Evidence that the bible is fake

By Hatuey ~

After reading atheistnurse's piece on Noah's Ark I decided to revisit
the story myself to get a better understanding of it the way she did.
Once I began reading, I noticed something in those passages that stood
out from all the rest. I also noticed that the particular subject that
those verses dealt with were not covered in atheistnurse's piece. So
with a curious mind, a healthy dose of skepticism, and a boatload of
information that I gathered from the internet and a few books I
decided to show you all the fruits of my research, but if any of you
find fault with something do let me know. I would like to use this
against any Christian that thinks that the Bible is infallible and I
wouldn't like to be on the losing side of that argument due to having
done improper or shady research. Now then, let us have a little
biology lesson.

The verses that I was referring to can be found in Genesis 6: 19-20
and they clearly state Biblegod's intention:

"You are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male
and female, to keep them alive with you. Two of every kind of bird, of
every kind of animal and of every kind of creature that moves along
the ground will come to you to be kept alive." (NIV)


Obviously anyone can see that Biblegod wanted to tell Noah that he
wants to preserve the members of the animal kingdom and wanted them to
repopulate the planet once the flood waters receded. Now, excluding
the ramifications of any genetic disease that might appear or the
possibility of incest due to every unclean animal being given the task
to propagate the species with only two individuals (Adam and Eve
anyone?), we see here that Biblegod at least knows how reproduction
works since it was he who the Bible credits with inventing it. One
male and one female is all you need in order to have offspring…or is
it?

Before I continue with this little endeavor, it is necessary for me to
explain the concept of parthenogenesis. To put it simply,
parthenogenesis (literally meaning "virgin birth" in Greek) is a form
of reproduction in which the growth and development of an embryo or
seed requires no need of fertilization by a male. Many invertebrates
have this form of asexual reproduction as part of their life cycle but
few vertebrates do. A leading exemplar of a vertebrate that is
parthenogenic is the Komodo Dragon. It is at this point that a
Christian might say "Ah but wait a minute! The female Komodo Dragon
only goes through parthenogenesis when there are no viable males to
which it can mate with. It still does not refute the necessity of
having both a male and a female to propagate the species as the Bible
clearly states. You lose!" Though it is true that female Komodo
Dragons become parthenogenic only when there are no males to be found,
I have to clarify that I only used that particular animal in order to
begin my assessment of the subject. And may I say that I'm far from
finished.

It is with great pleasure that I now introduce you all with the animal
that has helped me with my refutation of those verses. Ladies and
gentlemen, I give you Lepidodactylus lugubris. Commonly known as the
Mourning Gecko, this little lizard (just like its much larger
reptilian cousin) is also parthenogenic. Though there is a huge
difference between the two and it's a big one. You see, when you're a
Mourning Gecko you're always having a night out with the girls. Boys
are never allowed to join in for the fun because there are simply no
boys in the first place. Every single specimen from this species is
female and they manage quite fine without ever having a man around the
house (sorry guys).

Surely you all must know by now where I'm going with this. But if not,
I invite you to reread that verse that I presented earlier. The verse
clearly states one male and one female for every unclean animal. No
exceptions. A few verses later on in the story shows us that the
number of every kind of clean animal is said to be seven, though it's
still implied that there must be at least one representative of each
sex. Yet all of those verses fail to mention any hint of any lizard
with a population that only consists of females. There is no "…male
and female (except for those parthenogenic lizards which get two
females and no males) to keep them alive with you".

How can Biblegod, being all knowing, overlook such a simple thing? His
word is (according to some denominations) supposed to be infallible.
He created those lizards and their form of reproduction. Shouldn't it
say so in that holy book? It seems that the more one reads those
verses the more it appears to be quite simply that the Bible is a
collection of books written by fallible men who only had a limited
understanding of biology and that they didn't bother to lift the legs
of every animal that they encountered in order to confirm its sex.

The way I see it is that, unless there is some sort of lacuna in the
book of Genesis, any Christian claiming that the Bible has any
exemplary facts when it comes to biology doesn't know what he or she
is talking about. Should it be a case of a lacuna, then the Bible is
an incomplete work. How many Christians would dare say that? Not many
I bet.

The existence of this little Gecko has created a hole in the
historicity of the book of Genesis and though the name of this animal
has the word mourning in it, I can tell you that I'm not the one who
will feel any sorrow from this lizard. I have even made a joke about
it. Since it is a Gecko, I thought of something around the likes of
the GEICO commercial: 15 minutes of reading these verses could save
you 15% or more on brainwashing insurance. That should help people who
are recovering from leaving Christianity. Maybe we should make this
Gecko a spokesperson for our cause.