Category: Science

  • Did Dinosaurs Walk the Earth During Noah’s Time?

    Most Evangelicals are young earth creationists, though an increasing number of them are theistic evolutionists — God is the force, the mover behind evolution. Some Evangelicals are old earth creationists or day-age creationists. This allows them to distance themselves from crazy young earth creationists, even though their beliefs are just as nutty. Regardless of the belief, all of them believe the universe came into existence because “God did it.”

    According to Bishop James Ussher’s seventeenth century chronology, God created the universe in six twenty-hour days, 6,029 years ago. While other chronologies exist, Ussher’s seems to be the one that stuck with Evangelicals. Imprecise Evangelicals will say the universe is 6,000, 7,000, or 10,000 years old, but Ussher usually lurks in the shadows, even if few believers remember his name.

    I was a hardcore young earth creationist for most of my life. In the early 2000s, my beliefs bit by bit moved towards scientific consensus, and by the time I deconverted in 2008, I was no longer a creationist.

    As a young pastor, evolution was a favorite sermon target of mine, even though the only science training I had was general science and biology classes in high school, and a worthless biology class in college. I had no business talking about science in my sermons — much like preachers who pontificate about evolution today. “Evolution” is a buzzword used by Evangelical preachers to call the faithful to duty and commitment. “Them evil commies are coming for our kids with Satanic “evil-ution, ho-mo-sex-u-al-ity, rock and roll, Mary Jane, and premarital sex.” None of the church kids in youth group during the days when I heard such sermons became communists as adults. That other stuff? Most of us engage in them to some degree or the other, proof again that this sort of preaching never works (over the long term).

    One Sunday, I was preaching on the second coming of Jesus. He’s still late, decades later. During this fine piece of Baptist oratory, I brought up the hole in the ozone layer — a hot topic of discussion in the 1980s. I heartily laughed, as I thundered from the pulpit, “Who cares if there’s a hole in the ozone layer!” That’s just a bigger hole for Jesus to come through when he returns to earth.” Like that “deep” exegesis? 🤣 Yes, I’m embarrassed that I said dumb shit like that. I was in my 20s and 30s, lacking basic science training past middle school. My understanding of science wasn’t much different from that of my colleagues in the ministry, and most of the people I pastored had no science training beyond high school.

    In the 1970s forward, creationist “experts” traveled the land indoctrinating Evangelical church members in young earth creationism. (This is when Dr. Dino, Kent Hovind, got his start on the creationism circuit.) My first remembrance of a “creation conference” comes from 1979. At the time, I was the assistant pastor of Montpelier Baptist Church in rural northwest Ohio. Montpelier Baptist was a fast growing church, reaching 500 in attendance in October 1979. The church was filled with young adults excited to learn the truth about “science,” cults, and the end times. I still remember the buzz in the packed building when these subjects were addressed by Pastor Stuckey. We heard sermons on all the hot theological subjects and conspiracy theories. Good times? In the moment, yes. Think of being in the front row of a rock concert. Good time? In the moment, yes. However, morning follows night, and now you feel like you have been run over by a truck — twice. That’s how I feel about the 50 years I spent in Evangelicalism, especially the 25 years I devoted to the pastorate.

    The church brought in John Whitcomb to hold a creation conference. The building was filled with people as Whitcomb indoctrinated them in young earth creationism. Henry Morris’ and Whitcomb’s 1961 book, The Genesis Flood, was popular at the time. I owned the book, so I was familiar with his beliefs. I was excited to have an “expert” teach me the truth about science, creationism, Adam and Eve, and dinosaurs.

    These conferences turned ignorant preachers into science experts — in their own minds, anyway. If you have spent any time in Evangelical or Independent Fundamentalist Baptist (IFB) churches, you likely have heard sermons about science, evolution, and creationism. Maybe you even attended a creation conference or two. Did you ever question the qualifications of these “experts?” Probably not. Evangelicals tend to give too much respect and deference to men behind pulpits and lecterns. Few people bother to ask if the person speaking is qualified to teach on these subjects. Sadly, way too many “experts” are anything but. Going to an Evangelical preacher for your science knowledge is akin to thinking that eating a Big Mac at McDonald’s is fine dining. No one in their right mind would confuse McDonald’s with Ruth’s Chris Steak House. So it is with trusting Evangelical preachers to teach scientifically correct science. These preachers were indoctrinated just as their congregants were by them. Ignorance is multigenerational in Evangelical churches. It is not surprising that most church members are young earth creationists, and those who aren’t typically keep their mouths shut lest they be outed as “liberals.”

    In the early 80s, I attended a Bible conference at the Newark Baptist Temple in Heath, Ohio, pastored at the time by Polly’s uncle, James Dennis. I believe Jack Hyles was the headliner — uh I mean humble servant of God. 🤣 Afterward, I had a delightful discussion with the Glen West, the principal of the church’s Christian school. We jabbered back and forth before landing on dinosaurs. Both of us believed dinosaurs existed with humans on earth before Noah’s flood.

    Somewhere in the discussion, Henry Morris and John Whitcomb’s book came up. Both of us had read the book — two “intellectuals” discussing the finer points of science. I was pleased that Glen recognized my “scholarly” knowledge. It was nice to talk to someone on my level. Alas, this was little more than the blind leading the blind.

    I want to think Glen’s science knowledge increased over the past forty-five years, but he’s an Evangelical preacher, so I doubt it. Mine, on the other hand, has increased incrementally over years, though I will never be anything more than a rank novice.

    As a grandfather, I’m pleased to watch my older grandchildren choose STEM programs for their training at Ohio State University, Miami University, and Trine University respectively. Other grandkids coming behind them have STEM interests too.

    I can’t imagine — oh, I can, and I shudder to think — what kind of educations these kids would have received had our family remained Evangelicals and Grandpa was still a fire breathing Baptist preacher. Fortunately, the curse has been broken. Two of my granddaughters are taking college evolutionary biology this coming year. I relish the day when we can sit down at the pub and they can school Gramps on science. Maybe we can have a rousing discussion about endogenous retroviruses.🤣

  • The Bible Says What?: Which Person on Noah’s Ark Had Gonorrhea?

    bible says what

    According to young earth creationists, God destroyed the world with a flood that killed every living creature on earth, save Noah and his family. Millions of humans and billions of innocent animals died. There’s no evidence that this story took place, but millions of Christians and Muslim believe it.

    Gonorrhea is totally a human-restricted infection, one that has afflicted humans for thousands of years. The disease may have jumped from cattle to humans originally.

    The Journal of Skin and Sexually Transmitted Diseases says:

    Gonorrhea is one of the oldest sexually transmitted infections (STIs) known to humankind. There is some conflict of opinion regarding its exact origin, but according to the general consensus, the disease has been present from the ancient times. A disease resembling gonorrhea was described by the Chinese emperor, Huang Ti (2600 BC) in his textbook. It is believed that the mention of “an issue of seed” in the Book of Leviticus in the Old Testament and the precautions suggested refers to this disease. Gonorrhea was termed “strangury” by Hippocrates (460–375 BC) who claimed that it resulted from the “pleasures of Venus.” Celsus (25 BC–50 AD) was well aware of gonorrhea and its complications. He used to catheterize patients with urethral strictures. The Greek physician, Galen (131–200 AD) coined the term “gonorrhea” and he referred to it as “an unwanted discharge of semen” (gono: seed, rhea: flow)

    According to the Bible, only Noah, his family, and the animals on the ark survived God’s genocidal destruction of most life on earth. If gonorrhea is a solely human infection, and there were only eight humans on Noah’s big boat, which one of them had gonorrhea?

    Bruce Gerencser, 69, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 48 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.

    Your comments are welcome and appreciated. All first-time comments are moderated. Please read the commenting rules before commenting.

    You can email Bruce via the Contact Form.

  • My Evolving Understanding of Our Place in the Universe

    preaching about evolution

    I spent the first fifty years of my life in the Evangelical church. I was taught and later preached as a pastor young earth creationism. Parents, preachers, Sunday school teachers, and Bible college professors taught me the universe was 6,000 years old, created out of nothing by the triune God of the Bible in six literal 24 hour days. Most importantly, I was taught that the earth and its human inhabitants are the pinnacle of God’s creative work. In other words, we are s-p-e-c-i-a-l. Not the other animals on earth, just us. Further, I was taught that we humans had dominion and control of the earth.God is the owner of the earth and we are its caretakers.

    Sadly tens of millions of Americans believe the creation myths — yes, plural — recorded in Genesis 1-3. The blame for this rests solely on the shoulders on Evangelicals. and now, through subversive programs such as Lifewise Academy, public school students are being taught young earth creationism, including trips to the Creation Museum and the Ark Encounter — Ken Ham’s monuments of ignorance.

    After I deconverted in 2008, it became clear to me that I didn’t know much of anything about science. My entire understanding of science was based on what I learned in high school biology and a college biology class without a lab or a qualified teacher. As a pastor, I believed that only science book I needed was the King James Bible. This led to me saying all sorts of absurd things about science — embarrassingly so. Fortunately, my congregant were as ignorant as I was about science, so we all shouted AMEN together when I mentioned the creative acts of God.

    I have spent the last twenty years educating myself not only about science, but also about logic and philosophy. Over time, reason, skepticism, and common sense delivered me from some of my ignorance, but I will admit that I still have a lot to learn.

    Science has taught me that the Evangelical worldview is false. The earth and its human dwellers are not the center of universe, nor are they unique. Special, we are not. We are itty-bitty people with itty-bitty brains on an itty-bitty planet in a vast, mostly unexplored universe. In other words, we are a planet of nobodies; people who will live and die, never to be remembered again. A harsh reality, to be sure — and why so many stay irrationally attached to religious faith — but knowing and understanding this can and does help us focus on the here and now. No Heaven. No Hell. No Purgatory. No afterlife. No second chances. This is it. What will we do with this life of ours? I, for one, want to live every day to its fullest. I suspect you do too. When I look at Voyager One’s pale blue dot, I am reminded of how lucky I am to be alive in this corner of the Milky Way.

    pale blue dot

    Dr. Carl Sagan said at the time,

    “Look again at that dot. That’s here. That’s home. That’s us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives… Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the Universe, are challenged by this point of pale light. (Google)

    I continue to be amazed as I observe the skies and biological world. What a wonderful, yet dangerous, world we live in. Beautiful, to be sure, but the universe will kill us if we aren’t careful. And even it we are careful, the universe will someday likely kill off the human race. Death and extinction await, not Heaven and the sweet-by-and-by. Again, a somber thought, but also a reminder that we only have one life and it will soon be past.

    Bruce Gerencser, 69, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 48 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.

    Your comments are welcome and appreciated. All first-time comments are moderated. Please read the commenting rules before commenting.

    You can email Bruce via the Contact Form.

  • Dr. David Tee Says I Didn’t Use AI to Critique His “Science”Article

    dr david tee

    Dr. David Tee responded today to my article AI Critiques Dr. David Tee’s “Science.” Tee wrote:

    Our books and our websites have provided this evidence for everyone to read, and we still face the nonsense spewed by that AI critique. Why do we not believe he used AI? Because the words in the critique are exactly the same as those any unbelieving scientist would say.

    ….

    If something cannot be proven false, then it is true. This happens in courtrooms around the world every day. Falsifiability is a secular human invention to protect unbelieving science and scientists from the truth.

    ….

    The Bible is not wrong, as the evidence gathered up until now proves it is true. It is only deceptive thinking that comes up with that confused summary. Science in general is not based on the truth but on deceptive thinking.

    It throws God and the truth out so unbelievers can ‘do science’ and have the freedom to draw any conclusion they want to believe. Secular science and unbelieving scientists do not want the truth, for then they have to rethink their careers, their ideologies, and make changes they do not want to make.

    As you can see, their sinful nature has already corrupted AI. That website and that critique have no credibility, as the owner/author cannot prove he did not manipulate AI into providing the results he published.

    One can say they used AI, but what they are not saying is how they designed their instructions.It is the typical unbeliever’s way to only tell part of the truth, so no one will challenge them.

    ….

    As we pointed out that this critique spouted only what unbelieving scientists have said for over 100 years; it is not an independent tool. AI is like all secular scientific dating systems- created by unbelievers and corrupted before they are ever used in the field. They are far from independent tools.

    They are designed to hide the truth from all and allow unbelievers to fabricate human history. That critique is less useful than toilet paper.

    According to Tee, I am lying about using AI. Why would I lie. With Tee the truth is much more delicious than a lie.

    Fact: I used Gemini with text string that said: critique https://theologyarchaeology.wordpress.com/2026/01/08/science-the-bible/ That’s it. Tee could use the scientific method to “test” my claim, but he’d rather whine and stomp his feet.

    jumping man

    Fact: My friend Ben Berwick did an AI critique using a different engine to review Tee’s entire site. The AI engine returned a similar result as mine (and can be found in the comment section here).

    End of discussion.

    Anyone want to tackle Tee’s ignorant claim, “If something can’t be proven false then it is true.” Think about the absurdity of this statement. I’m sick enough that I don’t have the wherewithal to critically respond to Tee. My first thought was “My dick is 2 feet long.” Can’t prove otherwise, so this statement is true. 🤣 Not helpful, but funny, at least to me and my pain addled juvenile mind, 🤣 So, if you are interested in critically responding to the greatest theologian and scientist of the fifteenth century, please write a guest post or leave a comment.

    Tee is an ever present reminder of how religious fundamentalism causes brain rot. It robs people of the ability to think rationally, critically, and skeptically. I’ve been there, so I understand how and why Tee thinks the way he does. That said, change is possible, but it requires Tee to admit that the only lie in this story is his rigid literalist interpretations of an errant, fallible ancient religious text.

    Bruce Gerencser, 69, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 48 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.

    Your comments are welcome and appreciated. All first-time comments are moderated. Please read the commenting rules before commenting.

    You can email Bruce via the Contact Form.

  • AI Critiques Dr. David Tee’s “Science”

    dr david tee

    I recently asked an AI engine to critique a recent science article by world renowned Evangelical scientist, Dr. David Tee. Here’s what it had to say. enjoy! 😉 (This, by the way, could be a critique of many creationist arguments.)

    Critique of Science and the Bible

    The article you provided, titled “Science & the Bible” from Theology & Archaeology, argues that science is a fallible, human-driven endeavor that should be secondary to the “inerrant” word of the Bible.

    While the article is written from a theological perspective, a scientific critique focuses on its representation of the scientific method, epistemology (how we know what we know), and its use of concordism (the attempt to find modern science in ancient texts).

    1. Misunderstanding of “Theory” and “Fallibility”

    The article argues that because science is “fallible” and changes over time, it is less reliable than religious text.

    • Scientific Critique: This characterizes a core strength of science as a weakness. Science is self-correcting. The fact that theories are updated when new evidence emerges (e.g., moving from Newtonian physics to Relativity) does not mean the previous science was “wrong” in a vacuum; it means it was an incomplete model that became more precise.
    • The Error: The article implies that “change” equals “unreliability,” whereas in science, the refusal to change in the face of evidence is what constitutes unreliability.

    2. False Equivalence of Evidence

    The author suggests that a “Biblical worldview” and a “Secular worldview” are simply two different but equal ways of looking at the same data.

    • Scientific Critique: Science relies on methodological naturalism. It requires hypotheses to be testable, falsifiable, and predictable.
    • The Error: A “Biblical worldview” as described in the article starts with a conclusion (the Bible is true) and filters data to fit it. Science starts with data and builds a conclusion. By treating “revealed truth” as a data point equal to empirical observation, the article departs from the scientific method entirely.

    3. Retroactive “Scientific Foreknowledge” (Concordism)

    The article claims the Bible contains “scientific facts” that were ahead of their time, such as the water cycle or the earth being a sphere.

    • Scientific Critique: This is often a result of exegesis bias. Many of the verses cited (like Job 26:7 or Isaiah 40:22) use poetic language that can be interpreted in multiple ways.
    • The Error: If these texts were truly “scientific,” they would provide predictive power (e.g., explaining the mechanics of evaporation rather than just mentioning clouds). Identifying “science” in the Bible after the science has already been discovered by secular means is a form of hindsight bias, not a validation of the text as a scientific document.

    4. Categorical Misclassification

    The article states, “The Bible is not a scientific book, but it does reference a variety of scientific facts.”

    • Scientific Critique: This is a rhetorical “have your cake and eat it too” strategy. By saying it’s not a science book, the author protects it from scientific scrutiny when it is demonstrably inaccurate (e.g., the order of creation in Genesis), but by claiming it contains “scientific facts,” they attempt to borrow the authority of science to bolster the text’s credibility.
    • The Error: From a scientific standpoint, an observation is only a “fact” if it can be verified independently of the source. The article asks the reader to verify the source (the Bible) using the facts, and then verify the facts using the source—a circular logic.

    Summary

    The article’s “science” is actually apologetics. It uses the language of science to argue for the supremacy of a specific religious interpretation. Scientifically, the article fails because it rejects falsifiability—the author explicitly states that the Bible cannot be wrong, which means no amount of evidence could ever change the conclusion. In science, if a theory cannot be proven wrong, it cannot be used to claim truth.

    Bruce Gerencser, 69, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 48 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.

    Your comments are welcome and appreciated. All first-time comments are moderated. Please read the commenting rules before commenting.

    You can email Bruce via the Contact Form.

  • Bruce, If You Don’t Know Much About Science, How Can You Trust It?

    good question

    Every day, I learn things about science I didn’t know before. I am always learning new stuff, but make no mistake about it, I know very little about science. I know the basics, and I continue to educate myself through reading and listening to podcasts, but I am not, nor will I ever be, an expert. This is what happens when you spend most of your life thinking the King James Bible is a science textbook and the universe as created in six twenty-four hour days, 6,029 years ago. It was not until I deconverted that I read books about biology, cosmology, and evolution.

    Since I am not an science expert, I do what I always do; I rely on people who are experts to teach me and explain what I don’t know. This doesn’t mean experts are infallible, but, generally, experts can be trusted to tell us the truth (as they understand it at that moment). I try to check new things I hear against scientific consensus. I learned years ago as a pastor that if I came up with a novel interpretation of the Bible, it was likely that I was wrong. I still live by this principle today.

    Sadly, way too many Evangelicals think that they know more than scientists do because the Holy Spirit is their teacher and guide. Dr. David Tee, whose real name is Derrick Thomas Thiessen, illustrates this point when he says:

    As usual, he [Bruce Gerencser] thinks unbelievers can understand the Bible even though the Bible clearly says they can’t because they do not receive the Spirit of Truth. Everyone needs the Spirit of Truth to find what God is saying and so that everyone gets the same message.

    In other words, the vast majority of humans can’t understand the Bible. Regardless of how much education they have, Bible knowledge is impossible for them because they are not indwelt by the Holy Spirit. This is why a man with a Bible college education from an unaccredited college thinks he knows more about the Bible than most unbelieving scholars, even if they have PhDs and extensive knowledge about the Bible.

    Sunday after Sunday, Evangelical preachers — many of whom who have no relevant college training in the Bible, particularly the original languages — stand confidently before their congregations and say, THUS SAITH THE LORD. I have heard scores of sermons preached by men who have either no secondary training or have degrees from institutions focused on teaching preachers what to think, instead of how to think. These preachers stand before their congregations, preaching a book that they don’t know much about. Often, they just regurgitate what they heard in church or college. The next time you get a chance, check out the curriculums of several Evangelical Bible colleges. You will quickly learn how little they are taught about the Bible. Most preachers will exit college without comprehensively studying most of the books of the Bible (and survey courses don’t count).

    That’s not to say that all Evangelical preachers are uneducated. I know more than a few Evangelicals who have educations from major universities. Why they are still Evangelicals befuddles me, but it would be wrong to judge all preachers by the ignorant hillbillies who comment on this site.

    Bruce Gerencser, 69, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 48 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.

    Your comments are welcome and appreciated. All first-time comments are moderated. Please read the commenting rules before commenting.

    You can email Bruce via the Contact Form.

  • Did God Lie to Us About the Age of the Earth?

    creationism ken ham

    According to the Bible, God created the universe and everything in it. From this basic premise, Christian thinking goes off in all sorts of directions. Generally speaking, Christians believe one of the following about the creation of the universe:

    • Young Earth Creationism: God created the universe in six literal twenty-four-hour days, 6,028 years ago.
    • Theistic Evolution: God created the universe by and through the process of evolution, leaving room for God to personally intervene in human history when needed.
    • Old Earth Creationism: God created the universe with the appearance of old age.

    Yesterday, I listened to a podcast featuring an old-earth creationist trying to defend his beliefs. Things did not go well for him. Science aside, old-earth creationism posits that God deliberately deceived humanity by creating the universe with the appearance of age. Thus, they can accept what science says about the age of the universe while at the same time claiming God created everything.

    In other words, God lied to us. The Earth “looks” old, but it’s not. God is just playing a trick on us. If the Earth is 6,028 years old, why do various testing methods say differently? Simple, God is playing a game with us. He’s a trickster, telling us a painting is thousands of years old, when it is, in fact, two years old.

    Why would God do this? What is his endgame? Why would he lie to us? You would think that God would want us to have accurate information about creation and the age of the earth/universe. When science says the universe is billions of years old, this is a factual claim, old-earth creationists say, but — with a wink — they confidently say, “God created the universe with apparent age.” This, of course, is a faith claim.

    Evangelicalism has nothing to offer when it comes to science. Their core beliefs about the universe are directly contrary to what science says about the matter. Even the theistic evolutionist is inserting God where none is needed. Science doesn’t have all the answers, but it is superior to the manic rants of preachers about the literal interpretation of Genesis 1-3.

    Bruce Gerencser, 69, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 48 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.

    Your comments are welcome and appreciated. All first-time comments are moderated. Please read the commenting rules before commenting.

    You can email Bruce via the Contact Form.

  • Local News: Campbell Soup in Napoleon, Ohio Pollutes Local Waterway with Industrial Discharges

    lake erie waterkeeper

    WTOL-11 reports:

    Campbell Soup Supply Co. has admitted to thousands of violations of the federal Clean Water Act at its canning plant in Napoleon, Ohio.

    In a court filing released Monday, the company acknowledged its part in years of illegal discharges into the Maumee River, which feeds into Lake Erie.

    In the filing, which listed the plaintiffs as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and environmental groups Environment Ohio and Lake Erie Waterkeeper, Campbell conceded it is legally liable for at least 5,400 violations between April 2018 and December 2024. The wastewater contained phosphorus, ammonia, E. coli bacteria, oil and grease, suspended solids, and other pollutants.

    The case stemmed from a lawsuit filed in March 2024 by environmental advocates, who alleged the factory’s discharges were fueling toxic algae blooms in western Lake Erie. Blooms that could threaten drinking water supplies and harm wildlife.

    “Campbell’s admission that it committed these violations will speed this case toward a trial that will decide what steps the company must take to curb its pollution and how large a civil penalty should be imposed,” said John Rumpler, Clean Water Program director for Environment Ohio. “That’s great news for the people who live along the Maumee River and Lake Erie.”

    Lake Erie Waterkeeper Sandy Bihn said the outcome could mark a turning point in efforts to restore the watershed. 

    “Bringing an end to Campbell’s violations will help water quality in the river and Lake Erie, and demonstrates the power citizen enforcement suits have to drive meaningful environmental progress,” Bihn stated.

    Under federal law, citizens can sue to enforce the Clean Water Act when polluters fail to comply. In this case, Campbell agreed not to contest liability and acknowledged that residents suffered harm from the violations.

    The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio will now move toward a trial, expected next year, to determine penalties and remediation measures.

    Bruce Gerencser, 69, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 48 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.

    Your comments are welcome and appreciated. All first-time comments are moderated. Please read the commenting rules before commenting.

    You can email Bruce via the Contact Form.

  • Quote of the Day: Dr. Carl Sagan Accurately Predicted the Future of the United States

    carl sagan

    I have a foreboding of America in my children’s or grandchildren’s time–when the United States is a service and information economy; when nearly all of the manufacturing industries have slipped away to other countries; when awesome technological powers are in the hands of a very few, and no one representing the public interest can even grasp the issues; when the people have lost the ability to set their own agendas or knowledgeably question those in authority; with our critical faculties in decline, unable to distinguish between what feels good and what’s true, we slide almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness. 

    And when the dumbing down of America is most evident in the slow decay of substantive content in the enormously influential media, the 30-second sound bites now down to 10 seconds or less, lowest-common-denominator programming, credulous presentations on pseudoscience and superstition, but especially a kind of celebration of ignorance.”

    ― Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark

  • It Will Be a Cold Day in Hell: Dr. David Tee Demands That I Apologize to Him

    dr david tee's library
    Dr. David Tee’s Massive Library

    Dr. David Tee, whose real name is Derrick Thomas Thiessen, is a Fundamentalist Christian blogger who has spent the past few years using my writing without credit or attribution for what he calls “teachings.” He takes a similar approach with my friend Ben Berwick. Thiessen has written more posts about the two of us that I can count. Sometimes, I just ignore the man. He’s little more than a gnat flying around my head on a warm summer day. These days, I selectively ignore Thiessen, choosing to only respond to posts I consider so egregious that they demand a response or are personal attacks on my character, family, or the readers of this blog.

    Twice this week, Thiessen has demanded that both Ben and me apologize to him, for what I am not sure. I assume he’s demanding an apology because we dared to challenge his assertions about science. Thiessen sees himself as a defender of young earth creationism, a Bible literalist who will resolutely defend all sorts of nonsense because it appears in the Bible or is a personal belief of his. No amount of argumentation will change his mind. (And his defense of clerics who commit sex crimes is beyond disgusting.)

    Thiessen claims to have a doctorate, including four science degrees — a claim he recently made for the first time. Geoff, a long-time reader of this blog, had this to say about Thiessen’s education claims and his understanding of science:

    I don’t really care what educational achievements Tee claims, the proof of the pudding is in the eating or, in Tee’s case, the writing. There’s almost not a single sentence he writes that I can’t take issue with. Grammatically he’s dreadful, a clear indicator of his lack of proper education. Writing style not withstanding, his reasoning is impossible to understand by anyone with the slightest grasp of logic. He just doesn’t understand the scientific method. He seems to think it’s some isolated part of human existence, standing on its own, when in reality it’s the foundation on which everything we know about the world is based. Science essentially is observation and testing, reaching provisional conclusions, and incorporating them as needs be. Science and the scientific method is actually the only way we have of determining reality.

    I agree.

    In a post titled, It is Lazy to Simply Say God Did It!, Thiessen wrote (all grammar, spelling, punctuation, and irrationality in the original):

    How is exploring the natural physical world going to provide the correct answers to our origins if science is not looking in the right direction or looking in the correct places? Providing the best explanation is not sufficient enough as the best explanation is not the truth.

    The best explanation is the lazy man’s way to avoid the problems that arise with scientific research, when that research leads them away from natural solutions and into the supernatural. The scientists are too lazy and dishonest to say that the supernatural method is the only method possible.

    Hence, God did it is the correct answer when science has no solutions. Here are some examples of science/evolution cannot answer why something exists.

    …

    How can anyone trust science when it fails to provide the answers to these and a myriad of other mysteries? It is not lazy to say God did it because that is the answer to all the mysteries science cannot answer.

    Science is incapable of digging for and finding the truth because it does not want the truth. it wants something that misleads, misinforms, and hides the truth. In other words, they want something they and their biases can live with, and that is not science, nor is it objective.

    True science would recognize the weakness of the natural-driven science and recognize God as the creator, as there is no alternative answer. It would also recognize God’s creativity, power, and glory in all of these and other examples science cannot find a natural solution.

    It is just idiotic to dismiss the phrase ‘God did it’ because science cannot accept the supernatural. That dismissal is arrogance and ignorance on display at the same time. It is also a demonstration that science is incapable of studying the past as well as deriving the correct answer.

    Saying science is the only way to get to the answers is showing a great bias against reality and the truth. Science is no longer objective but a tool to promote one bias or preconceived conclusion over the truth.

    Instead of providing the correct answer, science becomes a place for unbelievers to hide from both reality and the truth. No one can trust a research field that takes great pains and many steps to avoid coming to the right answer.

    When one expounds the truth, God did it, they are not being lazy, but illuminating the correct answer for everyone so that they are not misled by the lies that come from the deceived and blind secular world.\Yes, God did it all and science is a tool used by evil to lead people away from God and giving him the proper credit and glory.

    Only a fool would say or repeat the words in the title in the exact same sentence structure. God created everything supernaturally and without the aid of science. Science is in over its head and outside of its scope when it investigates origins.

    The Bible has the correct answer every time.

    This is a good summary of the way Thiessen thinks about science.

    After responses from both Ben and I, Thiessen wrote a post titled, Even More Proof. What “more proof” of his assertions did Thiessen provide? An eighteen-minute video by Dr. Sabine Hossenfelder titled Scientific Research has Big Problems, and It is Getting Worse.

    Thiessen confuses “science research” with “science.” They are not one and the same. Further, Thiessen might want to study what Dr. Sabine Hossenfelder’s critics think of her work.

    Professor Dave responded to Hossenfelder’s video:

    Video Link

    Professor Dave later released this video:

    Video Link

    This brings me to Thiessen’s demand that I apologize. After posting Hossenfelder’s video, Thiessen wrote:

    With the above video, we expect a very honest, public, humble, and personal apology for the attacks and off-the-wall comments from both MM & BG.

    We know what we are talking about; they do not.

    I still haven’t stopped laughing about Thiessen’s demand. There’s nothing I’ve said that deserves an apology. Thiessen is butthurt over our coverage of his bogus “four science degrees” claim. Until Thiessen actually provides evidence for his degrees, there’s no reason for anyone to believe he has them. All we know for sure is that Thiessen attended an unaccredited Bible college in Canada as a young man. And we didn’t even know that until I outed him. Thiessen claims “God knows, and that’s all that matters.” This is a common ploy of Thiessen’s. Don’t want to answer a question? Deflect or make some sort of God claim. End of discussion.

    Today, Thiessen published a post titled, Not to Beat a Dead Horse, But. Here’s what he had to say:

    MM [Meerkat Musings] continues to make false accusations against us [me], so we [I] are [am] ignoring his latest response. Yet, neither he nor BG [Bruce Gerencser] has [have] apologized for their false accusations and their lies about us [me]. They like to make things personal, which we [I] do not, thus they have no credibility or an honest character.

    We [I] have proven our [my] point quite well and guess what. We [I] opened up YouTube a few minutes ago and at the top of the suggestion list was the following video:

    ….

    We [I] do not make fraudulent or misleading statements about anything. As you may have noticed, we [I] use legitimate websites and books to support our [my] points, so our [my] readers know they are getting accurate information.

    That video is 20 minutes long, and it is well worth listening to as it provides not only information to defend one’s views on science but also provides eye-opening information on what is going on behind the scenes in science.

    Maybe MM [Meerkat Musings] is upset as his rose colored view of science is destroyed, and it is not as glorious as he thought it was. Do not be fooled. Christians cannot trust scientists, and they do need to be fact-checked, etc., to get to the truth.

    The Bible warns Christians about unbelievers and what they say. Those warnings include scientists and science, whether done by unbelievers or believers. We [I] are [am] not saying Christian scientists are all pure and do not commit fraud.

    Those ‘Christian’ scientists who accept and promote evolution cannot be listened to either.

    So once again, we [I] are [am] expecting a public, honest, humble, and sincere public apology from both BG [Bruce Gerencser] and MM [Meerkat Musings] because they are falsely accusing us [me] and have done nothing but lie about us [me] through their personal attacks.

    Make sure to listen to the entire video to get all the right information on science.

    Once again, Thiessen demands an apology from me.

    Thiessen believes that Hossenfelder’s eighteen-minute video PROVES that Ben and I are lying about him and his science prowess. This claim has no merit. Besides, does Thiessen really believe that an eighteen-minute video by a controversial theoretical physicist justifies his criticisms of modern science? As I mentioned above, Thiessen confuses “science research” with “science” itself. He stupidly thinks that because a small minority of researchers lie or manipulate data that science itself can be disregarded anytime it disagrees with young-earth creationism and his wooden, literalist interpretations of the Bible.

    Speaking only for myself, no apology will be forthcoming. I stand by every word I have written about Thiessen and his errant views of science and the Bible. I do kinda, a little bit, — I mean a teeny, tiny microscopic bit, regret saying a few years ago that Thiessen wants a picture of me naked to hang on his bedroom ceiling, but outside of that bit of risque humor, I stand by what I have written about him.

    And Derrick? The offer of a picture still stands, but my nude photos are no longer available. 🙂

    Bruce Gerencser, 69, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 48 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.

    Your comments are welcome and appreciated. All first-time comments are moderated. Please read the commenting rules before commenting.

    You can email Bruce via the Contact Form.