Evolution is a religion? Talk about an idiot on Wisconsin school board!

[hyphenate]

http://www.wisconsinrapidstribune.com/article/20100327/WRT06/3270358

"I am Christian, conservative, and a Constitutionalist. I'm one of "those people" who clings to God, guns and the Bible, and I pray all the time for direction and strength. I believe evolution is a religion, and any science used to convince you otherwise is weak. I also believe if you are going to teach evolution as "science" you must address intelligent design which can be backed by the same scientific evidence.

"I think public education should not be public indoctrination of your children. Parents have every right to raise their children as they see fit, and social engineering of your kids should be prohibited in any public school."



-------------------------------------------------------------

If you ask me, this moron is just plain stupid, and what he's doing on a school board is anyone's guess.

[Warren DeMontague]

1. This person doesn't understand how science works.

Not surprising.

[Zoeisright]

26. No kidding. There's no 'belief' in science. At all.

These drooling idiots who don't 'believe' in evolution or climate change do not understand the scientific process.

[MajorChode]

33. The stupid bastard doesn't even understand how "intelligent design" works

The so-called intelligent design concept came from the dipshit creationists who lost their battle in court when they tried to force creationism to be taught in schools. They simply took their failed creationism lesson plans, and took some white out to all the references to Jesus, and repackaged their nonsense as "intelligent design". Of course, judges saw through their ruse, correctly labeled ID as pseudoscience, and again they lost in court just as they have every single time since the Scopes Monkey Trial was overturned on appeal over 80 years ago.

[Bill McBlueState]

2. it's really weird

how religious people try to undermine evolution by saying it's a religion.

For that to be a slur, you have to believe that religions are inherently less credible than other bodies of ideas.

[hobbit709]

3. Mark Twain's statement is proven correct once again

"First God made idiots, that was for practice. Then He made school boards"

[msongs]

4. guns are a religion lol nt

[pokerfan]

14. WWJS?

Who Would Jesus Shoot?



"You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. They pull a knife, you pull a gun. He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue. Matthew 5:38-39

[Odin2005]

5. One of Bob Altemeyer's Right-Wing Authoritarians.

Anyone who calls Evolution a religion is either 1. a RW Authoritarian, or 2. A Postmodernist idiot.

[LeftishBrit]

6. Even as an atheist, it seems to me strange that a Christian would talk of 'God, guns and the Bible

as though guns are appropriately placed between God and the Bible. Sounds like guns have turned into a graven image here.

And WTF about evolution being a religion!

[Fumesucker]

20. Hard to shoot heretics without a gun.. n/t

[madeline_con]

55. He said he's an Obama hater. It's code for other idiots. n/t

[Birthmark]

7. What is an ignoramus like that doing on the school board?

I know, I know.

[donco6]

10. Lemme tell ya . . .

There are so many of these people on school boards - you'd be flabbergasted.

[Birthmark]

24. I am flabbergasted

I'm a regular Panda's Thumb reader. So what flabbergasts me isn't how stupid and ignorant they are, but their sheer, seemingly inexhaustible numbers!

[donco6]

35. LOL! Yeah.

And there's always another - even worse one - to replace the one you thought was bonkers.

[verdalaven]

8. Evolution is a religion?

Does that mean if a few of my like minded friends and I get together once a week to discuss evolution, we too can enjoy tax exempt status?

[Initech]

9. How do these idiot wingnuts get to be on our school boards?

[donco6]

11. It only takes a few hundred votes to get on a board.

Our last election had people elected with 383.

[Festivito]

12. I think that too many people here understand only their own side.

Until there is a willingness to understand the other side's position, further discussion is meaningless.

[Tesha]

16. You say that as though the opinions held by morons deserve equal consideration to...

...those held by, say, PhDs.

That's one of the ideas that's destroying our civilization.

Tesha

[Festivito]

17. All of our citizens deserve consideration, even those who would refuse to hear others.

And, I'm not saying equal, more or even less -- just some would be nice. Enough would be astounding.

[RainDog]

38. are you unaware that the U.S. legal system has ruled i.d. etc, is worthless?

the i.d./creationist position (in court the i.d.-ers were shown to have derived material by changing the word "creationism" to the words "intelligent design" in their own works, btw - so i.d. is merely creationism and there is no reason to call it anything else.)

science- EVERY major scientific organization has declared that creationism/i.d. is WORTHLESS. none of its stances rise to the level of proof of anything. NONE of its writings actually deal with the processes it claims to dispute.

THIS WAS MADE CLEAR IN A COURT OF LAW. get it? the courts put creationism on trial (by the believers in the sames insistence) and was found lacking in any scholarship to back up what are, basically, statements of belief, not science. Creationism is not science. It is religious belief. The courts and the community that is the most knowledgeable about this subject won a ruling to this effect.

THERE IS NO ARGUMENT. Creationism is pure bullshit. There is no argument - beyond idiotic religious claims that have no basis in any known reality.

there is no controversy to teach, beyond the controversy that some people in America are so fucking stupid they think that a statement of belief should be allowed to be taught in science classroom and have equal validity with hundreds of years of evidence that proves how worthless these ideas are.

there is no evidence of creationism. none.

you cannot go into court and claim you have an idea of reality and have any judge rule that matters for anyone beyond you in the privacy of your own mind when there is eyewitness evidence that refutes what you say.

anyone who tried to make this claim would be classified as mentally incompetent.

that's why it's not worthwhile to teach anything about creationism other than the fact that it is not true and can be shown to be a lie.

Now, if religion wants science teachers to "teach the controversy" what those teachers should teach is how worthless the entire idea really is. Maybe they need a week in class to show how creationism is bullshit. Maybe the religious, literalist right needs this in order to face the reality that their position is equal to teaching that the earth is flat.

they can start with the history of bullshit by the religious and how the religious stood in the way of scientific progress for centuries - about how, even after their positions were demonstrated to be worthless (as in with Galileo) these same institutions refused to accept reality.

THAT'S what needs to be taught in relation to religious belief. it doesn't care about reality. it cares about the things it heard as a child, like santa, that it doesn't want to let go of b/c it challenges a mythological view of the world.

[walldude]

22. LMFAO... I understand his/her "side" completely

problem is she/he is.. um.. nuts.

Are you saying that schools should teach that Evolution is a Religion and that the Bible is FACT?

Sorry but I live in a place where science is FACT and religion is FAITH and if Christians want their kids to learn otherwise then they can take them out of PUBLIC SCHOOL... In spite of what the religious right thinks this is a country where you are free to be a member of ANY religion, and because of that Public schools lay off the religion and stick to the facts.

And frankly if these people were so fucking full of FAITH then they wouldn't be too worried about what is being taught in public schools because god will make those sinners pay. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[RainDog]

39. lol. this is a fucked up nation

incredible that people think this person is anything other than a fucking idiot.

[EvolveOrConvolve]

25. That's illogical

You're basing your statement on the premise that those on the side of evolution haven't taken the time to understand the opposition's position. That's patently false - their position is quite easy to understand and parse.

The implication in your post is that all ideas have equal merit, an argument made often by the anti-evolution, pro-creationism crowd. All ideas will never have the same merit - ideological equality is what allowed Republicans to gain so much power.

[beam me up scottie]

31. Teach both theories...let the kids decide:

[LeftishBrit]

88. Great stuff; says it all!

[Cresent City Kid]

34. Well put.

When the roulette wheel is spinning, and the ball is rolling around, it could end up on red or black. When the ball settles into a slot and it's black, the game is over despite the whining of the ones who bet on red saying the wheel is still spinning. People who don't believe in evolution or global warming get bent out of shape when they hear that the debate is over. The meaningful debate is over. What they call a debate is just saying "yes it is!" and "no it isn't!" For them, the "debate" is never over.

[Festivito]

43. I find that that's illogical as illogical -- as thinking inside a box.

... when outside-the-box thinking is needed to move this debate forward.

If you've studied the other position, good. And, you and your buddies state it to be false and that is supposed to be that.

What do you know of why they come to that position. The world does not consist solely of a few opposing positions, there are overarching positions in play here.

Unless we attack those reasons as well, further discussion on this devolves into meaninglessness.

[Name removed]

57. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Zoeisright]

27. There is no need to 'understand' a close-minded idiot.

HE'S the doofus who doesn't understand the scientific process. If he can't be educated, he doesn't have a place in the debate.

[Festivito]

45. Two cars met in middle of a long single-lane bridge. "I won't back up for an idiot!"

"I would," said the other, as he shifted into reverse.

[madeline_con]

58. We should not back up for idiots. It's ruining schools. n/t

[hyphenate]

29. Okay

let me see if I can't make this clear, as I try to understand that point of view.

Granted, every person on earth wants to be heard, and that's admirable. If they are just as willing to understand the viewpoint of others, something can be worked out in the end.

It takes at the very least, SOME intelligence to understand basic concepts of governance, and it takes open-mindedness to reach that point.

Many of these far right wing crazies aren't willing to learn, or compromise, or even listen to some semblance of rational behavior. They might be intelligenced-challenged, or stubborn, or in some other mentally incapable state of mind, but the fact is, they ARE'T GETTING IT. They don't want to hear that the United States allows for freedom of and from religion by ALL people, they don't want to hear that this country was not created by batshit crazy right-wingers, and they don't want to have their bible challenged by non-believers.

They simply want to be right. And when people start telling them other things, a wall goes up, or the fingers go in the ears, or they go into a small little world of their own. And it's from that make-believe world where they preach, and decide, and lose touch with all semblance of reality.

Sure, they want to be heard, and most of us would listen. IF. If they would listen to our beliefs, if they would allow other people to be who they want to be, and if they chose to let secularism in the public schools remain there without interference from their outrageous claims of the bible being sacrosanct. They don't want to put up the money to pay for parochial schools, but they instead want to make all families and children listen to their absurdities instead.

I've heard the crap enough times from my ex-friend, as she would go on and on making fun of the principals, teachers and other educational people she worked with, saying "secular" as though it had shit on it, dangling from her mouth. Both in the educational profession and a born-again fundie, she got more and more rabid as time passed, letting her religious views consume her education and her point of view.

Secular schools are secular. Our government is secular. Our Constitution is secular. Curricula are secular. And our teachers, government workers, politicians, and anyone else who gets their paycheck in some direct route from state or federal government, MUST be secular.

Beyond that, it's only when these people come to the realization that the United States isn't their church group, and are finally accepting of the laws of the country and leave religion out of it, that many of us would be willing to listen to their concerns. Until then, when I hear a fundie whining about this being a "Christian" nation, ot trying to insert creationism or ID into science classes in public schools, I will fight with any breath I have in me to keep them and their extreme right views out.

These people just aren't accepting the basic principles that have governed our nation for over 230 years now, or thereabouts, so until they make the first move to admit what assholes they really are, there is no sense of any discussion taking place, because it will just lead back to the place it started from.

[Festivito]

46. Can I just take this in a different direction?

Two groups have two different ideas. A has idea A, B, idea B. They both want their idea taught in schools.

Which should win?

Both claim the other idea is wrong. But, some hold both ideas as true.

Both claim their idea is rich in history, idealism and has a beautiful infrastructure that is needed for understanding the world and is therefore essential for the young.

Also, neither idea has anything to do with religion or evolution.

Which should be taught, A, B, both or neither?

[Ikonoklast]

48. There is no 'other side'.

2+2=4 can never be shown to have a different outcome, no matter how firmly the other side 'believes' 2+2=5.

There is no argument to be made.

[Festivito]

49. What if Einstein himself comes up with 2+2=5, would you answer the question then?

Fact of the matter is, ole Albert did come up with 2+2=5 once. Should that not be taught?

That's two questions.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

74. Albert Einstein came up with 2 + 2 = 5?

1. Albert Einstein did not come up with 2 + 2 = 5.

2. If he did, he would have been wrong, and no it should not have been taught.

[Ikonoklast]

94. Those that assert, must first prove.

Link, please.

[hyphenate]

64. If there is no religion involved

and the ideas have equal merit, they should both be addressed. However, in the evolution versus creationism debate, one relies on proven scientific data, while the other requires a leap of faith. As we are talking a public school, we must go with the one which is scientific for a SCIENCE class, and the other must go into perhaps a philosophy class or some other class that does not require some concrete evidence of its validity.

[DeschutesRiver]

86. +1. That is the real argument, and you've given the correct answer. nt

[PVnRT]

76. A has evidence. B has none. B does not get taught.

That's how science works. It is not a democracy. If the ID proponents had serious, positive evidence of their theory, that would be one thing, but they don't. All they do is latch onto "holes" in evolutionary theory that they don't really understand, but make good sound bites, then insist those "holes" somehow "prove" evolution wrong.

We understand the other side completely. ID is nothing more than an attempt to introduce creationism and Christian indoctrination in public schools. The Discovery Institute said as much in an internal memo.

[RainDog]

89. but apparently this must be repeatedly ad nauseum

with issues of science education, there is no "the two sides are just opinion" option. that doesn't exist. to try to argue about "hearing" creationists by claiming a false equivalency is one more reason we have the bad government that we do.

14% of Americans are barking mad and think Obama is the antichrist. it's their belief. why can't we teach that as part of the barking mad version of the truth... but pretend it has equal value as any other view.

[OnionPatch]

93. Which should be taught?

It depends where the teaching is taking place. There is a place for people to teach their children their evolution theory. It's call CHURCH. If people want their children to learn creationism, let them send their children to church and Sunday school and Bible study every night of the week, for all I care. But keep it out of my child's public school. My child is there to learn the facts.

[Dr Morbius]

51. Spot on.

I can make the argument that the freedom of speech implies the responsibility of giving a fair hearing to others, assuming one wants to be heard oneself from time to time.

I also feel pretty confident I can defeat the argument that science constitutes religion.

And last, why do we allow idiots on school boards? Who votes at these elections? Why don't we as liberals and progressives take these elections more seriously? The guy with the bad history books, that was Texas, so it doesn't surprise me. This guy's from Wisconsin; much bluer territory.

[dorkulon]

40. Frankly, I do understand the other side's position, and it is completely unsupported by any evidence

This person has CHOSEN to believe something, based on his desire for his existence to be meaningful and special. He has also chosen to reject basic science because it interferes with his sense of being special. I understand that. I also understand that he is just plain wrong, period. The reason that further discussion is meaningless is that his position is not logical, not rational, therefore not arguable.

[Festivito]

47. Reinforcing my idea of meaninglessness of further discussion.

Especially since the other side would say the very same things.

[RainDog]

50. your posts are sad to read

because they demonstrate such a basic ignorance about the way in which science operates as opposed to religious belief.

I can give you a list of books that will prove to you, based upon all ways that non-insane humans evaluate issues to decide which side of an argument is correct, that shows there is no valid alternate pov called creationism or i.d. There is no controversy that these ideas meet the criteria for knowledge in the context of our world.

Jerry Coyne's Why Evolution is True is a good place to start.

Go to the PBS site and see if they have the Dover science trial documentary available online. It demonstrates why creationism is bullshit.

You should also read Jesus, Interrupted, by Bart Ehrman. He demonstrates unequivocally that the bible is not what fundies claim it is. It is not literally true. It is not a document that recorded any fact that occurred. the gospels were written at least a hundred years after the period they claim to quote.

if you do not understand why creationism does not belong in a science classroom, you need to educate yourself because you look like a total idiot.

[Festivito]

52. I see yours as sadly ridiculous.

I don't even mention science in my posts here and yet you accuse that I "demonstrate such a basic ignorance about the way in which science operates."

Had I mentioned science, maybe, but I did not.

What? Is DU posting a science to you? I didn't get the memo. Did you post to the wrong post?

And, why don't you post directly to someone rather than jumping into other peoples conversations. Post 12 is where a new responder should start to deal with me here.

[RainDog]

61. you rest my case. n/t

[Zhade]

66. DAMN. Well done!

He did indeed.

[immoderate]

54. Ah, but I do understand their side.

The theory of evolution has more evidence for it than the theory of gravity. There have been millions of observations and experiments in 150 years, and not a single one contradicts Darwin's principles.

Some theists think these principles do not conform to their faith, so they make up some other story that does conform to their faith, and they want that taught as truth. But it's really just fiction. They pack the school boards with their church buddies to get the crap put in the curriculum.

If you understand science, (and I fear you don't) you'll see that a real science class would spend its time falsifying creationism and intelligent design, as they are welcome to try to do to Darwin, like they've tried for 150 years.

What else is there to understand about them that is relevant to this issue? :shrug:

--imm

[Festivito]

59. Understanding one part of their side is not good enough.

I feel like I'm constantly talking to people wearing blinders about something behind those blinders, and I can never get them to turn their head.

I'm just frustrated.

[immoderate]

60. There's another part?

What could it be? Can you reveal what it is? If not, how do you know it exists?

Scientific discovery does not conform to (which is polite for contradicts) their faith, and they don't accept that. But it's the truth.

OK, suppose I wanted to be "good enough." What am I not understanding?

--imm

[Festivito]

62. That these people do see the scientific method as a matter of faith.

That people have faith in the scientific method to give them good results and information for their lives.

And, the other side see themselves as having faith in something else, a certain god, to give themselves good results and information for their lives.

That the two sides are on equal footing in this discussion.

Intelligent design can be knocked down as not fitting to the larger scientific community, and can be further knocked out in our courts, but the underlying belief systems are outside of those boxes and still have to work out those differences.

EDIT ADD: Back to my main point, we cannot have the conversation we need to work out these differences until we manage to deal with this subject's larger issue of faith.

[hyphenate]

68. They can believe all they want

that a god created everything, and most of us wouldn't knock it. It's okay to have a belief system which supports whatever they want.

But it's there that the debate ends. Religion does not BELONG in a secular school, and most especially doesn't belong in a SCIENCE class.

I don't give a flying fuck about these people and their religious beliefs. Religion doesn't belong in secular schools, and creationism doesn't have any kind of empirical evidence that would make it equal any kind of science at all. If these people are trying to short-shrift our children's science education, they can go to hell.

Science is NOT a faith, it's a fact.
The word "theory" in the case of evolution does not mean that it is inconclusive or simply thrown "out there" with nothing to back it. In this case, evolution has already been proven consistently, and satisfies the logical criteria of pursuit. We learn more and more each day about evolution, and the clues which continue to be spot on. It's not a science which is completely set in place, it's dynamic: and we find more every day to continue to be amazed at all the proof which turns up to substantiate it.

Faith is okay in its proper context.
Religious faith is fine if it's believed at home or in a parochial setting.
Science is NOT faith, but a logical and methodical way of finding answers.
Public schools are NOT religious. They are part of the whole state and federal of government.
Public schools are paid for by government money. As such, they are secular.
Creationism is NOT secular. It has ZERO worth or merit outside homes or churches.
Public schools must teach secular subjects. Therefore, science is taught in public schools.

If you are playing devil's advocate, it's one thing, but if you really believe that evolution and creationism (and ID) should have equal footing in public schools, you need to sort that out in your own mind, and learn why creationism is simply bunk. But if you are still not convinced that evolution is true, and real and logical, I think you need to reconcile the issue before arguing about it.

[RainDog]

69. more bullshit that demonstrates your ignorance of science

you apparently do not understand what it means to create reproducible results, to have work reviewed for peer-review in journals that are leaders in their respective fields from the most prestigious institutions of higher learning from around the world.

that is the "audience" for these issues of faith v. science. not your freaking opinion.

this is not a matter of faith, unless you also believe that the theory of gravity is an issue of faith.

if this is what you believe, you are too ignorant to post anything about science. it's really that simple.

and yet you insist that your ignorance has equal footing. that's more ignorance.

I find it AMAZING that you are so ignorant that you can pretend to yourself that science and religion have equal footing in matters of science education.

you are an example of why Americans are an embarrassment to the entire western world when it comes to education.

[immoderate]

73. The scientific method does not require faith, on the contrary...

Are you claiming that creationists need understanding because they can't differentiate between evidence and faith? When you add two numbers does it require faith to express the answer? If you follow a recipe, do you need faith to obtain an entree. Do you need faith to believe that Washington was the first president?

The scientific method requires no more faith than a screw driver.

What kind of outcome are you looking for here? In the context of science, these people are 100% wrong. Can we tell them that? If not, what do you say?

--imm

[RainDog]

75. the argument is so fucking stupid it boggles the mind, huh? n/t

[NeedleCast]

83. But the scientific method does not require faith

That's the point.

They do not have a "side" in this argument, at least not a side that has anything to do with science. Using your apparent definiton of "side" we'd have to teach all sorts of woo-woo in science just to cover a small percentage of arguments that can be made that ghosts or demons or psychic phenomenon are real.

Should we be required to teach the "new earth" fundie meme that the entiretiy of existance is 6,000 years old because a handful of fundies believe it to be so?

Science should teach fact, not belief.

[LeftishBrit]

90. In a *science class*, the scientific method and religious belief do *not* have equal footing

That's like saying that a maths teacher could tell pupils that they should ask God for the answer to multiplication sums instead of working them out.

In a *place of worship*, faith may be placed ahead of science. But a science class is for teaching science.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

92. Stop weaseling out with "these people" thing.

It's more than obvious YOU are part of these people.

By the way, as far as I know, defending Creationism isn't actually a violation of DU rules* like defending, say, Limbaugh is. Therefore, this is not a call out.

Have at leas the courage of your convictions.


* Although I think it should be, but that's another matter.

[madeline_con]

56. I think the moran was quite clear.

discussing anything with him would be fruitless.

[hyphenate]

77. You are likely correct.

I find people who cannot separate faith and fact are impossible to reason with, as they do not have the ability to critically think about the differences between them. And it is shown now around our country that there are many who cannot grasp the concepts put forth in schools. These people have created their own little worlds, devoid of true science, and kept their faith as a companion. They are often terrified about how fast this country is moving forward, and they can't keep up.

It's easy to see why people argue so much about evolution and creationism, because they have spent their lives clinging to that belief in their bible as the one constant that doesn't progress as quick as the wind. It makes their lives have meaning, and it makes their ability to cope more reassuring.

But even as I am over 50, and as much as I hated the public school system when I was young, I know that my life, and the lives of everyone else, depends on moving forward. I know that the younger generations have taken to technological heights that I was never exposed to, and find all the advances made are already part of their world, just as my generation often struggles with these leaps as beyond our comprehension. Nowadays, there are very few who haven't had their own computer, or who hasn't worked on one, but I remember what it was like for some people.

Science requires a commitment--a commitment of time and open-mindedness, which some people aren't capable or willing to make in some cases. They see long words, a touch of arrogance (perhaps?) and concepts far beyond what they grew up with. But rather than admit that some things are beyond their ken, they instead retreat to a world dominated by things of old, which aren't moving, or state things in a true black and white fashion. We've heard it often enough from the religious right, when they define everything as either good or bad, and won't delve into the million shades of grey in between the absolutes.

But because of their fear and unwillingness to learn more, they are trying to make the rest of the world revolve around them and their beliefs. They infiltrate government groups like school boards, city councils and state offices with the expressed goal of bringing science to its knees, and reinstate what they believe in.

And so, we come full cycle. I pity many of them, for their reliance on a book to help them lead better lives, instead of accepting that there are many beautiful and wonderful things in store for those who embrace progression and move forward.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

91. I understand the other side when the other side isn't utter poppycock.

If someone comes up with what they say is a proof that "pi" is actually rational, do I need to "understand the other side" and engage in "further discussion"?

No.

Because it's poppycock.

(Edit: no -nt. There is a -t.)

[TrogL]

13. People are voted to board for popularity, not necessarily brains

In a sensible world, sensible people vote for a sensible person on the school board. However...

[GreenPartyVoter]

15. A church in my area will be burning science textbooks in the near future. I asked my kids what they

think about that since I am an "evolutionist" and their dad is a creationist. They think it's nuts to do that to a book and that even though they lean more towards science in their way of thinking, they would never burn a Bible just because they don't agree with it.

[surrealAmerican]

18. Apparently those prayers "for direction" ...

... have been to no avail. This guy's clearly going the wrong way.

[walldude]

19. It is a religion...

Every Sunday morning I wake up, go downstairs, and bow down and pray before a statue of Darwin while tossing copies of the Bible in the wood stove and masturbating to pictures of the melting polar ice caps.

[hyphenate]

21. lol

Good thing my cup of hot tea was to the side of me, and I didn't have any in my mouth!

[baldguy]

23. Our Darwin who art in Downe House,

hallowed be thy name.
Thy kingdom come.
Phylum be done
on earth today as it was on earth before.
Give us this day our daily bread,
with the survival of the fittest,
as we compete those who compete against us,
and lead us not into extinction,
but allow us to multiply.
For thine is the kingdom,
and the genus, and the species,
for ever and ever.
Ah, men.

[sakabatou]

37. Ramen

[RainDog]

28. notice the guy says "I believe." Without any evidence to back him up

without anyone who knows the subject to explain why the guy is a total fucking idiot...

someone can believe anything. that doesn't mean it's not pure, unadulterated bullshit.

this is the problem with the religious right. they are so brain washed they do not understand what it means to actually think.

[HappyCynic]

30. Yea, though I...

Yea, though I wade through the shallow gene pool of stupid, I will fear no teabagger: for logic is with me; the facts and the scientific method educate me.

[Rex]

32. Oh how they envy science, all those shiney objects and cool

glass containers! Wow-wee! Potions all a bubblin and the little electrical thingy with the current going between, all based on faith..er...science. Yup. Evolution is a religion,,,akfhoghshgs9hgs9gh9s8dhgsolihsda.

[sakabatou]

36. We should also teach gravity along with "Intelligent Falling."

Whoever this person is, probably doesn't know jack shit about Kitzmiller v Dover School Board.

[hyphenate]

41. Before we know it

They'll be believing that the earth is really flat, and that the "orange peel" map proves it.

They'll be teaching that you really CAN turn any object into gold.

Or that the moon landing never happened.

That Atlas is holding the flat earth up on his shoulders.

That the sun revolves around the earth.



Yep--they're determined to drag us back at least 5 centuries.

[hyphenate]

42. ooh, ooh! I forgot to mention the guy wrote an article on

UFOs!

http://www.rense.com/general11/brows.htm

[Arkana]

44. "I believe evolution is a religion"

Know what my dad taught me about opinions, sir?

That they're like assholes--everyone's got one and they all stink.

[Mojeoux]

53. Appointed by Bush, Kansas State Supreme Court Judge, "We're trying to cure cancer here,

there's no room in science for religious intervention."

[BlooInBloo]

63. Plenty of DUers talk similarly about science being a religion. Stupidity has no party affiliation.

[KamaAina]

65. So does that mean Devo are atheists?

("Devo" is short for "de-evolution")

[hyphenate]

84. Naw--just geeks. eom

[maxsolomon]

67. i just can't fathom the thinking process on display here:

"I believe evolution is a religion, and any science used to convince you otherwise is weak"

if you present evidence that science is not a religion he won't listen because he believes it's not strong enough? like fossils and such?

[RainDog]

71. and there is an idiot on this thread making the same claim

who, apparently, has no idea that he or she is simply demonstrating a level of stupidity that no other western nation allows in terms of education - total education, in terms of understanding what comprises belief v. evidence, for example.

this is why I think this nation is fucked.

there are too many stupid people who don't know how stupid they are. most of them are Palin supporters. all of them try to claim that a religious belief and a scientific claim are the same.

I'M SICK OF THIS STUPID SHIT.

[NeedleCast]

70. Ongoing attemps by believers to "religionize" everything

Evolution is a religion...

Homosexuality is a religion...

Atheism is a religion...

[arbusto_baboso]

72. These asshats think atheism is a religion, too.

They just can't handle the thought that not everyone believes as they do.

[NeedleCast]

79. They have to religionize all things for their argument to make any sense

Not that they really make a lot of sense in general...

[RainDog]

85. they have to discredit reality to fit their fantasy

it is cult-think, iow.

[BurtWorm]

78. You pray for direction and strength?

God has failed you.

[sl8]

80. Evolutionists Flock To Darwin-Shaped Wall Stain

"I brought my baby to touch the wall, so that the power of Darwin can purify her genetic makeup of undesirable inherited traits," said Darlene Freiberg, one among a growing crowd assembled here to see the mysterious stain, which appeared last Monday on one side of the Rhea County Courthouse.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/evolutionists-flock-to-darwinshaped-wall-stain,2523/

[dkofos]

81. WWAIFTHBD

What Would An Intelligent Free Thinking Human Being Do

[Javaman]

82. She puts the "E" in idiot. nt

[daleo]

87. The law of gravity is a religion too

Every day I pray that we don't all float off into outer space. So far, it seems to be working, but I can't make any guarantees. How about you people send a little money to my church?