Since leaving livejournal a couple years back(?), I decided to do some serious self improvement. I was sick of being depressed and unhappy and I went out and did something about it.

Now, a couple years on, life has just been getting better and better. I am traveling more, living overseas again, engaged, and completely sickeningly happy :)

If anyone wants to keep up with me now, I am starting a new blog at:
http://angelarhodes.blogspot.com/

A friend of mine and her husband now use a mutual email address to tell all their friends all the stuff they do together, Mats and I found the potential to turn this into a joke too great.

Mats: “Maybe we should make our own mutual email address… hunnybunnies@gmail.com”

Me: “Yea and we can email all our friends about all the cute stuff we do together”

Mats: “Today Mats pulled off little Angela’s nose”

After hearing two people rave about the book “The Case for a creator: A Journalist Investigates Scientific Evidence That Points Toward God.” By Lee Strobel and hearing how it used ‘scientific evidence” I decided to give it a read before dismissing it.

Last night I finished it…

If this is the best argument for a creator then I must say I’m sorry but it’s just not good enough, perhaps it is good enough for those with no science background or for the very gullible but anyone with a real science background is able to easily disprove the arguments put forward in this book.

Reading it I found that the book was full of false logic and half truths. Strobel did nothing but prove he has little understanding of science.

1. The biggest issue I had on this book was the whole chapter on Doubts about Darwinism. Here Strobel completely loses the point of what evolution is, he appears to believe that evolution attempts to explain how life appeared on this planet… EVOLUTION DOES NOT ATTEMPT TO EXPLAIN HOW LIFE CAME TO BE ON THIS PLANET evolution is “the process by which different kinds of living organisms are thought to have developed and diversified from earlier forms during the history of the earth.” Anyone who believes this junk chapter, I suggest you read a little about Darwin, natural selection and evolution and I promise if you have any logic in you at all you will see the fallacies in this whole chapter.

2. Strobel claims to be writing this book from a skeptics point of view he writes "I would stand in the shoes of the skeptic, reading all sides of each topic" however I did not read anything of the sort, he did not adequately “read all the sides” this is nothing but bullshit, look carefully and you will find that Strobel only interviewed people from the Discovery Institute, this organisation is one which promotes intelligent design in US public schools. So put the pieces together anybody with a brain can see that Strobel only interviewed people who support intelligent design. As if that wasn’t bad enough of the “authorities in various disciplines” he interviewed only two were involved in scientific research the others were science graduates who went on to take philosophy or theology! THEOLOGY! Obviously alarm bells should ring there right?! So, sorry but any science graduate including myself would know that to become a science expert in any field you need to do research that is a masters or a PhD in a science based topic. Duh.

3. The one PhD scientist, Michael Behe, that Strobel interviewed was a complete crackpot who’s theory was dismissed by the scientific community. Behe himself declared his “ID” theory was not science.

There is so much more mumbo jumbo in this book but I don’t have all day to correct the fallacies.

Basically what I got out of this book was two things

1. Evolution is not a fact therefore god exists and not just any god a Christian god!

2. OMG look! A pretty flower! There must be a god!

I suggest to anyone who wants a real scientific point of view visit this site
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/paul_doland/creator.html#wells

Better pic of The Kimberley

Not too long ago Mats and I took a little visit to Oceanworld in Manly, the exhibit that stood out to me the most was one of the small tanks with the cuttlefish. Watching them there, hovering, reminded me of a really cool article I read not too long ago on the sexual tactics of the clever male Australian Cuttlefish.

The females who are heavily outnumbered are often guarded by the larger males who fight off competitors, so if you’re a smaller male what chance have you got at scoring with the few females?

Well, cuttlefish are masters of camouflage, their skin which is covered in chromatophores, iridophores and leucophores enables them to blend into any background flawlessly. So the smaller but clever males disguise themselves as females by changing their body shape and skin pattern, in doing this they and are able to swim right past any male guarding the female.

Hanlon who published these findings in the Journal Nature explained "You certainly do not fight the big male because he's going to beat you up very quickly and very easily," explains Hanlon. "So [small males] don't even engage in a fight, but they do what we call sneaking tactics: He hides the fourth arms (females only have three sets of arms), bulges his arms up like he's holding an egg, and he puts on a coloration pattern that's typical of females. And then, he just waltzes right in. And every single time that this happens, the big male looks and thinks he's acquiring another female mate and he lets him/her just swim right in next to the female. And as soon as he gets under the big male and he's next to the female, it's like, 'Okay, let's try a mating'."

Apparently the females love this and accept most mating attempts by them while rejecting most mating attempts by the larger males who try to bully their genes into the next generation.

Eight previously unknown invertebrate creatures have been discovered in an underwater cave in central Israel.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5036618.stm

Not bad for my first complete oil painting :)

There’s a kind of person out there who;

• Is sincere and honest
• Is trustworthy and loyal
• Isn’t afraid to be silly with me
• Isn’t fickle
• Is funny and can make me laugh
• Is clever and can challenge me intellectually
• Is down to earth
• Is stable yet can understand me and is there for me when I need him
• Is secure enough to give me space when I need it
• Is understanding enough to realise sometimes I say or do things I don’t mean.

I have never found a person like this, but I know this is the sort of person I will end up with. He is the sort of person who is worth waiting for.

6:25:05 PM
you_offended_my_laundry
hi
6:25:19 PM
i like ur name, i once hallucinated a purple starfish

Ever notice that when writing something, especially when writing a paper/assignment, that you have one word which is always overused? or diagnostic of your writing?

My word is "however"