Applying Intelligent Design to the Theory of Pregnancy
Erik Lumberjack
My name is Erik Lumberjack. I'm founder and chief scientist of the
recently formed Intelligent Gestation Institute. Our goal is apply
insights gained from Intelligent Design to combat the current Theory
of Pregnancy, i.e., that humans develop gradually from a sperm and
egg. Our FAQs below provide more details.
Thank you, and best regards, Eric Lumberjack
OPEN LETTER TO KANSAS SCHOOL BOARD
Thank you for teaching Intelligent Design alongside the Theory of
Evolution. Our children deserve to hear multiple viewpoints.
I’m concerned, though, that only one Theory of Pregnancy is currently
being taught.
Namely, that humans develop in gradual stages from an initial sperm
and egg. First looking like a salmon, and then a lizard, and only
after long and slow development finally resembling a human.
As founder and chief scientist of the Intelligent Gestation Institute,
I request that equal time be given to Intelligent Gestation, an
alternative approach that is gaining increasing support within the
scientific community.
These are key points regarding Intelligent Gestation for your
reference.
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
Question: Then why does the mother’s stomach get bigger?
Answer: Scientific studies have shown that it’s impossible for human
breasts alone to hold the amount of milk required to nurture infants.
That’s why the body gradually prepares by storing milk in the mothers’
stomach. Scientific evidence of this can be seen by observing cows.
Question: But sonograms show pictures of developing infants, don’t
they?
Answer: Experiments have shown that ultrasound equipment creates sound
waves that cause milk to curdle. So medical staff are creating these
images, and then the very same staff are interpreting the images that
they themselves created. This can hardly be called scientific.
Question: Then where do babies come from?
Answer: Let's not base conclusions on anecdotes, but look at the case
for which we have the most recorded evidence. When the key figure of
human history was born, textual research has shown that he was
begotten as son when a dove descended from the heavens. More than
2,000 original texts agree on this point, many of them dating back to
several years from the original event, when eye witnesses were still
living. In addition to this, the past 2,000 years of historical
observation have also taught us where babies come from. The stork --
which the genome project has just recently proven to be of the same
ovarian family, genus and phyla as the dove. The probability of this
coincidence occurring by chance alone has been calculated at less than
1 over a number so large that it is greater than the number of
subatomic particles in the entire state of Arkansas.
Question: Is Intelligent Gestation faith based?
Answer: No. Unlike the Theory of Pregnancy, it is based on observable
and testable scientific fact.
Please contact us if you would like more details, or free samples of
the textbooks that we are preparing for your school use.
Thank you, and best regards,
Erik Lumberjack
Founder and Chief Scientist
Intelligent Gestation Institute
Web site: https://sites.google...ationinstitute/
Alternate site: http://www.intelligent-gestation.com
Contact info: erik.lu...@gmail.com
FAQ FOR SCIENTISTS
Question: But why does the mother’s stomach get smaller immediately
after childbirth?
Answer: When the infant arrives, the milk transfers from the mother’s
stomach to the mother’s breasts in preparation for breast feeding. How
else could a mother feed her child? We challenge scientists to provide
us with one example where a mother has breast fed her child from her
stomach.
Question: But I’ve seen photos of children being born directly from
their mothers.
Answer: Photos can be retouched. But more importantly, why are you
looking down there?
Question: Delivery rooms are sealed off. How could a stork or dove get
in?
Answer: Ships are made of reinforced steel, but mice have entered them
for centuries. We challenge scientists to produce one example of a
ship without a mouse.
Question: I’ve been in delivery rooms and never seen a stork or dove.
Answer: Absence of evidence of stork is not evidence of absence of
stork. We don’t notice mice either, but one day we open our
refrigerator door and notice the cheese is missing. The result speaks
for itself.
Question: But I’ve seen an egg cell divide in science class after
being joined by a sperm.
Answer: Imagine that you're an egg and a sperm collides with you at
the equivalent of 2,000 kilometers per hour. You would divide as well.
Question: Does this mean that you're not opposed to stem cell
research?
Answer: We are not opposed, but our scientists don’t expect viable
medical applications. Any experiments done on stem cells would surely
only be applicable to similar plants with similar stems.
Question: Why is the Intelligent Gestation Institute speaking out at
this time?
Answer: If our children are taught in school that humans develop in
their mothers’ wombs from something that looks like a catfish, and
then a gecko, and then a reces monkey, and finally a human, it’s not a
small step for them to believe later on that man evolved from ape.
This reduces humans to something purely physical and degrades our
worth as spiritual beings. If our children believe they descended from
heaven, they will try to act heavenly. But how will our children act
if they are taught they come from come? How will they be encouraged to
act morally? To be honest, our scientists are disappointed that the
Intelligent Design community has thrown in the towel so readily on
this very important issue.
Question: Would you be willing to debate Richard Dawkins on this
issue?
Answer: It would look good on his resume, but we’re not so sure about
ours. We would consider such an opportunity, but must take care not to
elevate his theories to appear to have the achieved the status of true
science.
Question: What are the academic qualifications of the scientists at
your institute? We’ve been told that your chief research scientist has
a B.Sc. degree from the Livestock University of Kentucky with a major
in roast beef and a minor in mashed potatoes.
Answer: That is completely unfounded and we’re disappointed that the
secular press has stooped to using add homily arguments to try to
discredit us.
Question: In summary, is there any decisive evidence that you can give
us?
Answer: It basically comes down to this. Which is more likely, that we
developed in our mothers' wombs through an unimaginably large number
of intermediate stages and then due to purely physical forces and
blind chance ended up as human beings that are fine tuned to an order
of magnitude of 10 to the 1,000th power, or that we’re a bundle from
heaven? Ocam’s razor makes the answer more than obvious. Let me give
an example. Let’s say you’re walking on a beach and find a baby
wrapped in a blanket on the sand. Which is more likely, that an
intelligent being left the baby there, or that someone came on the
beach? People that make extraordinary claims must provide
extraordinary evidence to support those claims. The burden of proof
lies with them, not us. Our Institute is prepared to offer $100,000 to
anyone who will pop a nut on national TV and form something as
intricate as the human eye from sperm. And anyways, if humans
developed in their mothers' wombs from something that looked like a
catfish, how come you don’t see catfish walking among us today and
giving interviews on TV?
Erik Lumberjack
> Hello fellow members,
> Web site:https://sites.google...ationinstitute/
Woops, link broke... This is it.
https://sites.google.com/site/intelligentgestationinstitute/
Ernest Major
<c7913547-6283-463e...@b4g2000pra.googlegroups.com>, Erik
Lumberjack <erik.lu...@gmail.com> writes
http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2007/10/intelligent-del.html
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Scientific_storkism
http://www.nmsr.org/stork.htm
--
alias Ernest Major
Richard Harter
<erik.lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
May I reprint this on my web site? Pretty please.
Erik Lumberjack
> In message
> <c7913547-6283-463e-85b4-3b0bffb02...@b4g2000pra.googlegroups.com>, Erik
> Lumberjack <erik.lumberj...@gmail.com> writes>On Aug 29, 1:02 am, Erik Lumberjack <erik.lumberj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Hello fellow members,
>
> >> Web site:https://sites.google...ationinstitute/
>
> >Woops, link broke... This is it.
>
> >https://sites.google.com/site/intelligentgestationinstitute/
>
> Unfortunately it's been done before.
>
> http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2007/10/intelligent-del.html
> http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Scientific_storkism
> http://www.nmsr.org/stork.htm
> --
> alias Ernest Major
Oh, shoot...
I just searched on "intelligent gestation" and there were only 9
unrelated hits so I hurried and stayed up all night writing it in a
semiconscious frenzy. I was so pleased with myself... Scientific
storkism... It already exists. Oh well...
Erik Lumberjack
> On Sat, 28 Aug 2010 09:02:45 -0700 (PDT), Erik Lumberjack
>
Hi Richard, Sure, thanks! Sure you can reprint it! You'll give some
kind or link or credit or something? I crave fame since I poured my
heart into it.
I watched all the Dawkins and Hitchens and Dennet and Harris and other
debates so many zillions of times, and heard the same key phrases over
and over again so I thought I'd do a remix and make the site up.
Then I tied to post it on Dawkin's discussion page two days ago and it
didn't make it past the moderator. I was crushed. I was imaging
Dawkins would say "Well done chap, quite smashing, you're bloody
brilliant" but the moderator threw it into the rubbish bin.
And then I posted it on another site and it was deleted about six
minutes later. I was so depressed.
I like the last paragraph if I may say so. I rewrote it and rewrote it
so it's the best summary I could do.
Sure post away! My honor! You made my day. Could you send me a link
when you have time?
erik.lu...@gmail.com
I sent it to my friends and relatives with a picture of myself smiling
on the site that I chubbied up with FatBooth software (I deleted the
picture this morning), and they just wrote back politely
"Um...yes...thank you..." and had no idea what I was talking about...
Thanks again Richard!
Erik Lumberjack
> In message
> <c7913547-6283-463e-85b4-3b0bffb02...@b4g2000pra.googlegroups.com>, Erik
> >> Hello fellow members,
>
> >> Web site:https://sites.google...ationinstitute/
>
> >Woops, link broke... This is it.
>
> >https://sites.google.com/site/intelligentgestationinstitute/
>
> Unfortunately it's been done before.
>
> http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2007/10/intelligent-del.html
> http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Scientific_storkism
> http://www.nmsr.org/stork.htm
> --
> alias Ernest Major
Hi Ernest, Wow you're really up on this stuff. I only searched on
"intelligent gestation" and only found 9 unrelated hits so I stayed up
all night until morning and hurried and made the website. I thought I
was the first one who thought of it... Thanks for the links! I'll
study up...
Burkhard
> In message
> <c7913547-6283-463e-85b4-3b0bffb02...@b4g2000pra.googlegroups.com>, Erik
> >> Hello fellow members,
>
> >> Web site:https://sites.google...ationinstitute/
>
> >Woops, link broke... This is it.
>
> >https://sites.google.com/site/intelligentgestationinstitute/
>
> Unfortunately it's been done before.
>
> http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2007/10/intelligent-del.html
> http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Scientific_storkism
> http://www.nmsr.org/stork.htm
> --
> alias Ernest Major
yeah, but this new one is the best version yet :o)
John Harshman
unconstitutional to teach in public schools, since that would violate
the first amendment. Intelligent gestation, being a purely scientific
theory having nothing whatsoever to do with religion, is fine. Just
don't let anyone catch you with a "stgestation proponentsists" in your
intelligent gestation textbook and you'll be fine.
Ernest Major
<57859f24-e170-442c...@l25g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
Erik Lumberjack <erik.lu...@gmail.com> writes
preexisting meme was "intelligent delivery" - once you know the term to
use Google becomes your friend. Scientific storkism has a long pedigree
- it was reposted here back in 1992, so presumably is even older.
http://www.antievolution.org/features/evohumor/storkism.html
--
alias Ernest Major
Bob Casanova
appeared in talk.origins, posted by Erik Lumberjack
<erik.lu...@gmail.com>:
Excellent! Thanks for the effort. Even though it's been
pointed out that it's not an entirely new field, it's
certainly a good spoof.
--
Bob C.
"Evidence confirming an observation is
evidence that the observation is wrong."
- McNameless
Mike Painter
> Hello fellow members,
>
> My name is Erik Lumberjack. I'm founder and chief scientist of the
> recently formed Intelligent Gestation Institute. Our goal is apply
> insights gained from Intelligent Design to combat the current Theory
> of Pregnancy, i.e., that humans develop gradually from a sperm and
> egg. Our FAQs below provide more details.
>
> Thank you, and best regards, Eric Lumberjack
>
> OPEN LETTER TO KANSAS SCHOOL BOARD
>
> Thank you for teaching Intelligent Design alongside the Theory of
> Evolution. Our children deserve to hear multiple viewpoints.
>
> I’m concerned, though, that only one Theory of Pregnancy is currently
> being taught.
>
Before I endorse your wonderful work I must question your credentials.
1. Do you believe in the Bible Bob school of Science?
Bible Bob says,
" A theory is a guess, speculation, abstract thought, a guess based on
some facts; but then facts are not truth so it is all about theory."
and
" Of course I understand the scientific method (the true one, not the
false one made up by money grubbing deceivers who stole and corrupted
the words "the scientific method." Apparently you have been misled by
them so I will try to make it easy for you to understand.
Trial and error; screw up till ya get it right. By wrong until you
get it right. Develop theories and make wild guesses and try them
out until you get one out of ten thousand right and are able to repeat
the process."
2. Do you agree with AIG and CRS when they say that you must ignore any
evidence that does not agree with the bible?
If the answer to the above are *YES* (with "Praise The Lord" being optional)
then welcome.
I hope you make enough money to become a member of Landover Baptist.
One more question.
What is wrong with the "onion" theory of childbirth?
Each female "egg" as the other call it is a complete human, only real
small. The female "egg" contains with in it one or more complete humans,
only smaller. Every woman carries within her all the people she or her
descendants will ever produce.
Clearly this makes more sense and explains why God tells us to reproduce but
not to have sex.
TomS
<14c6c7d3-d47a-4b33...@p12g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, Erik
Lumberjack stated..."
The major problem with "Intelligent Gestation" is that it concedes
that *gestation* is real.
--
---Tom S.
Surely, God could have caused birds to fly with their bones made of solid gold,
with their veins full of quicksilver, with their flesh heavier than lead
The Crime of Galileo (1976) by Giorgio De Santillana, p. 167
Erik Lumberjack
Hi John and Burkhard,
Okay, thanks, good, I feel vindicated now... So it wasn't all a waste.
I quietly added myself as an external link on some Wikipedia
creationism related sites so hopefully it will take.
Then all I have to do is travel the country and debate biology
teachers and so-called obstetricians. I'm sure I'd win. There's
always a comeback. Like the guy who had the creationist
dinosaur museum and was scolded by Ali G about the floater
backstage and then went to jail for ten years for tax evasion.
He always had an answer. Kenneth Hovin or something
I'd love to debate Dawkins on the theory of pregnancy
and then make him stumped for an answer like he was
on Youtube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zal1XW88HQQ
Like a creationist Ali G or something.
Mike Dworetsky
In the show, Ali G "mistook" his name and called him Kent Bovine.
>
> I'd love to debate Dawkins on the theory of pregnancy
> and then make him stumped for an answer like he was
> on Youtube.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zal1XW88HQQ
>
> Like a creationist Ali G or something.
--
Mike Dworetsky
(Remove pants sp*mbl*ck to reply)
Mike Dworetsky
> Hello fellow members,
>
> My name is Erik Lumberjack. I'm founder and chief scientist of the
OB Monty Python: I guess that means that you are OK.
--
Frank J
>
> - Show quoted text -
You might want to have the ID-friendly YEC named "FL" to do guests
lecture in schools about "IG." He is a regular on the Panda's Thumb
and other boards, though rarely if ever posts on TO. In an exchange on
the PT from early 2008 (the "Expelled" era) he admitted that human
conception was a design actuation event. Note that the "pure" IDers
(the ones who insist that ID is not creationism but refuse to
challenge YEC or OEC) take pains to *avoid* saying when or where any
of their "designs" (bacterial flagellum, vertebrate clotting cascade,
etc.) were translated from "mere ideas" to actual working biological
systems. They wish people like FL would shut up, but can't tell him -
can't upset the big tent, you know.
Richard Harter
<erik.lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Aug 29, 2:25 am, c...@tiac.net (Richard Harter) wrote:
>> On Sat, 28 Aug 2010 09:02:45 -0700 (PDT), Erik Lumberjack
>>
>> <erik.lumberj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>> May I reprint this on my web site? Pretty please.
>
>Hi Richard, Sure, thanks! Sure you can reprint it! You'll give some
>kind or link or credit or something? I crave fame since I poured my
>heart into it.
Your name will be on it as author, and there will be a copyright
notice on it. It should be up in a day or two. The URL will be
http://home.tiac.net/~cri/2010/gestation.html
I'll post a notice when it's on the web.
gregwrld
wrote:
This is cool...I'm posting it to a few friends of
similar interests and an appreciation for irony.
Well done!
gregwrld
Walter Bushell
<858a9112-cf1a-4e5d...@u4g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
Erik Lumberjack <erik.lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
Scientific Storkism is an attractive object in meme space.
--
All BP's money, and all the President's men,
Cannot put the Gulf of Mexico together again.
Paul J Gans
>In article
><858a9112-cf1a-4e5d...@u4g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
> Erik Lumberjack <erik.lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Aug 29, 2:27?am, Ernest Major <{$t...@meden.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> > In message
>> > <c7913547-6283-463e-85b4-3b0bffb02...@b4g2000pra.googlegroups.com>, Erik
>> > Lumberjack <erik.lumberj...@gmail.com> writes>On Aug 29, 1:02?am, Erik
>> > Lumberjack <erik.lumberj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >> Hello fellow members,
>> >
>> > >> Web site:https://sites.google...ationinstitute/
>> >
>> > >Woops, link broke... This is it.
>> >
>> > >https://sites.google.com/site/intelligentgestationinstitute/
>> >
>> > Unfortunately it's been done before.
>> >
>> > ? ? ?http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2007/10/intelligent-del.html
>> > ? ? ?http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Scientific_storkism
>> > ? ? ?http://www.nmsr.org/stork.htm
>> > --
>> > alias Ernest Major
>>
>> Oh, shoot...
>>
>> I just searched on "intelligent gestation" and there were only 9
>> unrelated hits so I hurried and stayed up all night writing it in a
>> semiconscious frenzy. I was so pleased with myself... Scientific
>> storkism... It already exists. Oh well...
>Scientific Storkism is an attractive object in meme space.
And in chemistry. Gilbert Stork is quite famous.
--
--- Paul J. Gans