Chick, a natural disaster

From PZ Myers at Pharyngula we learn about a new informative Chick tract. Our weather forecasters have it all wrong. Catastrophic weather conditions are directly caused by how we are treating Israel. It has nothing to do with climate change, seasonal warm water conditions in the Atlantic and Gulf, higher population densities, or thermodynamics. I’m sure that Chick has all the necessary evidence and data to substantiate this intriguing claim. Clearly the story indicates that if you remind God through prayer that you are his people (He does seem to get forgetful at times), he’ll protect you from the disaster. From this, we can conclude that nobody reminded God about being his people before Katrina hit. In the tract, he has identified catastrophic events with what he perceives as political mistreatment of Israel. I’m sure he can provide ample evidence that catastrophic events never happened at any other time.

But this does finally give us something by which we can potentially falsify religious claims. If we can somehow never do anything that Jack Chick perceives as mistreatment of Israel, we would, during that period of no mistreatment, have no catastrophic events. Seasonally warm waters in the Gulf would not evaporate (Change in thermal properties of water such as the latent heat of vaporization, perhaps? That’s something we could measure. Increase of atmospheric pressure?) into the atmosphere, or wind shear would dissipate the energy release by the water as it condenses into the clouds if it did. The tornado corridor would be devoid of tornadoes. The continental plates would stop moving so there would be no more earthquakes. The possibilities are amazing and incredible!

Advertisements

Tags: ,

2 Responses to “Chick, a natural disaster”

  1. Russ Says:

    You said, “…we can potentially falsify religious claims.” However, I think you meant to say, “…we can potentially falsify the religious claims of Jack Chick.” Obviously, proving Jack Chick wrong does not equate with proving the Bible wrong.

  2. liquidthinker Says:

    Russ — Technically that would be correct. It would be falsifying an interpretation of the Bible that Jack Chick (and possibly others) claims is correct. Unless one takes everything in the Bible quite literally (which we already know is incompatible with what we have learned using the scientific method), interpretations are all anyone can really do. Or so it seems to me 🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: