Written by Godinci.


The observation that: (1) behavior in animate things is strongly influenced by hormones, which in return are genetic determined, and (2) the unshakable believe that all species have a common ancestor and new species evolved from internal changes within earlier species, assured the adherents of materialist philosophies that behavior arouses as a consequential cocktail of Darwinian draconian time-chance error-mechanism, natural and sexual selection, and adaptive responses to external pressures, and condition, to which the entities are subject to.

After having successfully brainwashed the mass, through institutionalized education, with the notion that "the universe is the sole product of chance, and man nothing more than an accidental byproduct of an extinct ape that somehow got bored of hanging around in trees", people have come to accept that absurdity, and not commonsense, is our shortcut to liberation and self-accomplishment.

Parents therefore willingly accept that our decorated secular high-priest confine their children, as gooses, in boxes while pushing neo-Darwinian claptrap as nutrients through their trout, and dream that one day their children become the ‘foie-gras’ of our deluded society.

Evolutionist propagandists have become masters in transforming first order observational facts into Hollywood blockbuster scripts that are broadcast under the label 'scientific truth'.

Just to give you a couple of simple examples:

Watching propagandist Darwinian documentaries is similar as imagining looking to a horror movie of James whale with Charles Chaplin playing Frankenstein. It certainly would produce a good laugh; the sad thing about Darwinism, and all other materialist evolution theories, is that people don’t recognize the jokes and take the play for granted.

Do we really want that our children, thus society, becomes nothing more than a collection of à la Dawkins  intellectually fulfilled copulating atheist survival machines?
When will we finally start to realize the absurdity of Darwinism? Not of evolution through adaption in response to environmental pressure and conditions, but the one proposed by Darwin and refined by neo-Darwinists alike.

If we want to make sense of Nature and live in accordance to our cosmic purpose than we might never overlook, as materialist do, that all inanimate and animate things, be they entities or not, are not from themselves, thus instrumental and subject to the law of inherent purpose.
Furthermore, if Nature, as materialist claim, is equivalent to the material world, than we have a problem at hand because all observations indicate us that Nature is contingent; and so, in contrast to what secularists claim, we have to conclude, based on related commonsense reasoning, that all the laws of Nature are secondary laws.

The fact that all things are instrumental elucidates why almost all natural phenomena are somewhat explicable in mechanistic terms, and gives us falsely the hope that reductionism is the way to go; however, may it be clear that the instrumental allows only for the fructification of the goal and is never the goal in itself.

Also important to note is that the evolution of the species in Nature is ‘linear progressive’ – i.e. entities go step-wise from deterministic to mental; thus, behavior in animate entities possessing a brain will largely depends on the entity’s mental containing capacity.

Brain and perception

The behavior produced for the satisfaction of instinct related things in carnivorous beings with little mental containing capacity, such as mantises, is therefor very straightforward.
Here, the simple rules of ‘if hungry and eatable than eat’ and ‘if danger than run, hide or eliminate danger’ strongly apply. Honestly, do you really expect that mantises, giving their nature, will settle down for a chat after copulation, especially when the predatory female hasn't lunched yet, and is much bigger than the copulating male that is an arm-strike away?  Get alive!

Concerning the observed behavior in lions, we do admit that overtaking a clan and engaging with non-related infanticide assures them of their offspring, and can satisfy their sex-drive. However, lions overtake a pack because it’s in their law of inherent purpose to do so. Secondly, lion(s) have to assure that the captured females recognize their authority.

Now, given that parental instinct are high implies that when the lionesses have unrelated cubs to look after than it becomes very difficult, for the overtaking male lion(s), to control the pack and/or engage with the satisfaction of instinct related things because they don't get recognition.
Lions have such understanding, and act, in accordance with their mental containing capacity and instincts, correspondingly.

Although Darwinist, just as all evolutionist of all kinds, use lots of science to force-feed their gooses with dubious claptrap, their theories are nothing more than workable absurdities that produce seemingly very appealing explanations to a multitude of first order observational facts.


I can guarantee you that if tomorrow, somewhere in the deep forest of Congo, an unknown human-like specie was discovered where the males have grown a penis on their forehead – let’s call them ‘the dickheads’ – than evolutionary charlatans, be they academic or not, could easily explain with institutionalized scientific claptrap, and without upsetting our secular humanist community, why the dickheads (assuming that their testicles don’t hang in front of their eyes), in terms of benefice for sexual reproduction and energy preservation, evolved as such.

  Also read: What is love? - don't ask science!
The Higgs...a back of bricks!


About the author:

Source reference:

Picture credit:

  1. Cartoon of walking shadow dick: http://www.recoverygraphics.com/albums/userpics/10837/dickhead.jpg
  2. Cartoon of man pissing against wall: http://img1.joyreactor.com/pics/post/funny-pictures-auto-man-piss-388921.jpeg
  3. Picture of dickhead (woman with dildo on head): http://static.fjcdn.com/pictures/dickhead_5b8a99_4644947.png