Scientist Predicts Evolution Debate Will Soon Be History

Richard Leakey, who is clearly oblivious to the fact that macro-evolution is no closer to being open and shut than it was in Darwin’s time, boldly predicts a great acceleration in discoveries that have proven elusive to date.

So let’s see…the High Church Atheists–Dawkins, Dennett, the late Hitchens, Harris, PZ Myers–have whined and wailed about the greatness of evolution, insisting that there is plenty of proof, without offering any.

Now Leakey has entered the fray, insisting that discoveries will accelerate to the point that the evolution debate will be open and shut, in favor–of course–of the evolutionists.

This in spite of the fact that these “discoveries” have been quite scarce for 150+ years post Darwin.

I’ll grant Leakey this much: while I have my doubts here, it is quite possible that the debate may go away in a few decades, although the nature of that outcome may very well be at variance with what he hopes.

News Flash: Cheating Can Be Bad For Your Heart

I found this article interesting.

Doctors have long known that men live longer if they consistently have sex into old age, but knocking boots only provides a health boost if it occurs with the same partner in a familiar place. Sex into old age only helps if you’re doing it with your spouse. Sudden coital death occurs most frequently when a man engages in coitus with a woman who is not his long-term partner.


What an Idiot Looks Like

Who is the idiot here? I’d submit that it is the man, Steven Silverstein.

While Kendra Platt-Lee certainly qualifies as a “gold-digger”–and Steven Silverstein is fortunate to be getting ditched now rather than after the wedding–he was a complete idiot for moving in with her and giving her access to his money.

Hopefully, he learns his lesson.

Just remember, ladies: folks like Kendra are doing you a disservice.

Trayvon Martin: The Reasonable Doubt Piles Up…

While criminal (and civil) trials are marketing efforts just as they are legal efforts, one always does well to remember that there are legal requirements for gaining criminal convictions.

When someone is accused of a crime, the legal standard for conviction is evidence that shows guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

But in the Trayvon Martin case, the reasonable doubt continues to pile up in favor George Zimmerman, who is accused of Murder 2.

The injury evidence alone is huge: it appears to back up Zimmerman’s story. The gashes, the broken nose, the black eye.

The fact that Zimmerman only shot once is indicative of someone not intending to kill an assailant. (Anyone knowledgeable of tactical issues knows that it is prudent to at least double-tap the assailant. I know of NRA instructors who recommend shooting the assailant at least three times.)

Making matters worse for the Trayvon Martin camp: Martin had THC in his system. He was at least partially impaired, and this would not bode well for his judgement.

Now, keep in mind, that none of this evidence shows who started the fight.

And THAT is the key issue.

If Martin started the fight, then none of the haggling means anything: Zimmerman is totally innocent.

If Zimmerman started the fight, then he is, at mininum, partially-negligent and, at worst, totally negligent.

The dilemma for the prosecution: the evidence does not jibe with the story of Zimmerman starting a fight. In order to believe the prosecution, Zimmerman picked a fight with a younger man who towered a foot over him.

I’m the same size as Zimmerman. I’m in excellent shape–less than 10% body fat, and strong cardiovascular and core/upper-body fitness–but have serious health issues (bad disks in my back, torn cartilage in my left knee).

But even in my prime, I would not consider starting a fight at all, let alone one with someone who had a one-foot height advantage on me. I find it very hard to believe that Zimmerman was that stupid.

I carry a firearm–and know how to use it. But, if anything, that makes me LESS likely to get into fights. This is because I know that, if I so much as draw my weapon, I’d better be ready to show–in a court of law–that my actions were totally justified.

In fact, Zimmerman’s actions–after the fact–tell me he is nothing if not innocent. He volunteered to talk to the cops; he trusted law enforcement to believe his side of the story.

Even though his father is a retired judge, he didn’t “lawyer up”. He could have asserted his Fifth Amendment rights, told the cops to go to Gehenna, hired the best lawyer he could find, and he would be totally in the clear.

Personally, what has transpired is an object lesson in why our Founding Fathers designed our Constitutional protections into our system. They knew–firsthand–how European legal systems, England in particular, railroaded innocent people.

While there are many good people among the ranks of prosecutors, keep in mind that they have competing interests.

In theory, prosecutors are supposed to be interested in going after only those people who are guilty. In reality, they are under pressure to get convictions, especially in high-profile cases where they have political aspirations.

Sadly, George Zimmerman has found this out the hard way.

If I were on the jury, I’m not seeing enough evidence to support even a negligent discharge of firearm conviction, let alone Murder 2 or manslaughter (voluntary or involuntary).

Back in Business

I suffered what appeared to be a catastrophic attack, such that the domain was suspended.

Due to being tied up with work-related matters, I was not able to get things back quickly, but it appears that we are back in business.

I had to nuke my old WordPress install and do a new one. I also nuked the user table. This was a necessary evil, but still evil.

Some of you–who had user accounts–will probably need new accounts. I will create them in the coming days.