All in the Family featured the curmudgeonly Archie Bunker. Archie was television’s most famous grouch, blunt, blustering, straightforward and untouched by the PC crowd. He was the archetype of the conservative male. Michael desprately tried to reeducate him, but he persisted in his breviloquence.

Looking back at the last 40 years, we realize: ARCHIE WAS RIGHT!


This Is (not) the End

I got home from work a little late tonight and its now 12:45 MST.  That means that the world should have ended, but it hasn't, so I need to get to bed and get some sleep for tomorrow.  There is a Christmas party at work that I'll have to go in early for.  I wish I would have bought some gifts now, but the world was suppose to end.  Better luck in 5,125 years when the next long form calender will have run it's course.

I don't think anyone has the date of the end of the world nailed down.  I've had a little fun with this whole thing and I learned something that I hadn't realized before.  The Mayans claim that creation happened in 3114 BC.  Bishop Ussher calculated 4004 BC as the date of creation.  Several other ancient authorities and cultures also have similar dates for the beginning of the world. By similar I mean an age of the earth as less than 10,000 years.  Depending on who you ask and the method used there are a number of sources that date creation at around 5,000 to 7,000 years ago.  I find this interesting because I always assumed that the age of the earth debate was basically boiled down to a literal view of the bible verses an evolutionary timeline issue.  That isn't the case at all.  Human observation, as recorded in varous calenders like the Mayans or in nonbiblical mythologies supports a young earth theory.

Now that it looks like the world hasn't ended, we'll have some more time to ponder the topic.


  1. The day isn't over yet.

  2. WaterBoy10:13 AM

    "Human observation, as recorded in varous calenders like the Mayans or in nonbiblical mythologies supports a young earth theory."

    That is interesting, and bears further investigation. I suspect that the inability of the human mind to completely grasp very large numbers, which would be required for a scale of billions of years, probably has a lot to do with that (as described here).

    My theory is that the Mayans and other ancient peoples just did not have a concept of such a large scale, so they only went back as far as it made sense to them.

  3. I think it could have something to do with the restoration of civilization after the last ice age, when a few thousand humans survived in the tropics and then were able to expand out once again as the world warmed up. That was about 10-12 thousand years ago.

  4. Anonymous5:26 PM

    I think only a retard would think that the earth wasn't over a billion years old. You've got to be some kind of a religious nut to not believe in science.

  5. Res Ipsa6:13 PM


    thanks for stopping by. Is this a hit and run or do you have something to add?

    There are lots of different viewpoints on the age of the earth, creation vs evolution etc. The three guys posting ahead of you don’t agree with each other, yet none of them are retards, BTW I know that two of them don’t agree with me either yet they are all my friends. (I don’t know where Giraffe stands)

    There is no way to determine to a scientific certainty creation vs evolution or the age of the earth. Period, it can’t be done. Either position is a matter of faith in the strength of the evidence you are considering. That’s it there is no methodology that arrives at any concussion without a strong reliance on faith. Be offended, but the evolutionist still has to have faith because he lacks facts.

    That said. As I pointed out in the post, I had never considered the fact that many of the ancient peoples postulated an age of the earth that was in the 10,000 year or less range. I knew that many ancient civilizations had mythologies, stories if you will, about things that are recorded in the bible, like Noah’s flood. It had never occurred to me that other peoples had such short time lines for the age of the earth.

    It doesn’t prove anything, its just interesting at most its another piece of evidence for a short age of the earth. However, both Astro and WB have given two rational counter arguments that may serve as explanations (or may not). They both lack the social autism required to be a true evolutionist.

  6. WaterBoy12:00 AM

    How dare you respond with such clarity and rationality, Res. Don't you know you are supposed to respond to trolls with all the acerbic vitriol with which they post?

    How dare you fail to live up to Anon's expectations and entertain it with a religious counter-rant!

  7. Res Ipsa4:43 PM


    I've known for a long time, at least since Jr. High, that faith is just that, faith. Is mine what is should be? No, I wish it was better, but its not. So I don't expect everyone to agree with me. I try not to be rude to them if they don't. Everybody has faith in something. For one guy its what the sub-intellect public school employee dished out form his painfully PC text book. For me it’s a near literal acceptance of the Bible. Funny thing is, as I get older I’ve been seeing the Bible as more literal than I did when I was younger.

    I guess I might have been aware that different civilizations claimed the age of the earth to be around 6,000 years. I don't think I did. To me realizing that fact was kind of a cool thing to have happen. Did it make my faith a little stronger? Yes I think it did. I don't expect everyone to share my take on the information. I don't think I'm retarded for accepting as literal, the only first hand account of creation to stand the test of time. In heaven, if God tells me some of the things I believed about creation didn’t happen the way I thought, I'm not going to ask for a transfer.

    I don’t know what to do about the Anon’s. Every once in awhile I get some click traffic from Vox’s from somebody that wants to mix it up, but they normally just fire off some dumb remark and fail to show back up.

  8. Anonymous8:17 PM

    some dumb remark and fail to show back up.

    I didn't fail to show up. I said everything that there is to say. You dumb shit fucktard. You admit you are a religious nut so why are you trying to deny it now?

    Evolution is a fact, not faith dumb ass. Thats why they call it science not church. Your friends get it, but they aren't pulling bullshit over peoples eyes like you are. The church teaches a bunch of mumbo jumbo that you have to believe because the church says so. Where did the church get the mumbo jumbo? They pulled it out of their ass just like you are with this shit.

    There is no god. Let that sink in and blow your dumb little mind.

  9. So Anon isn't just socially autistic, he is also a teen so full of knowledge and wisdom that he can only look down upon others who are not as enlightened as he.

    But I don't see a point in holding a grudge against one with an obviously superior intelligence. So in the spirit of the season I want to point out to Anon that ProActiv is having a sale if he orders before Christmas (which he no doubt doesn't celebrate)

  10. Anonymous9:50 PM

    socially autistic

    WTF is that?

    Some dumbass rightwing religious nut job bs.

    I don't have to back it up. Its science not faith. If it was faith it would be for fucktards like Res Ipsa. It's science thats why you don't get it. Science is hard for people living in the dark ages. evolution is in all the school books because its prov true.

    Religion is h8!!!

  11. And ignorance must be bliss.

  12. WaterBoy11:50 PM

    It's unfortunate that it seems like the most vocal people on the side of evolution have to come off like jackasses all the time.

    Even worse that they'll take every opportunity to prove it.

  13. Anonymous4:49 PM

    Why does telling the truth make you a jackass?

    It doesn't.

    I thought you are a evolutionist.

    Why aren't you sticking up for the truth?

  14. Anonymous4:52 PM

    Hell Res Ipsa doesn't even have the guts to argue on his own blog. He knows hes wrong and doesn't have the balls to back it up.

  15. WaterBoy9:02 PM

    Because it's not what you say that makes you look like a's how you say it.

    Truth should be able to stand on its own, and not need childish invectives to support it.

  16. You must be moving up in the 'sphere, Res, you got your own troll.

  17. Anon,

    What is there to argue about and what could I say to you that would help you change your mind?

    The post was about the Mayans and the world not ending. It hasn't. How was I wrong?

    The only thing you seem to be upset about is that I noted that some ancient people believed the world to be less than 10,000 years old. I hadn't thought about that before. Why does this upset you?

    Your reaction to my post is based on emotion, nothing else. School will be starting back soon. I imagine you'll go away soon enough.

  18. Anonymous5:10 PM

    Why does this upset you?

    I'm upset bc ur pushing ur religious bs on everyone. U won't admit ur a nut job.

    U can't change my mind bc I believe in science. Science is never wrong but ur.

  19. WaterBoy6:52 PM


  20. Science is never wrong?

    I'm sorry, Res. This is particularly stupid troll. I don't think he counts.

  21. WaterBoy12:27 PM

    That's why I called "Poe". This troll is not a scientist; it is someone pretending to be one.

    Every scientist I know accepts that mistakes are occasionally made; it's why there's so much emphasis on peer review. That's not even counting the vague falsehoods, outright lies, and obfuscation of data through cherry-picking.

  22. WaterBoy12:34 PM

    Or, maybe it really IS that stupid.

    Either way, it has proven itself to not be worthy of honest discussion.

  23. I have an astronomy textbook of my grandfather's from the 1920s. If science is always right, why are there so many things wrong in that book? Laughable things, such as the Martian canals, or the belief that our galaxy was the extent of the universe.

    The best one can say about science is that scientists continue to work on confirming or revising theories by experiments. It is often "wrong", or found to be wrong, when new evidence comes to light!

    But, this comment will bounce right off anon's thick little skull, and he will continue to accept the dictates of Scientists, because they are Always Right. Such faith he puts in these men!