By Simon Jeffery
The Guardian - UK
6-13-3


At least 5,000 civilians may have been killed during the invasion of Iraq, an independent research group has claimed. As more evidence is collated, it says, the figure could reach 10,000.
 
Iraq Body Count (IBC), a volunteer group of British and US academics and researchers, compiled statistics on civilian casualties from media reports and estimated that between 5,000 and 7,000 civilians died in the conflict.
 
Its latest report compares those figures with 14 other counts, most of them taken in Iraq, which, it says, bear out its findings.
 
Researchers from several groups have visited hospitals and mortuaries in Iraq and interviewed relatives of the dead; some are conducting surveys in the main cities.
 
Three completed studies suggest that between 1,700 and 2,356 civilians died in the battle for Baghdad alone.
 
John Sloboda, professor of psychology at Keele University and an IBC report author, said the studies in Iraq backed up his group's figures. "One of the things we have been criticised for is quoting journalists who are quoting other people. But what we are now finding is that whenever the teams go into Iraq and do a detailed check of the data we had through the press, not only is our data accurate but [it is] often on the low side.
 
"The totality is now producing an unassailable sense that there were a hell of a lot of civilian deaths in Iraq."
 
A spokesman for the Ministry of Defence said he had not seen anything to substantiate the report's figures. "During the conflict we took great pains to minimise casualties among civilians. We targeted [the] military. So it is very difficult for us to give any guidance or credence to a set of figures that suggest there was x number of civilian casualties."
 
IBC's total includes a figure of at least 3,240 civilian deaths published this week by the Associated Press news agency, which was based on a survey of 60 Iraqi hospitals from March 20 to April 20, when the fighting was declining. But many other bodies were either buried quickly in line with Islamic custom or lost under rubble.
 
Prof Sloboda said there was nothing in principle to stop a total count being made using forensic science methods similar to those used to calculate the death toll from the September 11 attack: it was a question of political will and resources.
 
He said even an incomplete record of civilian deaths was worth compiling, to assist in paying reparations and in assessing the claim before the war that there would be few civilian casualties.
 
Lieutenant Colonel James Cassella, a US defence department spokesman, said the Pentagon had not counted civilian deaths because its efforts had been focused on defeating enemy forces rather than aiming at civilians.
 
He said that under international law the US was not liable to pay compensation for "injuries or damage occurring during lawful combat operations".
 
The Iraqi authorities estimated that 2,278 civilians died in the 1991 Gulf war.
 
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,976295,00.html

You can't make an Omelet without destroying Ova.

You see, the fact that about 3,000 U.S. civilians were killed on 9/11 shows that Arabs are terrorists, irrational, like to kill, think that the ends justify the means, that they are uncivilized, that the religious mumbo-jumbo most of them believe in is inferior to the religious mumbo-jumbo most Americans believe, and that a great crusade against them has to be waged by virtuous, superior people like ourselves. On the other hand, the fact that 10, 000 Arab civilians may have been killed during our invasion and hundreds of thousands during 13 years of sanctions proves that, er, well, it proves that we were fighting for freedom. And to prevent them from attacking us with "weapons of mass destruction." And to help Ariel Sharon and other lovers of democracy and justice. I believe every word of that - just like I believe in Santa Claus, the Easter Rabbit, the story of Noah's Ark and every other miracle in the Bible, that beautiful women on Budweiser commercials drink great quantities of beer but still manage to maintain movie-star like figures, and that we live in a pluralistic society where everyone has the same rights and billionaires do not run the show.

the same independant research group that has been caught out for double counting guessing and generally making up numbers before.

...the fact that you're blaming the US for the sanctions-related deaths, and not Saddam, proves you're not right in the head.

How many people would the construction, furnishing, and decorating costs for 43 palaces feed?

...remaining cover is to resort to name calling and petty quibbles.

Fact: A lot of innocent people died however you want to slice it.

Face it: BUSH LIED, CHILDREN DIED. It really is that simple.

I think you are confusing the commision with Georgies good freinds over at Enron. They and the other corporate slimebags are the ones who make up the numbers, and bush peddles his lies and gimps like you believe him. Or...maybe not, perhaps you feel 10,000 civilian deaths are worth the ability to fill up your gas guzzler and engender the wholescale sacrifice of the Bill of Rights.

How many more civilian deaths have to occur? How many more billions of tax dollars must be wasted on death weapons rather than spent funding true quality of life issues, safe drinking water, and free and excellent education for all? Will you dumb bunnies ever get past your patriotic gore far enough to see that reality does not have to include endless war and race hatred?

...how many Dead Children does it take to fill your Gas Tank?

Many Iraqis died.

We found their graves.

Another fact is that you wouldn't have minded Saddam filling more graves.

And blaming Saddam for the sanctions-related deaths is petty quibbling? Not if you're one of the Iraqis he starved to death, it isn't. Blaming anyone else besides Saddam is just plain stupid.

Fact: you don't give a flying bowl of guacamole about the Iraqis. The war is just a reason for you to hate Bush more. No matter what coourse of action Bush took or will take, it's wrong in your eyes. He could have given the entire world food and education and you'd have been screaming about empire-building.

Deny it all you want. Your words speak louder than your denials.

Why are you justifying civilian deaths Daveman? Or not justifying, rationalizing more likely.

The fact is that we have an out of control military machine hard at work making billions of human beings hate America. And the psychopath running the show is embaressing. He should be a gas station attendant rather than running around thinking about how noble he is and how rapture is upon planet earth.

Here is a poem I wrote awhile back. I am not sure if you can undersatnd it Davemoron but try...then maybe you can join the human race again.
<><><><>
Symbology minus one

Do poems wait to be written?
May they never be written, never read?
Paper sheets,
thick and rich like the top-of-the-cream
in bottles I can imagine,
drift down through the smoky air
in a room with reverberating rebar
and condemned concrete.

Thoughts that once filled this air
now sprawl
limp and unmoving.
Dreams of last night
that have no more doors.
Unfinished ice water slowly regains
ambience on the floor
as the unfilled paper floats down
to sop it up like so much gauze.

Will there ever be enough gauze to fill wounds
ever enough poets screaming and chanting their verse
ever enough time to escape the decimations of the past.

Metal flying through the sky is unusual.
Civilian deaths are not.
But they are connected.
As one strand of blue
lays next to threads of white
lays next to threads of red.

Crop circles are forming spontaneously.
The SUV is proclaimed more valuable than human life.
The atom bomb is declared a weapon of choice
and torture is finally enshrined in legal prevarications.

Stranger things have happened.
What is made by people
comes back to people,
like metal flying through the air,
like paper floating up and then drifting down
like poems never written,
stopped and strangled,
disappearing in the bitter smoke.

2/6/03

Is it possible that they both could be blamed Daveman.. Saddam and the US government.... Everything doesnt need to be black and white. There are grey areas.... right? SO Saddam Hussain must be dead so that is 5000 children that he was responsible for. Now who in America takes responsibility for the other 5000? Feel some fucking shame. That is 2000 more than the amount of people who died in the World Trade Center. What is ur argument. I thought u were clever man. I thought u could hold up an argument. Dont be whipped by a muslim ;)

Why wont people quote their sources on this channel? Where are u getting all this information from Daveman? please tell me its more than one place or American Media because hell their NEVER prejudiced

...just pointing out that fewer people have died with the war than without it.

And apparently some people here don't care about that; they'd rather see more dead brown people than a Republican president involved in anything successful.

"I am not sure if you can undersatnd it Davemoron but try...then maybe you can join the human race again."

That has to be one of the most buttheadedly arrogant things I've ever read. My humanity depends on my understanding of your poetry?!

Man, I thought Dio was pompous...but you get the prize. You so need to Get. Over. Yourself.

The poem I liked. The poet is a pretentious jerk.

"Face it: BUSH LIED, CHILDREN DIED. It really is that simple."

Ah the old standby that the dim-witted lackies of Dio swallow like honey.

The fact of the matter is this,
Whether or not Bush LIED or not, MANY MORE THOUSANDS OF CHILDREN WERE SAVED"

There's simply no getting around that.

Another measure of the victory of the war. Countless civilians were spared miserable deaths from the hand of Sadam.

Do I think that's why we went to war? Of course not. But that is one of the outcomes of it.

"Saddam signed a treaty to end GW1.

Had he abided by the terms he agreed to, there would have been no need for sanctions, there would have been no need for the war; therefore, all the people who died from the sanctions (because Saddam misspent the money and hoarded the humanitarian aid) would not have died. The people who were killed during the war would not have died."

Simple, isn't it? Yes, there are shades of gray...but not in this case. Sometimes there is only black and white.

You can place blame where it doesn't belong; I expect no less.

But you're denying reality when you do so.

You want me to feel shame? For what? I feel bad for the losses; I truly do. But I also feel happy for the people who are no longer under the boot of a murderous madman. And regardless of what you deluded people think about the war, it was successful for that very reason.

Do you feel any shame that it was Muslim extremists that attacked the US on 9/11? Do you feel shame that Saddam, a fellow Arab, killed millions of his own people?

I wonder.

...what Muslim extremists bombed us on 911?

There is no proof as to the identity of the hijackers.

The head of the FBI has admitted as much by publicly stating that the hijackers were using false I.D.. Expert at were his words.

It could just as easily have been someone wanting to make it appear that it was done by Arab Muslims. Great Fall Guys don't you think?

As for frescaw - as it has become apparent to all but the most dimwitted, or obediently blind, Bush Lied as to the motivation for the Iraq War. That is the issue frescaw is Spinning away from. "Don't look at the man behind that curtain." If you accept that Bush Lied then you have to start looking for the real motivation for the War. frescaw does not want you to go there.

I invite you to go there.

No matter how frescaw tries to avoid it: BUSH LIED, CHILDREN DIED. It really is that simple.

"There is no proof as to the identity of the hijackers. "

Videotaped confession after bragging after confession from bin laden and his henchmen is the only proof needed.

Cell-phone calls from the planes verify this.

There's more proof but this will certainly do.

You're whipped old man.

"If you accept that Bush Lied then you have to start looking for the real motivation for the War. frescaw does not want you to go there. "

I couldn't care less.
The war happened. It led to a better world. End of story.

she even has to have the last word with herself.

Notice no reply to the assertion of Duhbya's lying.

Instead it takes up my reply to davie.

The Bin Laden Video is of dubious authenticity. Independent Translation by the German Magazine Monitor even disputes the official Translation. Which was strangely modified 8 hours after Monitor published it's translation.

The Cell Phone calls are also dubious. Independent tests would seem to indicate that they are very unlikely to have occurred as has been publicly stated. The Phones lack the power to get a signal through the Aluminum Skin of the Aircraft (which would cause severe Signal Attenuation particularly in the higher frequency range Cell Phones operate at), which was making about 500 Knots (causing the plane to travel through a Cell faster than the phone could make a link), make a link to a tower, and transmit a message - let alone carry on an extended conversation. Not impossible but not very likely either.

Notice again frescaw avoids the issue of false I.D.'s as this is on the public record. I can document it Seven Ways from Sunday.

"Notice no reply to the assertion of Duhbya's lying. "


Since you add this to damn near every post of your's, I answered it in other threads. Start looking.

...you challenged it indirectly without providing any rationale or back-up for the challenge. It is not answered it stands, and is supported by information in the public domain.

Even the CIA is starting to leak to cover their ass as Duhbya has been trying to pin the blame on them for "Intelligence Failures". However the CIA people are leaking reports that indicate that they did everything reasonable within their power to inform Duhbya, and Dickless Cheney, and staff, that they did not believe Iraq to have any significant stores of banned weapons.

...that "Intelligence failures" has become a popular refrain in the Bush Junta e.g., 911 = "Intellingence Failures"; Iraq really did not have banned weapons = "Intelligence Failures".

Seems to be enjoying some popularity.


BUSH LIED, CHILDREN DIED. It really is that simple.

Whether or not Bush LIED or not, MANY MORE THOUSANDS OF CHILDREN WERE SAVED. It really is that simple.

Perhaps Only 2,000 civilians may have died in the Iraq war. There is still no Independent non-bias source, just like the Jenin massacre of 8 people. and militants (but, we were trying to kill them) These so called independent source are looking for as much possible deaths without confirming any of them. Including the children shot with 7.62mm AK-47 fire, (damn Yanks and their AK's)
Seriously though, you have to love the Iraqi people, they always die in groups of 5,000, makes it easier to count.

Even given the inflated figure of 10,000 civilian deaths (which is larger than the number presented by the rediculous Iraq Body Counter ) the operation was obviously worth the sacrifice.

According to the CIA's estimate of July of 2002, there were 24,001,816 persons living in Iraq. 10,000 deaths equates to 1/24th of one percent of the population. Not exactly a massacre.

Additionally, given the charming and courageous method of Islamic war (using women and children as shields to fire behind, shooting at civilians who attempt to flee cities like Basra etc...) the Coalition's share of responsiblity for the deaths of these civilians is low indeed.

Furthermore what would the Left prefer? 10,000 civilians dead or 24 MILLION civilians enslaved and countless thousands murdered every year?

I withdraw the question. I don't think I want to hear the answer.

....the invasion was justified based on the effects. .so far

the question remains however, and you rite-sided dorks know it: What were the underlying reasons for the shrubadmin in the invasion of iraq?

Ok Simple I got you pegged. Your definately the type that shops at Wallmart, and thinks that all those A Rabs are all the same. I bet you drink Pabst blue Ribbon Beer and Married with children is your favortie TV Show(besides Fox News) But I'd love for one of you Bush lovers to tell me why is it that in all these invasions where an evil dicator is overthrown there is always one constant.
All of the so called evildoers, the brutal dictators which we have overthrown and replaced with our dictator, have at one time been our friend or on the CIA Payroll. You look at Noriega in Panama, Sadam, Bin Ladden, all of them were at one time our friends. Not just our friends but in the case of Noriega he was Bush Seniors right hand man in Latin America. They used him to illegally ship arms to Nigauraga and in return good old Manuel was able to use Air America planes to Smuggle drugs to America. They were all used by our CIA, part of our secret government that fights all these covert dirty little wars. Yes and I know Bush Admirer and Dave Girl your gonna try and dismiss this as some crackpot conspiracy. But you see Fresca characters like Olie North and General Seacord really did sell weapons and drugs secretely to fund their so called freedom fighters to terrorzie the peasants of Latin America. But they don't even bother with shady characters in secret anymore. Ever since 9-11 they use the corporate media and lie flat out to the american people right out in the open.
Am I the only one that thinks they may have gotten a little to big for their own good?
Back me up Sheepdog!

They've gotten far too big for their tax paid britches. Pretty much in line with my reasoning, so far....
Let's keep working on the deadly deception of 9-11 and the pall of
murder and lies it brought. This won't happen over night but if we
continue to spread the word and provide backup for the befuddeled
average citizen by telling the truth beyond the lies of our poodle media we can throw these bastards (I mean all of them) into prison. Maybe
have a line up in front of a bullet pocked wall. The celll space could be refitted for better uses.

The fact is that many of the posts from the Bush/War defenders show that they do indeed realize that Bush lied about the WMDs and they don't give a damn; they just wanted to see some Arabs massacred and that is what they got. If Bush had claimed that Iraq was planning to invade Israel they would have gone along with that nonsense, too.
The hypocrisy about the mass graves is breath-taking. Many of these murdered people were Shiite Muslims - the kind of Muslims right wingers love to hate the most. The US didn't mind Hussein killing these people at all; in the eyes of people like Bush 1, Clinton, and Bush 2 it was a safeguard agains Iraq becoming another Iran.

“The fact is that many of the posts from the Bush/War defenders show that they do indeed realize that Bush lied about the WMDs and they don't give a damn”

Pretty much, I never bought into the argument in the first place, (I know that is so hard to believe) what I did accept is the fact; if the sanctions were ever removed Saddam would have pursed and most likely obtained nuclear weapons. So all of us were forced with a choice, leaving the Iraqi people under the oppression with Hussein, and economic sanctions, or a quick war with limited casualties

“If Bush had claimed that Iraq was planning to invade Israel they would have gone along with that nonsense, too.”

Damn right, and if you jumped off a bridge I will follow you. You first now, hehe

“it was a safeguard agains Iraq becoming another Iran.”

Not quite, safeguard against Iraq breaking up, a Kurdistan in the north, invaded by Turkey; Syria backing Sunni Muslims against Iranian backed Shiite’s. Just imagine the bloodshed. (I don’t know if CNN would have covered it, though)
The only way to prevent it, would have been occupation, however the political support wasn’t there at the time, along with the Arab collation members getting cold feet.

Speaking of Iran, It nice to see the protests are picking up, all though not as big as in 99, still new calls for the “deaths” of the Mullahs has stirred my hopes again. (But, don’t worry I am sure the Iraq war had no effect on this)
I hope they get a democracy back again, To bad MI6 had to destroy their first one, when the Persians tired to nationalize a British oil company, the Persians offered more than generous compensation terms, but as you know British snobs are some of the worse scumbags on the face of the world.

It might be acceptable to you that Bush and Dick can lie and kill thousands of people in return. It isnt to people of Morality. Dont use my tax dollars, my brothers and sisters lives to promote your fucking imperial designs. NO OIL FOR BLOOD.

The above comment was for all the War supporters

The Bush Junta and their sycophants have a new justification for lying: "Everybody does it". This of course is the rationale the Clinton Kool-Aid Drinkers used to defend Clinton's lying. "Deja Vu all over again."

Of course when Clinton did it they had a hissy fit and held their breath until they turned blue. Tush Limbag went over it ad nauseam pointing out how dishonest an argument it was and how untrue it was. Wanna bet he's on board defending it now?

The sycophants will of course carefully omit the part about several thousand people dying as a result of these lies.

Taking the same logic one could excuse any number of crimes because "everybody does it". It is lame, dishonest, and pusilanimous.

The apologists for evil will be working overtime.

I thought Michale Rivero the Web Master over at WhatReallyHappened.com had the correct take on this New Old Tactic:

""If he lied, he's not the first".

  Today the media is trying another approach to the Bush crisis. It's a variation on the "they all do it" excuse. The theory goes that previous Presidents have lied to the public, therefore it would be unfair to make a big stink about Bush's lies used to start the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Never mind all the people who were killed, the world is just picking on poor President Bush.

  But look at it this way. Does the fact that many murderers are never caught mean we must not punish those we do catch? Of course not. That only leads to more murders as those who like to murder realize they may do so with impunity. The same applies here. Yes, other Presidents have lied.  Sometimes they got away with it. But that did not stop us from impeaching Bill Clinton and driving Richard Nixon from office for the lies they were caught at, lies which did not result in the killing of innocent people and the destruction of a foreign nation. Why shouldn't Bush be subject to the same or greater penalties for his lies? 

  Kicking Bush out of office for his lies sends a message to the entire government that lies and liars will not be tolerated by those who pay the bills and raise the soldiers.  Not kicking Bush out also sends a message, that those who wish to like may do so safely and with impunity, secure in the knowledge that the victim of those lies will go on quietly paying the taxes and raising the soldiers for the liars to use and abuse.

  Check your Constitution. The government is the EMPLOYEE of We The People. Now, can you imagine any company that discovers an employee who has lied to obtain money from the employer keeping his or her job? How about lies that kill people? Wouldn't the reasonable and responsible action be to fire that lying employee immediately, so set an example? Of course it would.

  But the media is trying to persuade you not to fire the liar, to simply accept the liar because other liars got away with it, to do nothing, to think nothing, to not get angry, to keep and continue to pay an employee who lies to obtain more money and to send your kids off to war. And isn't that the definition of a dictatorship when the people do not react to a government that acts illegally? That's what the media is selling you when they try to convince you not to be angry with the liars in high office; they are selling you a dictatorship, a nation where those in power can do whatever they want, whenever they want, however they want, with your money and your children and you will stand there silently and say and do nothing about it. That is the future they are trying to sell you. And they will succeed if you let them.

  Time has run out. You need to decide today whether you will live the rest of your life in a dictatorship or not. And you need to act appropriately. The good news is that the only reason the media is trying the "they all do it" excuse is that the situation is deteriorating. Pressure is mounting on Congress to act, that making phones calls, office visits, and GETTING ANGRY is working.

  So if you are a true child of 1776, keep up the pressure. Talk to your friends about what is going on. The latest polls show that fewer and fewer people believe that banned weapons were ever found in Iraq. Polls show Bush's numbers plummeting. The GOP is trapped, caught between having impeached Clinton for lies about an intern and Bush's lies to start wars. Sooner or later, something has to give. Keep up the pressure. Fire the liars! All the liars. In government and the media. The people of this nation deserve the truth, they are owed the truth, and under the Constitution, the government is required to give the people of this nation the truth. And it is time for the DC boys to get the message that we will have a truthful and honest government or we will have no government at all. "

"But look at it this way. Does the fact that many murderers are never caught mean we must not punish those we do catch? Of course not. That only leads to more murders as those who like to murder realize they may do so with impunity. "

Curiously enough, this is the exact same analogy I used over and over again when everyone around here said that to go after Sadam was hypocritical since there were so many other monsters around.
Curious. That's all I'm saying.

Why can’t the Muslim world expect the theory of evolution?

I presume you mean accept the theory of evolution.
If you mean why can't Muslim fundamentalists accept it, the obvious answer is that it is due to the same reasons why Christian fundamentalists like Falwell can't accept it - religious fanaticism, ignorance of science, lack of serious reading, and authoritarian upringing. Maybe these Muslim fundamentalists should take a good look at the behavior of buffoons like Bushy, Limbaugh, and Savage - living examples of how some human beings still have not advanced much beyond the Cro-Magnon level.
By the way, evolution, to most educated people, is not a theory but a fact. Natural Selection, Darwin's idea, is a theory developed to explain this fact - a highly persuasive theory that has successfully weathered more than a century of attacks from religious fanatics, philosphical idealists, and other reactionaries.

Fresca, has it occured to you that Hussein is not a U.S. citizen while Bush is, so the latter is subject to U.S. law in ways that Hussein is not? And that as President Bush is legally subject to impeachment by Congress, while the U.S. Government had no legal authority whatsoever to remove Hussein from office?

Meyer is so right. Plus the USA had no legal right to remove that wonderful and nice Hitler from power.

Someone must have dropped Meyer on his head.

Ah, the usual resort to the Hitler argument when right-wingers can't think of any other rationale for invading a third world nation that was not threatening the US in any way. Of course, the fact that Hitler had declared war on the US is irrelevant. As is the fact that Iraq had no way of attacking the United States even if it had wanted to.
You sound like the kind of person who would have been a Hitler supporter in the 1930's, whether you lived in the US or in Germany. Plenty of US corporations did support him, as well as rank and file American right wingers. After all, Adolf stood for a lot of the things that right wingers hold dear: suppression of labor unions and socialists, militarism and glorification of military values, support for repressive police measures, male supremecy, "family valures," homophobia, intolerance, racism, protection of rich capitalists like the Krupps from strikes, high taxes, or any threat to their wealth, and ridicule of non-western civilizations. Seig Heil.

Running low again numbnuts on ideas?

That banner was taped live over several networks, the photo couldn't be fake. Unlike your values. Even Yemen carried the broadcast!

As for Meyer, well I've read you posts. The worm called Meyer, he want's his asshole back. Apparently you've been using for a brain.

The photo is either faked or staged. There is nothing fake about the person who posted it, though - he is right up front about being a cretin and an ignorant fascist.

>By the way, evolution, to most educated people, is not a theory but a fact.

According to Sir Julian Huxley, one of the world's foremost evolutionists, "Evolution can be defined as a directional, essentially irreversible process, occurring in time, which in its course gives rise to an increase of variety and an increasingly high level of organization in its products. Our present knowledge forces us to the view that the whole of reality is evolution - one single process of self-transition."

It is most important to recognize in this definition that one who accepts it is accepting not just a biological theory but a worldview. Something so far-reaching in its scope and so comprehensive in its implication for us demands serious scrutiny. Such and examination can only be done in and abbreviated way in one article, but it is the intention of the author to stimulate the thinking of our readers.

A most important aspect of Huxley's definition is the directionality of the change that he says occurs in evolution. Note also that this directional change is not brought about by an external agency, such as a God, but rather by self-transformation. In this, basic properties of matter and energy are capable of accomplishing this age-long process of increasing order and organization.

As far as Huxley was concerned, evolution had removed from the sphere of rational discussion the very idea of God as the Creator of organisms. Nature, energy and matter were capable of initiating and accomplishing the whole process. The behavior of nature becomes of critical interest to us, and it is the fundamental character of this behavior on which we shall now focus our attention.

When such patterns of behavior are recognized by scientists, and no exceptions to the patterns are ever seen, the scientist formulates a statement of the behavior.

This is descriptive, not prescriptive. The scientists are only describing the observed behavior of natural events, descriptions, which in themselves dictate and predict nothing.

Isn't the result the same? Absolutely not! The man-formulated statement may give and accurate account of the natural phenomenon, but the statement itself has no power to cause it to occur.

It is profoundly significant that the two most basic laws of science are associated with energy and order. These are the famous First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics.

The THEORY of evolution completely flies in the face of the Laws of Thermodynamics.

The First Law, also called the Law of Energy Conservation, states that in any closed system no energy is either created or destroyed, though it can be changed from one form to another.

The Second Law states that all spontaneous processes go in a direction of increasing disorder, or randomness. The available energy for maintaining the physical processes of the universe is seen to be decreasing; everything spontaneously tends toward disorder and wearing out. This is also commonly referred to as entropy.

Evolutions says that single-celled slimy algae advanced themselves and became creatures which crawled out of the swamps and and finally became man. That's the simple becoming the more complex.

Second Law of Thermodynamics says that the more complex develops into the more simple, the exact opposite of what the Law of Thermodynamics teaches.

No where on Earth can scientists point out any creature today which is developing from a less complex creature to a more complex creature, yet we are to believe that this all happened over millions of years and suddenly today it has stopped. There are no half-man half-monkeys walking around today. There are no half any-creatures. There are no birds slowing turing into anything else other than other birds. There are no single-celled organisims becoming fish who grow legs to then walk out of the water and grow wings and fly away.

Evolution is the converse of the Two Laws. Logically Evolution and the Two Laws cannot both be true.

But the First and Second Laws are the two most proven generalizations of science. They pertain to all naturally-occurring events. According to these laws, natural processes are basically processes of conservation and disintegration.

For Evolution and the Laws of Thermodynamics to be compatible, evolution must incorporate mechanisms which can direct a process to a state of higher complexity and also provide for an energy conversion process. Evolutionists say this directionality and energy conversion are supplied by mutations and natural selection, yet both phenomena fail to operate in accordance with the evolutionary requirements previously stated.

The statement:

"Second Law of Thermodynamics says that the more complex develops into the more simple, the exact opposite of what the Law of Thermodynamics teaches."

should read:

Second Law of Thermodynamics says that the more complex develops into the more simple, the exact opposite of what the Theory of Evolution teaches.

evolution and the laws of thermodynamics do not contradict as evolution does not refer to a increece in absolute order but just local order.
If thermodynamics laws make evolution impossible they also make a computer screen impossible because a computer screen displays ordered images from an origional state of displaying nothing.. impossible right?
your definition of the laws of thermodynamics is breached by everything you have ever seen.

Mutations are more similar to "the uncertainty principle " than an entergy source.

No where on Earth can scientists point out any creature today which is developing from a less complex creature to a more complex creature

I can. any animal find a single animal that has a mutation.. there you go more complex. sure it may or may not be useful but it is probably more complex.

, yet we are to believe that this all happened over millions of years and suddenly today it has stopped.

- it hapens in birsts. natural selection causes creatures to evolve to their environment when they are well evolved to a certain environment change is slow because there arent alot of small improvements to be made. Things happen faster if the environment changes or if they become isolated from natural selection.

There are no half-man half-monkeys walking around today.

If there were then you would have given them a name and they would no longer be "half" anything they would be australopithicines or somthing and oyu would be looking for half austros..

There are no single-celled organisims becoming fish who grow legs to then walk out of the water and grow wings and fly away.

- er that takes a billion odd years mate

sorry, Titus, but the days of the Scopes Monkee Trial are over, except maybe in rural Tennessee, Arkansas, Kern County, and similar places. Why don't you move there - you will probably be happier. The 1880's haven't arrived there yet.

- If thermodynamics laws make evolution impossible they also make a computer screen impossible because a computer screen displays ordered images from an origional state of displaying nothing.. impossible right?

Man-made objects are not nature. Man can make the whole become greater than the sum of its parts. We can take wood and cut it and shape it into a house. But , the computer screen will slowly deteroriate. So will the house. They go from order to disorder. Evolutions says that creatures in nature went from the less complex to the more complex; that the tree, in and of its own self, "evolved" into a house.

- I can. any animal find a single animal that has a mutation.. there you go more complex. sure it may or may not be useful but it is probably more complex.

"More complex" means that a fish would become a bird. It's not talking about something reproducing of its own kind. All creatures procreate their own kind. There's no single celled animal that mutates into something other than what it is.

- er that takes a billion odd years mate

er mate, if it happened then, it would still be happening today. Where is the creature that was a fish but is "evolving" into a bird?

Newton's 2nd Law of Thermodynamics states that the entropy of a closed system cannot decrease.

But life is not a closed system (don't forget that little thing we call the 'sun'). The sun provides energy.

You are misconstruing Newton's 2nd Law. When it says "more complex", it is talking about energy (heat vs potential energy, for example). It has nothing to do with the complexity of an organism, whether it can swim or fly or walk on two legs.

"...how many Dead Children does it take to fill your Gas Tank?"

Is this silliness actually supposed to illustrate anything?

If you hate Arabs, Muslims, Blacks, Latinos, and Koreans, come to Computers N.L.A. for a purely Aryan shopping experience. No funny accents at our shop. Just red blooded Americans.