that both Newton and Copernicus were long in their graves when Darwin published Origin of Species.
As regards Albert Einstein, the suggestion that he would, in any way shape or form, support the claim that the god of Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron was anything but myth – the desperate wish thinking of small minds – is not only wrong, it’s insulting. They are both pathetic liars.

I give you Albert Einstein’s OWN WORDS on the subject:

1. Albert Einstein: God is a Product of Human Weakness

The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this.

Letter to philosopher Eric Gutkind, January 3, 1954

2. Albert Einstein & Spinoza’s God: Harmony in the Universe

I believe in Spinoza’s God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings.

– Albert Einstein, responding to Rabbi Herbert Goldstein’s question “Do you believe in God?” quoted in: Has Science Found God?, by Victor J Stenger

3. Albert Einstein: It is a Lie that I Believe in a Personal God

It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.

– Albert Einstein, letter to an atheist (1954), quoted in Albert Einstein: The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas & Banesh Hoffman

4. Albert Einstein: Human Fantasy Created Gods

During the youthful period of mankind’s spiritual evolution, human fantasy created gods in man’s own image who, by the operations of their will were supposed to determine, or at any rate influence, the phenomenal world.

– Albert Einstein, quoted in: 2000 Years of Disbelief, James Haught

5. Albert Einstein: Idea of a Personal God is Childlike

I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one. You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our own being.

– Albert Einstein to Guy H. Raner Jr., Sept. 28, 1949, quoted by Michael R. Gilmore in Skeptic magazine, Vol. 5, No. 2

6. Albert Einstein: Idea of a Personal God Cannot be Taken Seriously

It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously. I also cannot imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere…. Science has been charged with undermining morality, but the charge is unjust. A man’s ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death.

– Albert Einstein, “Religion and Science,” New York Times Magazine, November 9, 1930

7. Albert Einstein: Desire for Guidance & Love Creates Belief in Gods

The desire for guidance, love, and support prompts men to form the social or moral conception of God. This is the God of Providence, who protects, disposes, rewards, and punishes; the God who, according to the limits of the believer’s outlook, loves and cherishes the life of the tribe or of the human race, or even or life itself; the comforter in sorrow and unsatisfied longing; he who preserves the souls of the dead. This is the social or moral conception of God.

– Albert Einstein, New York Times Magazine, November 9, 1930

8. Albert Einstein: Morality Concerns Humanity, Not Gods

I cannot conceive of a personal God who would directly influence the actions of individuals, or would directly sit in judgment on creatures of his own creation. I cannot do this in spite of the fact that mechanistic causality has, to a certain extent, been placed in doubt by modern science. My religiosity consists in a humble admiration of the infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little that we, with our weak and transitory understanding, can comprehend of reality. Morality is of the highest importance — but for us, not for God.

– Albert Einstein, from Albert Einstein: The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas & Banesh Hoffman

9. Albert Einstein: Scientists Can Hardly Believe in Prayers to Supernatural Beings

Scientific research is based on the idea that everything that takes place is determined by laws of nature, and therefore this holds for the action of people. For this reason, a research scientist will hardly be inclined to believe that events could be influenced by a prayer, i.e. by a wish addressed to a Supernatural Being.

– Albert Einstein, 1936, responding to a child who wrote and asked if scientists pray; quoted in: Albert Einstein: The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas & Banesh Hoffmann

10. Albert Einstein: Few Rise Above Anthropomorphic Gods

Common to all these types is the anthropomorphic character of their conception of God. In general, only individuals of exceptional endowments, and exceptionally high-minded communities, rise to any considerable extent above this level. But there is a third stage of religious experience which belongs to all of them, even though it is rarely found in a pure form: I shall call it cosmic religious feeling. It is very difficult to elucidate this feeling to anyone who is entirely without it, especially as there is no anthropomorphic conception of God corresponding to it.

– Albert Einstein, New York Times Magazine, November 9, 1930

11. Albert Einstein: Concept of a Personal God is the Main Source of Conflict

Nobody, certainly, will deny that the idea of the existence of an omnipotent, just, and omnibeneficent personal God is able to accord man solace, help, and guidance; also, by virtue of its simplicity it is accessible to the most undeveloped mind. But, on the other hand, there are decisive weaknesses attached to this idea in itself, which have been painfully felt since the beginning of history. …

– Albert Einstein, Science and Religion (1941)

12. Albert Einstein: Divine Will Cannot Cause Natural Events

The more a man is imbued with the ordered regularity of all events the firmer becomes his conviction that there is no room left by the side of this ordered regularity for causes of a different nature. For him neither the rule of human nor the rule of divine will exist as an independent cause of natural events. …

– Albert Einstein, Science and Religion (1941)

See also:

Einstein on Life After Death

Einstein’s Criticisms of Religion

Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron are welcome to their faith – I will defend to the death (well…maybe not quite that far) their right to jam their heads up their asses and yammer about sky wizards. But I don’t care for lies, especially ones that seek to draw support from a brilliant man who would dismiss them for the rather dull lads they are, never said anything remotely like what they imply, and who is not around to demand retraction.
Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron, you are liars. If you need to resort to such tactics in order to make your argument appear worthwhile, it must not be much of an argument (but there’s plenty enough evidence of that, isn’t there?)

Fuck off, Kirk Cameron, you liar!


6 Responses

  1. Ok, so Einstein says there’s no God. But Sarah Palin says God exists!!!

    • Well, you can’t argue with Sarah Palin.
      As my father was fond of saying, “Never argue with an idiot. If you do, that’s what the idiot is doing, too.”

  2. Hey, the banana thingy works! It fits my hand very nicely. And guess what else…. Hey, you can’t see me now can you?

  3. And my dick fits very nicely (albeit tightly) into vaginas. therefore, my dick is an act of God and must be in a vagina at all times.

  4. Einstein to Times:
    “I’m not an atheist. I don’t think I can call myself a pantheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn’t know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws.”

    You did not post that one for some reason!

    I agree that the thought of God is something that our minds cannot even begin to fathom. So I would have to say Einstein did not believe in the traditional thought of God as being human like, but maybe God is the very laws of physics and math that allows everything to be.

    • If THAT’S your god, you’ll get no argument from me.
      Start telling me that it INTERVENES in the affairs of men – monitors my thoughts, JUDGES good and evil, offers reward or punishment, then I simply say, “How did you get your head jammed that far up your ass?”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: