Bank Of America Begins 66-Day Countdown Until The "Ghost Of 1937" Returns

Tyler Durden's picture

In 66 trading days on September 17, 2015, the Federal Reserve will, according to Bank of America, hike rates for the first time since 2006, which according to BofA will "end the era of excess liquidity."

We disagree entirely, but let's hear what BofA's Michael Hartnett has to say:

On September 17th the Fed will hike the Fed funds rate by 25bps according to Ethan Harris & our US economics team, the first hike since June 2006. 


Recent US economic data support this view, in particular the solid May payroll & retail sales reports. Note that after a Q1 wobble, one of our favorite cyclical indicators, US small business confidence, has also bounced back into expansionary territory. Ethan Harris forecasts 3.4% US GDP growth in Q2, after 0.2% in Q1, and US rates strategist Priya Misra forecasts a Fed funds rate of 0.5% by year-end, and 1.5% by end-2016. Like Ethan & Priya, the futures market also looks for a modest Fed tightening cycle: Eurodollar futures contracts are currently pricing in 3-month rates in the US rising from 0.01% today to 0.65% by year-end, and to 1.54% by end-2016.

Yes, the US economy is so strong the Bureau of Economic Analysis has to fabricate double seasonal adjustments to goalseek GDP data that is non-compliant with the narrative. As for economists being wrong about a rate hike, or overestimating future US growth, let's just say it won't be the first time they are wrong...

Still, one thing BofA is right about: this time the normalization process will be different.

Past Fed performance is no guide to future performance


Gradual or otherwise, the first interest rate hike by the Fed since June 2006 marks a major inflection point for financial markets. Three reasons suggest that the impact of higher Fed rates will be far less predictable than normal, that historical comparisons may be less powerful, and that volatility across both credit & equity markets should continue to be owned.

Actually, the main reason is one, and it is very simple. It is shown in the chart below.

Here are some other reasons why the Fed's rate hike will lead to a period of, to put it mildly, volatility which "will mark the beginning of the end of massive monetary easing and a collapse of interest rates to effectively zero across the globe, and follows a humungous bull market in both equities and credit in the past 6 years:"

  • Central banks now own over $22 trillion of financial assets, a figure that exceeds the annual GDP of US & Japan
  • Central banks have cut interest rates 577 times since Lehman, a rate cut once every three 3 trading days
  • Central bank financial repression created $6 trillion of negatively-yielding global government bonds earlier this year
  • 45% of all government bonds in the world currently yield <1% (that’s $17.4 trillion of bond issues outstanding)
  • US corporate high grade bond issuance as a % of GDP has doubled to almost 30% since the introduction of ZIRP
  • US small cap 5-year rolling returns hit 30-year highs (28%) in recent quarters
  • The US equity bull market is now in the 3rd longest ever
  • 83% of global equity markets are currently supported by zero rate policies

Put simply, central bank's provision of liquidity for financial markets has been unprecedented. The extent of Wall Street addiction to liquidity is about to be revealed and the potential for unintended consequences is clearly high.

Which is not to say that attempts to "renormalize" rates are unheard of: previously both Israel and the RBNZ tried it and failed, with markets promptly forcing them to reverse tightening.

More notably, it was the ECB itself which in April of 2011 under Jean-Claude Trichet tried to halt Chinese inflation exports in their tracks, and pulled off one rate hike... before the wheels came off from under Europe and the continent promptly entered a double dip recession, leading not only to a return to ZIRP, and the replacement of Trichet with an Italian Goldman Sachs apparatchik, but ultimately pushed Europe into its first ever NIRP episode.

But no episode is more notable than what happened in the US in 1937, smack in the middle of the Great Depression. This is the only time in US history which is analogous to what the Fed will attempt to do, and not only because short rates collapsed to zero between 1929-36 but because the Fed’s balance sheet jumped from 5% to 20% of GDP to offset the Great Depression.

Just like now.

And then, briefly, the economy started to improve superficially, just like now, and as a result the Fed tightened in a series of three steps between Aug’36 & May’37, doubling reserve requirements from $3bn to $6bn, causing 3-month rates to jump from 0.1% in Dec’36 to 0.7% in April’37.

Here is a detailed narrative of precisely what happened from a recent Bridgewater note:

The first tightening in August 1936 did not hurt stock prices or the economy, as is typical.


The tightening of monetary policy was intensified by currency devaluations by France and Switzerland, which chose not to move in lock-step with the US tightening. The demand for dollars increased. By late 1936, the President and other policy makers became increasingly concerned by gold inflows (which allowed faster money and credit growth). 


The economy remained strong going into early 1937. The stock market was still rising, industrial production remained strong, and inflation had ticked up to around 5%. The second tightening came in March of 1937 and the third one came in May. While neither the Fed nor the Treasury anticipated that the increase in required reserves combined with the sterilization program would push rates higher, the tighter money and reduced liquidity led to a sell-off in bonds, a rise in the short rate, and a sell-off in stocks. Following the second increase in reserves in March 1937, both the short-term rate and the bond yield spiked.


Stocks also fell that month nearly 10%. They bottomed a year later, in March of 1938, declining more than 50%!

Or, as Bank of America summarizes it: "The Fed exit strategy completely failed as the money supply immediately contracted; Fed tightening in H1’37 was followed in H2’37 by a severe recession and a 49% collapse in the Dow Jones."

As can be seen on the above, in 1938, the stock market began to recover some. However, despite the easing stocks didn't fully regain their 1937 highs until the end of the war nearly a decade later.

Wait, the Fed hiked only to easy? That's right: in response to the second increase in reserves that March, Treasury Secretary Morgenthau was furious and argued that the Fed should offset the "panic" through open market operations to make net purchases of bonds. Also known now as QE. He ordered the Treasury into the market to purchase bonds itself.

Fed Chairman Eccles pushed back on Morgenthau urging him to balance the budget and raise tax rates to begin to retire debt.

How quaint: once upon a time the US actually had an independent Fed, not working on behalf of the banks, and pushing back on pressure to monetize debt and raise stock prices.

Those days are long gone.

So is the imminent rate hike which guarantees the ghost of 1937 is about to wake up and lead to stock losses which could make the Lehman crash seem like a dress rehearsal just the precursor to QE4, as happened nearly 80 years ago? We don't know, but neither does the manager of the world's biggest hedge fund. This is what Ray Dalio says ahead of the upcoming rate hike:

... in our opinion, inadequate attention is being paid to the risks of a downturn in which central bankers' abilities to ease are significantly impaired. Please understand that we are not sure of anything but, for the reasons explained, we do not want to have any concentrated bets, especially at this time.

We don't know either, but we do know that if the S&P is cut in half the Fed will launch not just QE4, but 5, 6 and so on, resulting in every other central bank doing the same as global currency war goes nuclear, and the race to the final currency collapse enters its final lap.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
greenskeeper carl's picture

yes, please....

(not getting my hopes up)

jaap's picture

Only 49%?

This time there are no real buyers anymore

Usurious's picture
Usurious (not verified) jaap Jun 15, 2015 9:22 PM



what does Hillsenrat say?........

Tall Tom's picture

He sez you need to buy MOAR shit that you do not need or cannot afford.


Anyway...So Bunk of America is projecting an August 20 collapse.


Right in line with the Shemitah.


(Just because YOU, the reader, may not believe in God does not mean that the ones in power do not. And those that do believe in God will do their damndest to make the prophecy fulfill itself. They believe that they are fulfilling "God's will" in doing so. Heads up. Lloyd Blankfein actually believes that he is doing God's work.)


Looking forward to September...

Not Too Important's picture

You got God confused with Lucifer, TT.

(Just because YOU, the reader, may not believe in Lucifer does not mean that the ones in power do not. And those that do believe in Lucifer will do their damndest to make the prophecy fulfill itself. They believe that they are fulfilling "Lucifer's will" in doing so. Heads up. Lloyd Blankfein actually believes that he is doing Lucifer's work.)

This is how the shit-show is run.

Tall Tom's picture

No. I do not have God confused with Lucifer. I am not illuminati. I am diametrically opposed


As for Lloyd Blankfein and the rest?


Even the Satanists believe in God. They just worship the wrong one.


But ALL THINGS work toward the glory of God...even that evil which the Satanists do.

Manthong's picture

Stand by for no bid… no F’ng bid.

palmereldritch's picture

66 days huh?

That's like 33 times 2 (II) !!


Anusocracy's picture

Thank God the Fed knows how to push a string into the wind.

MonetaryApostate's picture

The clock is ticking on everyone, whether they know it or not....

Not Too Important's picture

Didn't say you were. It's clear you're on the right team.

Especially with that last line. Very few ever figure that out.

It's just the carnage in-between that's hard to stomach.

DeadFred's picture

This is all smoke and mirrors, they raise rates in two days not two months. If they have to raise how will they do it after Greece has defaulted and the war jitters start? It's now or never and I believe someone gave them the tap on the shoulder

The Merovingian's picture

Right said Fred.  Here comes Janet's little prick when no one is looking.

cyberfossil's picture

Especially with that last line. Very few ever figure that out.

Apropros-hope you are on the right team:

NoDebt's picture

Articles like this make me pine for the days where Bernanke was at the helm of the ship.  That man knew how to drop money when money needed to be dropped.  Janet doesn't have the chops.  When this whole thing starts sliding off the edge of the table, she'll freeze like the scared little rabbit she is, do little to nothing, and set the table for WWIII, just like she's supposed to.

MonetaryApostate's picture

"You can't taper a ponzi-scheme!" - Max Keiser

(I'm with max on this, the shit is going to hit the fan in 3 months!)

That would put us @ September 21rst yes?

(The crash would follow shortly thereafter)

crazytechnician's picture

The can has been kicked since 1971 , do not underestimate the longevity of the boot.

marathonman's picture

The Bank of England has kicked the can for 300 years.  The Fed has kicked the can for 100 years.  I wouldn't necessarily bet against them.  They own most of the world and are going for the rest. 

TheReplacement's picture

As someone who believes in God, I do not go out of my way to make his will happen.  I figure, 'Hey, he's God.  He doesn't need me to do anything but believe.' 

Of course if you claim to believe but do not have faith, then you need to make it happen to justify yourself.

I guess maybe that is the difference between faith and religion.

BringOnTheAsteroid's picture

"As someone who believes in God".

You think you believe in God. An idea implanted in your mind at a very young age is indistinguishable from a personal thought, a thought you arrived at under your own volition, under your own analysis. We are all progranmed from birth by our parents, our friends, our teachers and the MSM, in that order. We are biological automatons. You cannot escape this. You are fed information subject to centuries of bias and distortion and cultural nuance.

There may or may not be a god but the inescapable fact is, no one can know, no one can ever know. Theists will invoke basic emotion at best and magic at worst to win their argumant but this is the working of an infantile mind. "I feel" gods presence is a common theistic retort. No - you have been programmed to display the same emotions and use the same descriptive words as millions of your predecessors. Your subjective world has been largely implanted by society. You cannot tell any difference so will argue ferociously to the contrary. A true product of the matrix. 

In the coming years I suspect we are going to see a level of suffering that will leave us all stone cold to any belief in a higher power. This shit show that is life cannot have been created by an infinitely high power. Why make animals suffer as they do? Why make innocent humans suffer as they do? Life is the equivalent of a mechanical process, unfortunately this alone is enough to explain the horror that goes on in this world. If you are an innocent human and suffer horribly in this life, why the fuck do you need god, what's the point? You'd be suffering equally if there was no god.

You needn't be scared of this revelation because there is nothing you can do about it. 


Seek_Truth's picture


There is a need for God in each of us- it is part of our genome- because we are created by God.

We are all fed information, for sure. It is up to each of us to use our all of our God given gifts to discern the truth.

When you state that "There may or may not be a god but the inescapable fact is, no one can know, no one can ever know",

you aren't considering what will happen in the end- as foretold in the Bible.

Some theists, it is true- work on emotion, primarily. (Again, using the gifts God gave them).

Others use research, intellectualism, math, logic, etc. (Again, using the gifts God gave them).

We will, indeed, see suffering unlike anything that history has ever before recorded- and most of us commenting here on ZH will see it before we pass on.

But that will be the harbinger of the return of Jesus Christ, just as He foretold, so it will be a litmus test of those who believe in God, and those who do not.

Humans suffer because they fell from grace- Jesus Christ established the way for all suffering to end.

Jesus Christ Himself suffered- we should expect to suffer as well,- a servant is not greater than his master.

There is everything we can do about it- we can accept Jesus Christ as our personal Lord and Savior!



Counterpunch's picture
Counterpunch (not verified) Seek_Truth Jun 15, 2015 11:07 PM

A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything.

     - Friedrich Nietzsche

Seek_Truth's picture

"And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him." - God

-(Hebrews 11:6)

Counterpunch's picture
Counterpunch (not verified) Seek_Truth Jun 15, 2015 11:18 PM

"God for you is where you sweep away all the mysteries of the world, all the challenges to our intelligence. You simply turn your mind off and say God did it." - Carl Sagan (1934-1996), Contact

Seek_Truth's picture

Au contraire, those with faith seek to explain the mysteries of the world- and are successful in doing so- precisely because they do not shut their minds to the truth that God created everything, in the beginning.

"Mae prawf y pwdin yn y bwyta." - some Welsh guy

Counterpunch's picture
Counterpunch (not verified) Seek_Truth Jun 15, 2015 11:33 PM

thats why those with faith attributed disease to sin, and not germs - confusing believing something is the case with having knowledge something is the case, derived from empirical verification.


You place the word/label "God" in, and think you've gained knowledge? This is weapons grade stupidity.


We may as well resume burning women as witches, witchcraft being in the bible, donchyaknow.  And stoning to death people teenagers who scream at their parents 'I hate you' after an argument.


And so forth.

Tall Tom's picture

Yeah. I am happy that you expose that you espouse Nietzsche's philosophy.


You have read "Beyond Good and Evil", right? I have. What a classic work! It promotes a relative morality where the practioner can spew lies to serve...himself...when he sees fit.


Yes. So did Alaistair Crowley read Nietzsche.


Celebrate the flesh. Do as thou wilt is the entireity of the Law. Lying is good whereas the truth is evil if it does not serve one's self.


Nietzxche was more of a Satanist than an atheist. He transformed himself into his own God, the most extreme form of psychopathic narcissism.


Today's neoatheism is nothing more than Satanism in disquise.


It is Zionism in a sense.


Waging war by deception is the hallmark slogan, the creed of the Mossad, after all. And Satan is the father of deception.


Thanks for exposing yourself. Really. I enkoy reading the musings of narcissistic psychopaths as it telegraphs the evil which the future beholds.


You espouse Nietzsche's philosophy after all. It is evidential as you have quoted him enough.

Counterpunch's picture
Counterpunch (not verified) Tall Tom Jun 16, 2015 12:44 AM

Hi TT, no I wouldnt say I 'espouse' his philosophy, but I do espouse the succinct wisdom of that particular quote.


As to moral relativism, I have to part ways with you on how I look at that, too, and sure a nietzsche quote will suffice:  'there are no moral phenomena at all, only a moral interpretation of phenomena'


Yes, there are Kant's arguments and natural law arguments - but these don't actually get around Nietzche's ontological framing - what morality is - is a judgment as to the goodness/rightness of something. 

Morality is inherently relative, for sure.  This needn't mean chaos.


I also like William James' and Dewey's Pragmatism.


In terms of ethics - I go with secular humanism.  Radically anti-war and anti-violence. 


If you've noticed, I've elected to sidestep your ad hominem.


Tall Tom's picture

Nietzsche pisses me off as he is a narcissistic psychopath. Thanks for your forgiving oversight as I allowed my emotions, my zeal, to get the best of me...again.


I just get blinded by what Secular Humanism breeds.


I understand that Secular Humanism is Satanism. Morality is not relative when one accepts the Kingdom of God. 


I can state that the true practice of "Relative Morality" is no better than that which happens in the Animal Kingdom.


Now in the Animal Kingdom killing and warfare are endemic. So is enslavement and farming. Cannibalism. Homosexuality. Pederasty and pedophillia. Incest. Beastiality. Theft.


 I can give you many examples..from warring ants to aphid farming ants. And that is in just one order, Hymenoptera.


Homosexuality is endemic amongst many orders and species of animals. Secular Humanists may believe that is okay that it happens with humans. In Greece and the Balkans, ancient and modern, Men-Boy Sex is expected and required, even to this modern day. NAMBLA does not exist by accident. It is wrong and the practitioners know it. That is why they hide it.


Girls are impregnated when they become "of age", the onset of menstruation. That happens across many cultures here on Earth.


Ritual Cannibalism even still happens to this day in some cultures. It is not widely reported but there are still incidents in New Guinea.


Child Rape still happens in many, many cities acrss the Globe including the USA.


In fact there are districts in the USA where the Police intentionally turn a blind eye while boys are picked up by the uberwealthy and Sodomized. I WATCHED THAT HAPPEN IN PHOENIX...TWELVE HOURS PER DAY FOR THREE WEEKS.


Interspecies sex happens in the Animal Kingdom naturally. Beastiality is practiced. If it is natural then do it?


But that is nothing different than what happens in the Animal Kingdom.


That is the fruits of Secular Humanism. Do what thou wilt.


We are separate from the animals. We inherently know right from wrong.


You do. I do.


Now mother never taught me not to have sex with animals. I know that would not only be wrong but disgusting.


And mother never taught me not to have sex with kids...even when I was a kid.  Neither did the INDOCTRINATORS, the teachers in the School System and "Religious Leaders" (I really did not go to church much as a child. Thankfully I was spared that.) Yet somehow I knew that it would be wrong and shameful.


In fact we knew that there was something wrong about that. We, even as children, knew that it was forbidden to have sex with another child, and we knew INHERENTLY where to draw our own lines, set our own boundaries, when exploring and experimenting. Who or what told us.


There is no restrictions placed upon the animals. There is this one species of monkey where if they are not out gathering food then it is a constant orgy...regardless of sex, age, or whether or not any of them are in Esterus.


It is definitely a non reproductive activity.


How about INCEST? It happens in the Animal Kingdom.


It is TABOO in our culture. How does one know that one is not to have sex with blood relatives or siblings? It takes a will to overcome that TABOO and violate it.


We were given a conscience...a spirit.


And that is what separates us from the Animal Kingdom. It is a profound difference.


Relative Morality does not work when one has a conscience.


The battle is being waged between the spirit and the flesh...our conscience against our Animal Instincts.





BringOnTheAsteroid's picture

TT, do you agree with capital punishment?

At what age is it permissible for two humans to copulate? Does your innate sense of morality dictate this age to be 18 years or 17 years or 16 years or 15 years and 6 months.

We will be very quickly entrenched in relative morality.

I keep banging the same drum and you guys just don;'t get it or are simply unwillingly to accept that all these innate feelings you THINK ARE INNATE are programmed either genetically or via cultural norms.

You know as well as I do that incest has been largely been selected out of a higher organism repertoire because the resultant offsrping are more than likely to be unviable.

Our conscience is a complex interplay of social norms and psychology (including guilt and many other emotions). If conscience was god given native tribes would display the same flavour of morality as we do (as in modern western man), but they don't. so haven't you lost that argument just fair and square right there.

I reckon you constantly mix up reality with your hoped for reality. Is this not a fair call?


IdiotsOutWalkingAbout's picture

"Ritual Cannibalism even still happens to this day in some cultures. It is not widely reported but there are still incidents in New Guinea."

TT, please explain how Holy Communion is not ritual cannibalism? (Eat, drink. This is my body and blood, given and shed for you for the remission of sin.)

If the idea of cannibalism is so replulsive to you (as it is to me), how can you not see that it is embedded in Christianity's Bible and is a fundamental pillar of the faith? At it's bloody heart, Christianity is a death cult.

Zoomorph's picture


Thank you for being logical, presenting clear arguments, and avoiding personal attacks.

erg's picture

Let's face it folks, we're barely out of the trees. Any possible concepts of any kind of god-thing have to be greatly stunted at best. As a collective, forever steeped in our own fecund stupidity we think we have it all figured out.

It's absurd. Look at us, we're a complete fucking mess. Figuratively, spiritually, everything.

Can't find our own well-lit ass.


Seek_Truth's picture

Yeah, we're all collectively imperfect.

But God sent His only begotten Son to show us the way.

Accepting Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior is the path to salvation, as well as understanding.

erg's picture

More ephemeral schisms. Not that I've completely discounted the possibility.

cheech_wizard's picture

Belief, . .is all we got to separate us from being a chunk.

Charming Anarchist's picture

A man without faith is insane. It is impossible for man to have "proof" of everything he must believe.  At the very least, man must have faith that the sun will re-appear in the east tomorrow in and around the same time as it did today. 

Faith is part of the human condition.  Without some sort of belief in the unknown, man would never venture out of the cave. 


I bet an ounce of Ag that 99% of the folks reading this believe 99% of the "science" they were taught as incontrovertible truth and yet, most of it is fudged and deliberately falsefied.  If you can not think of at least 1 example of the lies you were taught in grade school, then you are unwittingly a man of faith. Your religion is "science" of intellectual statism. 

Counterpunch's picture
Counterpunch (not verified) Charming Anarchist Jun 15, 2015 11:41 PM


A person who confuses faith with knowledge is insane.

A person who understands that his knowledge is imperfect and possibly wrong understands science.

'Apodictic truth' is the realm of religion and metaphysics, and not science. 

Religion explained disease as arising from sin - imagine if we accepted that false knowledge as "truth" forever and prohibited all inquiries otherwise.

Religion burned people at the stake for translating the bible.  It commanded Galileo to recant. It has made Jerusalem and environs the bloodiest place on earth.

Dont confuse religious faith with knowledge derived from empirical verification. 

The man of faith claims that his belief is true because he believes it

The man of science claims that his belief is true, until proven otherwise, based on empirical verification.

As for your ethics and values - secular humanism is at least as good, and probably a better candidate than a set of rules falsely attributed to a non-existent entity.


It's 2015.  Stop adhering to the fallacy that the finite, imperfect nature of human knowledge entitles you to believe something, without evidence, then claim it is true, because you believe it is true, and then claim that OTHER PEOPLE WHO ALSO BELIEVE SOMETHING DIFFERENT VIA THEIR OWN FAITH ARE WRONG... BECAUSE YOU THINK THEY ARE.

{to dumb this down - why are you right but a Jew or Taoist or worshipper of Odin wrong? Because you "believe" they are?  They believe the same about you!}

Your position is epistemological solipsism - and it is absurd, it disproves itself.


If I have faith Seek Truth is an agent of the Devil and his sacred book was written by demons - it is true, because I have faith it is true, thereby Seek Truth can not have faith otherwise, because it he did, his believe would be true - but it can not be, because I have faith that something else is true, and my faith determines truth....


edit:  p.s. it is fine, mroe than fine to junk a post - but it is a dick move to do it so quickly it is clear you can't have read the post.  If you can't be bothered to read it, dont pretend you did.

Seek_Truth's picture

Faith and knowlege are two separate things.

So are knowledge and wisdom.

And knowledge and science are two different things.

Disease does arise from sin - this has never been proved or unproved- yet knowledge, wisdom, and faith lead to this conclusion.

"Religion" has certainly led to many positive and negative outcomes for humanity.

That is why there is a distinction between true religion and false religion.

"By their fruits you shall know them" - Matthew 7:16

Your comment about "empirical verification" has become, for the most part, meaningless in today's world of bought and paid for $cience.

There is a huge body of evidence to prove that God exists, that He created all things, that we are living in the last days.

Again, "The proof of the pudding is in the eating" - some Welsh guy.

BringOnTheAsteroid's picture

"There is a huge body of evidence to prove that God exists"

I think we need to have a long hard talk about the word "evidence".

For a start the bible is absolutely impermissible as evidence as in every way a science book is impermissible as evidence of any of its claims.

I'll humour you and ask you to state one of your proofs that god exists. This is going to be earth shattering because this is exactly what I am looking for, proof. This is as exciting as my personal journey through science, philoosphy. religion, psychology, history and politics is ever going to get. AT LAST, SOMEONE HAS PROOF :) 


Seek_Truth's picture

We've been to this movie before, BOTA.

Do you ever get out?


Try it- observe what you see.

Think about it.

This planet, and all the minerals, flora, fauna, and humans- didn't "happen" by chance.

Math proves this, as well as our observational powers.

"For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse." - Romans 1:20

PS- It's getting late here.

BringOnTheAsteroid's picture

Going for a hike is not evidence of gods existence. I get tired of these christian "rainbows are so pretty they must be created by god" argument.

There is outstanding beauty in this world and no doubt on millions of other planets in the universe.

It's tiring that you use the term "powers of observation" as a form of evidence, OH IF ONLY SCIENCE WAS SO EASY.

I suggest you read "A Living Planet" and "Life on Earth" by David Attenborough. 

"This planet, and all the minerals, flora, fauna, and humans- didn't "happen" by chance. Math proves this"

Math proves this? Riiiiiiight. Are you telling tarry diddles here Seek. PROVES. Did I read this correctly?

And if there are an infinite number of parallel universes then this concept of absolute precision of certain key constants collapses like a wave function.

There is no proof seek, it's a shame that the moral concept of honesty could not draw us both to the same conclusion. But as George Costanza said "It's not a lie if you believe it".

I'll accept proof, instantly. You offer up nothing more than highly emotional sentiment book ended in scientific nomenclature. 

pazmaker's picture

who designed the process of photosynthesis?   You seem pretty intelligent...would you agree it takes intelligence in order to design a complex organism?   I tell you show me proof a skyscrapper can be erected without a plan and design first or better yet show me a painting that is hanging on a wall that does not come from the mind of an artist.   Show one invention on this earth that came about on it's own and was not invented or designed by a person, just one please.


I'm sorry I don't mean to insult you but anyone who believes the complex human genome is not a design that took a designer is pretty damn ignorant.   I will you give you this have an incredible amount of FAITH!   Because when one sees all the complexity of design weaved through out nature and processes in nature, and then believes they came about by chance and not through some intelligent designer then that takes a lot of FAITH!!   Atheist have more faith then Diest!

Mayer Amschel Rothschild's picture

Black holes, anti-matter, parallel universes, spontaneous originial creation of life, anthropomorphic global warming, fossil fuels, and other fantastic bed-time stories courtesy of the highest levels of blind faith in the religion of Science.

IdiotsOutWalkingAbout's picture

If God was such a perfect designer, why put a common inlet on the human airway and its cakehole? That is a stupid, dangerous design, a built in choking hazard. Why not make teeth last a lifetime? The earth is 2/3 water. Where are my webbed fingers and toes; maybe a standby gill system for breatheing when I fall in? Who the F*ck can't think of an improved human design? And I'm not even claiming to be God. Just a human frustrated by physical problems that constantly limit what my brain would permit me to do.

BTW fundamentalists geniuses ought to own up to the fact that even the Creator must have been confused, because in Genesis 1 He creates man and woman equal and in his image while he's make all the other animals and then in Genesis 2 the writer comes up with the woman made from Adam's rib myth. These are two distinctly different creation stories: two distinctly different women. The first was Lilith and the second was Eve.

In the beginning, God created the conflicting text in the Bible. Yeppers. Next, all the faithful explain it with the blanket statement: God works in mysterious ways.

Let's just go there now and get it over with.