Quote# 18515

Since many people like to change the words in the bible, let's change Darwin's theory too. Afterall, anyone's interpretation of his words are as correct as anyone's interpretation of the bible.

So Darwin claimed that humans didn't evolve from apes or primates, but instead, from the a three-toed sloth that just...mutated into a human. Afterall, mutations happen all the time so of course this is the way it happened. We have fossils of three--toed sloths that existsed millions of years ago so that is proof that they turned into humans.

We also have other fossils that once used to be a three-toed sloth, but they died out because they weren't fit enough so they thankfully happened to breed a superior three-toed sloth. Whew! That mutation was a lucky break. But wait...the environment must have been colder then let's say around an avergage of 20 degrees all year around, no let's make it 30. Yeah, that's a nice round number because it was much closer to the ice age so it fits right in.

So the above is true because it's my "interpretation" of Darwin's words and they're just as right as anyone else's.

Carico, CARM 37 Comments [12/22/2006 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 1

Username  (Login)
Comment  (Text formatting help) 

1 2 | bottom

KillWhitey

I know its carico but, how can this much stupid be contained in one person?

12/22/2006 3:39:03 PM

MK

No, you're deliberately rewriting Darwin, which is no more valid than rewriting the Bible. You can interpret Darwin however you like. But you'll be a majority of one if you do.

The Bible is and has been open to new interpretations for centuries. You can interpret it however you like. You'll still be a majority of one.

12/22/2006 3:42:59 PM

Jezebel's Evil Sister

\"...let's change Darwin's theory ...\"

Ho Hum. Nothing new here. Fundie fuckwits have been deliberately misinterpreting that ever since it first appeared.

12/22/2006 3:58:00 PM

Matilde

Don´t you understand the difference between a scientific theory and a CONTEXTUALISATION OF THE BIBLE, for it was written in a time and place which are not ours?, obviously NOT.

12/22/2006 3:59:49 PM

anevilmeme

Ah, a day without a post quote from Carico is like a day without sunshine.

Poor fundies they interpet everything in the world thru the lens of religion so to their screwed up worldview Darwin's writings are religious texts that can be interpeted.

12/22/2006 4:15:24 PM

Tzelmel

@\":
Ah, a day without a post quote from Carico is like a day without sunshine.


Perhaps that's why England lacks so much sun. We don't have half-wits like Carico breathing our air.

12/22/2006 4:24:32 PM

McCulloch

You may interpret it any way you wish. But unlike the Bible, evolution is science. Any changes have to be proven. You know, data, evidence, reason, peer review.

12/22/2006 4:31:12 PM

Luis

If Carico rewrote it, it would no longer fit the evidence. Thus, it would not be valid.

Carico is amusing.

12/22/2006 4:41:14 PM

Papabear

Carico, you don't even have a good enough grasp of what Darwin said to make an amusing parody of it. Why don't you find a kind, smart person to read one of Darwin's books to you and explain some of it for you? Maybe this kind, smart person could help you with the Bible, too.

12/22/2006 4:45:31 PM

MK

Nah, I rather think that kind smart person would see that the greater kindness is to give Carico several swift kicks in the ass for the betterment of all mankind.

12/22/2006 4:47:01 PM

Tiny Bulcher

Well she must 'interpret' the Bible, too. Otherwise she'd be eating kosher.

12/22/2006 4:48:32 PM

Ed

Okay, Carico...I assume, then, that you're reading the Bible in the original Hebrew, untranslated, abridged, or edited? And not just the stuff in the modern Bible, but all the books that have been cut out or banned as heretical over the centuries?

No? You're not? Then shut the fuck up.

12/22/2006 4:49:54 PM

Adrian

Yup, there is no limit to the stupid you can produce. If only we can find away to convert it into power, and then we'd solve all the world's energy problems.

12/22/2006 4:51:38 PM

MILF-chan

There are very few things which drive me to violence.

Carico is one of them.

12/22/2006 5:44:07 PM

lytefoot

Okay, Carico...I assume, then, that you're reading the Bible in the original Hebrew, untranslated, abridged, or edited?


What? No! The Bible is in God's language--English! Remember? All those other languages the Bible has been translated \"from\" are... uhm... damn, I don't know. Given the usual assumptions, probably a preemptive trick of Satan.

12/22/2006 5:55:46 PM

JustinGG

I've become convinced that Carico is a singularity of stupid worthy of scientific study.

12/22/2006 7:24:26 PM

Cat of Many Faces

yeah? now put your \"interpretation\" through all the testing that Darwin's theory has gone through. It won't stand up to them you little fucktard.THAT is the difference between his theory and scripture. We TEST theories.

12/22/2006 7:54:42 PM

Old Viking

It's like there's an obscure college somewhere granting advanced degrees in idiocy.

12/22/2006 8:11:05 PM

Blake

Carico has over 27 posts per day. 'Nuff said.

12/22/2006 8:27:59 PM

Mrdie

I wonder if Carico knows of this site...

12/22/2006 10:11:20 PM

Napoleon the Clown

Carico, we're sorry if the language in Darwin's book is beyond you. But most people can understand it as it is written in a straigh forward manner. The Bible is a riddle wrapped in an engima, all smothered in a savory sauce consisting of one part allegory and three parts, pure, unfiltered bullshit.

12/22/2006 11:14:19 PM

whitewater55

No, your interpretation is totally wrong. Sorry, try again.

12/23/2006 1:48:42 AM

Sayna

Carico, you don't even have a good enough grasp of what Darwin said to make an amusing parody of it. Why don't you find a kind, smart person to read one of Darwin's books to you and explain some of it for you? Maybe this kind, smart person could help you with the Bible, too.


Exactly.

Furthermore, \"I'm entitled to my opinion\" does not hold up in a debate. That's like saying \"Because.\" When somebody asks \"Why?\"

12/23/2006 4:35:09 AM

David D.G.

There's a vast difference between interpreting different meanings from the Bible because of its ambiguous style and outright contradictions on the one hand and, on the other hand, when criticizing Darwin, completely making stuff up.

Critics of biblical literalism have no need to lie about what's written in the Bible. Heck, that's what makes it so easy; the Bible is its own worst enemy as far as conveying anything rationally and/or consistently (especially with regard to consistency with known reality). By all means, cleave to its every literal word; you look like that much bigger a fool for doing so.

Darwin's writings, however, are largely quite correct and in general are models of scientific workmanship, and they DO reflect reality quite well -- and there really is no doubt at all about when he expresses something literally or metaphorically. There's no real need to \"interpret\" his writing as saying anything other than what it does say, and there certainly is no point in just making stuff up that isn't there at all.

Basically, Carico, this is the kind of argument tactic I would expect to see employed by 10-year-old kids taunting each other on the playground. It doesn't cut any ice in an adult discussion; it's just irritating. So if this is the best you've got, go back to the playground. We've got grown-up talk to do here.


~David D.G.

12/23/2006 5:06:41 AM

jack

yeah... what can you say? 'you're a jackarse' doesn't quite seem severe enough. nothing makes me cringe quite as much as christians trying to parody evolutionary theory.

12/23/2006 5:10:00 AM

1 2 | top: comments page