Comments on: Was Darwin Wrong? (Part 1)

By: GMNightmare

GMNightmare — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 08:11:54 +0000

You should mention that Darwin didn’t invent or come up with evolution, that the principle and theories existed as far back as the Ancient Greeks. Darwin’s brain child, was natural selection… of course he provided quite a backing for evolution as well with this at the forefront.

By: Steve

Steve — Sun, 31 May 2009 21:28:20 +0000

I’ve heard young-Earth creationists respond to things like radioisotope rations, fossils and red-shifted light from distant galaxies with the astounding statement that all of these things were created in situ, to Test Our Faith. What I haven’t heard is the obvious response to this blunder: “If you assert that God is lying to us, how do we know which is the lie? Most of the observable universe, or your Big Book of Repeatedly-Translated, Often-Edited Fairy Tales?” As a divinely-inspired stupid-detector, the Holy Babble makes sense. Obviously, one of the things that got censored out was the final paragraph: “Anyone who takes these fables literally should be kept away from fire and sharp objects.”

By: Saint Gasoline » Blog Archive » Was Darwin Wrong? (Part 2)

Saint Gasoline » Blog Archive » Was Darwin Wrong? (Part 2) — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 03:05:28 +0000

[...] « Was Darwin Wrong? (Part 1) [...]

By: Engineer-Poet

Engineer-Poet — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 17:39:13 +0000

So, did he get his degree just so he could say he was a creationist with an advanced degree?

Probably yes, and it wouldn’t be the first time: Jonathan Wells got his PhD at the behest of Rev. Moon (who Wells refers to as “father”) for the express purpose of “destroying Darwinism”, and there was an incident at Ohio State where a creationists’ PhD committee was packed with creationist non-biologists (and not one real biologist) until some higher-ups got wind of it. The latter incident was part of the fuel for “Expelled”.

By: Ziztur

Ziztur — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 15:39:28 +0000

I listened to another lecture by Dr. Harrub the other day. In said lecture, he told his audience that he lied on his tests. I.E. He would “write down the answers they wanted them to here, but then put a little asterisk by them and write at the bottom of the page that he knew the real truth”

So, did he get his degree just so he could say he was a creationist with an advanced degree?

By: Lizz

Lizz — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 21:08:08 +0000

The sex was not even CLOSE to the depravity of listening to a man try to tell you that dinosaurs and men lived at the same time. That’s just the pinnacle of shame. (A slowly spiraling pinnacle - soon you’ll be going to save the unicorn rallies and throwing in money for a find Santa’s house at the North Pole expedition.)

Good old fashioned sex is the least of your worries (and booze is just a mild step down from sucking your thumb.)

By: Awesome McCool

Awesome McCool — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 19:52:56 +0000

If you really want Christian event-centered depravity, take your girlfriend to an abstinence rally, sign those ridiculous pledges they hand, and then bang her in the church parking lot afterwards (bonus points for getting genetic material on the pledge.)

By: Need_4_women

Need_4_women — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 16:30:45 +0000

Hmmm…. true enough, come to think of it, even rational well educated scientists can sometimes end up behaving like a wild pack of monkeys hurling feces, when they disagree on a theory or model.
Looking to my own experience (only because it is the only experience that I have the most intimate knowledge of) I grasped and utilized logic from an early age, but it was a university philosophy course, and in particular, learning of relativistic paradigms that made me even more rational, thoughtful and empathetic in debating.
Anyways, maybe a re-education based on freshman science and some philosophy basics might do the trick?
(I am currently enthralled to the idea of benevolent social engineering)
Alas, I guess my point is moot, since in more than a few dark places in the world you would have to first teach the inhabitants to read and not to shit in their water source.

By: Ziztur

Ziztur — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 15:15:55 +0000

If you combined the three of us into one brain, we’d be a superbrain. We’d also be super annoying to 99% of the population.

By: Saint Gasoline

Saint Gasoline — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 23:58:22 +0000

The power of cognitive dissonance can override any number of years spent studying biology, physics, or biochemistry, unfortunately.