Ricky Gervais on Creationism (from Animals). (Please also read the afterword.)

Ricky Gervais is a comedy legend. He's done two fantastic stand-up shows, one quite crap one (you know which one I mean; ahem, Fame) and two fantastic shows - Extras and The Office, of course.

After watching this clip, a certain thought occured to me: not only can the snake - maybe God knew about Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets before J.K. Rowling did - and Eve speak English, but they could speak English before Babel occured. For those of you not familiar with Babel, I shall impart what I know.

Babel was the capital of Babylon - Babylon means 'gate of God' - in some language I don't know of, of course. (What? Yeah! I do fucking know the language, actually! Let's just call it Babylonian. Oh - makes sense.)

The Bible maintains that language was born at Babel after every single person in the 'Holy Land' (surely all of God's lands would be holy, right?) congregated there and started speaking in tongues. After a while of speaking in tongues, all the people fucked off home and thus, somehow, language was born. Sound convincing? Hmmm....

Anyway, doesn't the point that the [talking] snake and Eve could speak English (or any other language the Bible is translated into - such as Mandarin or Swedish or bullshit or whatever) before Babel occured undermine the whole point of Babel? The answer is yes - obviously! What? Do you think I'm some kind of fucking moron? Fuck you!

Thanks for watching the video.

Adendum: The book of Genesis supposes Adam was made from dust and Eve from Adam's rib. Only a child uneducated in biology and science could believe that - or a fundamentalist Christian. If Eve were made from a rib, surely all men would have a single rib fewer than women. That, of course, isn't the case. The best you can do - if you're a fundamentalist Christian - is say that Eve was made from Adam's penis bone. This is because, unlike other great apes and monkeys, human men lack penis bones.

Not only is the account of Genesis so utterly daft and designed that children can see through it (if they're not controlled by adults whom were taught from childhood to believe the pitiful attempt at identifying the source of creation) but there is also absolutely no evidence for it. I feel quite daft and reprehensible for having said no evidence backs it up - it's like saying the Honey Monster exists. But, that's what people expect these days. People will believe in the daftest cod-science until it's rejected scientifically - even then they may still persist in pursuing it purely out of ignorance. If you believe in the account of Genesis, I'd say there's no hope for you - maybe a snub-nosed .45 is the only solution for you. Make it painless, my friend.