The Drunken Skeptic

13/09/2025

11/09/2025

When is it knowledge and when is it beliefs? Critikid explains.

09/09/2025

Texas Sharpshooter addressing the "Kind only produce after their own kind" creationist argument.

🚨 The “Kind only reproduces with Kind” Myth 🚨

One of the most common creationist arguments is that “kind can only reproduce with kind.” But here’s the problem: “kind” isn’t even a scientific category. It’s a vague word used in place of actual biological terms like species, genus, or family.

Now here’s the science 👇

Yes — an animal can only reproduce with its own species (or very closely related ones). That’s just biology. But creationists make a leap here: they assume that means species never change.

What they’re missing is that evolution works step by step. Each generation is almost identical to the one before it, so reproduction happens just fine. But tiny changes add up over thousands, millions, and billions of years.

Think about it like zooming in vs zooming out:
🔬 Zoom in: You see “kind with kind.” Each animal breeds successfully with its own.
🌍 Zoom out: Those micro-changes accumulate until you end up with entirely new species that could no longer interbreed. That’s exactly how land mammals like Pakicetus evolved into modern whales, or how early hominins like Australopithecus eventually gave rise to humans.

So yes — kind reproduces with kind. But over deep time, the kind itself changes. That’s how evolution works, and the fossil record and genetics back it up every step of the way.

08/09/2025

05/09/2025

What would be number 10 for you?
-AMV

04/09/2025

WOW... I can't even.... 😳😳

Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson once lamented that the rise of the Flat Earth society in the world was evidence to him of two things:

1) That we live in a world where countries respect and defend the right to freedom of speech and...

2) That we live in a world where the education system has fundamentally failed us.

I think that this post here is probably the best example of Dr. Tyson's second point. That in this day and age people still do not know how light and sight works. And that they aren't even embarrassed to admit it to the world. This is the perfect example of the Dunning-Kruger effect. To be so sure with such a high degree of confidence that what they believe is true. Barkeep, pour me a stiff one, I feel I'm gonna need it today 🥃🥃.

03/09/2025

The claim about a rock formation “challenging millions of years” is common creationist talking point. And yes, I'm beyond speculating that this is merely due to their misunderstanding of geology and more convinced that it's willful mistepresentation and disinformation rather than ignorance that motivates these posts by them. So let's break it down, shall we?

Firstly, the idea that a vertical igneous intrusion cutting through horizontal sedimentary layers should shatter the layers if they were truly solid rock is incorrect. In fact, geological processes show that molten rock (magma) can intrude into solid or partially solid rock, often forming what are called dikes or sills that cut cleanly through layers. This happens because the magma forces its way through existing fractures or creates new ones by exploiting weaknesses in the rock. The rock can fracture in a controlled manner without shattering all around.

Secondly, rocks forming “millions of years” ago doesn’t mean all layers had to be fully solidified for all that time before any intrusion—they can cool and harden over varying timescales. Igneous intrusions often happen millions of years after the sedimentary layers formed. This doesn’t contradict slow geological processes; rather, it fits perfectly with them.

Thirdly, sedimentary rock layers are created by natural depositional processes over long periods, sometimes thousands to millions of years. Catastrophic events like floods do deposit sediments quickly but do not normally account for the vast thickness, variation, and fossil evidence found worldwide.

And finally, evolution and geology rely on multiple independent lines of evidence, from radiometric dating and fossil records to plate tectonics and stratigraphy. Overturning millions of years with a single photo is a huge oversimplification and ignores the breadth of scientific data supporting "deep time."

In short, this rock formation does not disprove millions of years of evolution. Geological principles are well-studied and tested, consistent with gradual processes as well as occasional catastrophes, but not a single global flood.

Science and Religion answer different questions, yes, but are not reconcilable. Where science seeks to explain the wonders of the world and universe around us through testing, experimentation and evidence, Religion relies only on faith. To me I'd rather abstain from belief or acceptance of an answer about history, nature and facts about our reality until I have verification through robust testing and replication of results. I will not deny that religion has benefited people around the world and does provide solis and comfort to some as they struggle to navigate reality as emotional beings. Just like an amputee requires a crutch to function and navigate the world, so too has many benefit from the emotional support spirituality and religion provide. To twist and misrepresent science and reality to fit in with one's religious persuasion and dogma, though, is not just an injustice, it is an insult to humanity designed to manipulate and deceive.

So, if someone tries to push a narrative that science has declared war on faith, kindly remind them that science doesn't care or seek to interfere with anyone's personal beliefs. It only seeks to explain objective, physical reality. If that clashes with their personal pre-existing unfalsifiable beliefs, then that's their problem and no one else's.

02/09/2025

Full Quote: “From this distant vantage point, the Earth might not seem of any particular interest. But for us, it's different. Consider again 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.

The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every 'superstar,' every 'supreme leader,' every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.

The Earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena. Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that in glory and triumph they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot. Think of the endless cruelties visited by the inhabitants of one corner of this pixel on the scarcely distinguishable inhabitants of some other corner.

How frequent their misunderstandings, how eager they are to kill one another, how fervent their hatreds. 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.

Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity – in all this vastness – there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves.

The Earth is the only world known, so far, to harbor life. There is nowhere else, at least in the near future, to which our species could migrate.

Visit, yes. Settle, not yet. Like it or not, for the moment, the Earth is where we make our stand. It has been said that astronomy is a humbling and character-building experience. There is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny world.

To me, it underscores our responsibility to deal more kindly with one another and to preserve and cherish the pale blue dot, the only home we've ever known."

Quote Citation:
‘Pale Blue Dot: A Vision of the Human Future in Space’ (Book, 1994) - Carl Sagan. J⭐️

Source:
https://www.businessinsider.com/pale-blue-dot-carl-sagan-2016-1?r=US&IR=T

01/09/2025

Melanie Trecek-King from Thinking Is Power addressing the misconceptions of science.

31/08/2025

29/08/2025

When we learn science in collage or university we aren't just forced fed dogmatic textbook indoctrination. We actually test the theories and evidence for ourselves to verify the material we learn for ourselves. It's not like we're being indoctrinated through parrot fashion to the point where we believe something because it's being repeated enough times. That's how religion and conspiracy theories work.

Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, t...