Church floor collapses under “Christian rock” group

So, does God hate Christians? Or just the music? “Church floor collapses during rock concert” in Abbotsford, BC.


ABBOTSFORD, B.C. – Witnesses say excited rock fans were urged to stop jumping up and down in a B.C. church before a large section of the floor collapsed and the lighting system fell from the ceiling.

More than 40 people were injured at a concert at Abbotsford’s Central Heights Church Friday night when the floor gave way…. Two people were transferred to hospital in Vancouver, and at least one of them is reported to have suffered critical injuries….

Police said about 1,000 youths were at the church when a large area in front of the stage gave way, sending people in the crowd falling several metres into the basement below.

Head pastor Chris Douglas told Vancouver radio station CKNW that the hall can hold up to 1,500 people.

What message should we take from this? “Religion is all very well but check your engineering”? “Phyics is not mocked”?

Here’s a map. Abbotsford is way down in the south.

Map of British Columbia showing towns


Saturday, bake

The traditional week plan included a day of baking.

humorous pictures
see more LOLcats

Or maybe it’s really Caturday.

Evolution vs. Intelligent Design in Expelled

First, for those who argue that Charles Darwin somehow caused the hard-hearted competitiveness later labelled “Social Darwinism,” its chief exponent, Herbert Spencer, published his views at least as early as 1857, two years before Darwin published On the Origin of Species.

Second, the argument from negative consequences in Expelled is a fallacy. You can state that some fact leads to unfortunate results but that does not invalidate the fact. If evolution caused people to become cruel, it would still be true. But it doesn’t, any more than gravity causes ex-husbands to throw their children off bridges. Love, loyalty, and altruism within one’s community evolved as adaptive behaviours.

Third, there are more than two explanations for evolution. Some of them have been discarded along the way, e.g. Lamarkianism. If evolution were disproved, that would not make I.D. true. For one thing, I.D. makes no predictions. Whatever we find is shoe-horned into the “designed” category. Dembski’s doctored flagellum images don’t make the flagellum into a machine.

Finally, the physical analogue of irreducible complexity is an arch built of bricks or stones. Once you remove the scaffolding that supports it in construction, nothing can be removed without destroying the arch. Similar changes occur in biochemical systems. In 1918 a geneticist named Muller published the mathematical explanation for the way that evolution creates systems that become irreducibly complex over time, based on his experimental work with fruit flies. You can look it up in the peer-reviewed journal Genetics (Volume 3). Dr. Muller later won the Nobel Prize. Michael Behe denies the existence of the vast academic world of molecular evolution (conferences, university departments, and journals) which has developed over the last forty years, so he probably hasn’t read this paper either. An invincible ignorance of science seems to be the real pre-requisite for Intelligent Design believers. And a willingness to throw up their hands and say, “Beats me! Musta been a miracle!”

Needs more detail

The current explanation of evolution, the Modern Synthesis, rests much more on the 150 years of work done since Darwin by hundreds of thousands of people pursuing thousands of lines of research in a dozen different fields. Selectively quoting that humble man won’t make evolution go away.

Science can not prove the supernatural, because the supernatural can not be counted on to show up for every experiment. If you could force God to show up and perform on command, you’d be controlling him. Since you can’t, you can’t include him in a scientific experiment. Science neither proves nor disproves religion. But a scientific mind is more likely to notice the lack of current evidence for God. Most scientists care no more for disproving God than they do for disproving Santa Claus: it’s not their department and they have other things to do.

Darwin’s roses

The New York Times has a nice article called, “What Darwin Saw Out Back.” It describes Darwin’s observations, which led to experiments in plant breeding and some clear conclusions:

“He determined that if they cross-pollinate, they produce more seed and more vigorous seedlings,” said Margaret Falk, a horticulturalist and associate vice president at the New York Botanical Garden. The variation is evolution’s way of increasing cross-pollination, she said.

Now the Botanical Garden is replicating this work, and more of Darwin’s Down House experiments, in a stunning, multipart exhibition called “Darwin’s Garden: An Evolutionary Adventure.” 

This shows another Darwinian experiment in 1878, this time in plant motion:

%d bloggers like this: