That’s why the Temple of Darwinian Materialism needs to be exposed for the religion it is, and forced to compete against rival theories of origins in the free market of scientific ideas. Let’s face it, the HMS Beagle is already in the process of sinking. Even the Evos are starting to call for the funeral of Darwin’s fanciful creation myth so that “evolution might live.” However, if the unconstitutional government and court supports are knocked out from underneath the Temple of Darwin, the HMS Beagle will sink faster than the lead weights the Mob uses to send their victims to watery graves.
50 comments
"That’s why the Temple of Darwinian Materialism needs to be exposed for the religion it is, and forced to compete against rival theories of origins in the free market of scientific ideas. "
Oooh, yeah, lets pit natural selection against Lamarkism and see which one wins in the free market of scientific ideas. For extra fun, lets pit genesis against the winner.
Let’s face it, the HMS Beagle is already in the process of sinking. Even the Evos are starting to call for the funeral of Darwin’s fanciful creation myth so that “evolution might live.”
I'm sorry to stop your fap-ing but that is simply incorrect. If anything, the theory of evolution is even stronger today.
Which is why I do not agree that the words "Darwinist", "Darwinism" and "Darwinian" should be stricken from the science books.
These are terms with proper meanings, and abandoning them because creationists misuse them does nothing but justify their stupid twisted views, "See, they could not support Darwinism when we challenged them on it!"
3G knows nothing about evolution, Darwinian or otherwise. Call him on it.
Time to call a 'tard a 'tard!
He forgot to mention all those sick liberal, Socialist, Communist, facists promoting their other Temple of Darwin Homosexuality. Just like Stalin and Hitler. Grrrr, just wait for the Rapture.
Then he would truly ba a super fundie.
And what the hell is Free Market of Scientific ideas. How does that work. Does the relevant aspects of Creationism/Evolution rest on Supply and Demand? More people like the idea of Creationism so we supply that instead of Evolution. Can this work with other theories? 'I Don't like Gravity can I have something a bit more floaty instead? Levitation that sounds nice, I no longer have to worry about walking off cliffs.' There's a Python sketch in this somewhere.
So, what you're saying is that your superstitious drivel could not compete in the world of science, so drag science into your delusional framework where it then becomes one cult's word against another's? And since you didn't meet the burden of proof, the law must be wrong too?
OBVIOUS FAIL.
The writing's terrible: Temple of Darwinian Materialism, free market of scientific ideas, HMS Beagle sinking, funeral, supports knocked out from underneath, HMS Beagle sinking again, lead weights...?
"This is the significance of mixed metaphors. The sole aim of a metaphor is to call up a visual image. When these images clash -- as in 'The Fascist octopus has sung its swan song', 'the jackboot is thrown into the melting pot' -- it can be taken as certain that the writer is not seeing a mental image of the objects he is naming; in other words he is not really thinking."
- George Orwell, Politics and the English Language
[...the Temple of Darwinian Materialism needs to be exposed for the religion it is...]
Dressing the Theory of Evolution up with funny names isn't going to change it into a religion, no matter how hard you try.
Similarly, using flowery rhetoric isn't going to make your argument any less fallacious.
[...forced to compete against rival theories of origins in the free market of scientific ideas.]
The ToE isn't a theory of origins, and the scientific method isn't a free market.
The ToE HAS competed against rival theories. It has faced more criticism than any other scientific theory, and has passed all tests.
It's like you guys just don't want to even try to keep up.
[However, if the unconstitutional government and court supports are knocked out from underneath the Temple of Darwin...]
Unconstitutional??? Please elaborate.
"...Darwin’s fanciful creation myth... "
Darwin's fanciful creation myth was your fanciful creation myth, until he stopped believing in it.
Buddy, the reason you lost is that Natural Selection did compete against Creationism, Lamarckism and Intelligent Design in the "free market of ideas." The punters looked at the alternatives and decided they were dodgy. You lost, your product was faulty, get over it and go back to church.
See Peloza v. Capistrano School District. Peloza tried to argue that he shouldn't have to teach "evolutionism" because it was a religion. The 9th circuit court agreed with the lower court that "evolutionism" was not a religion within the meaning of the First Amendment (or anyone's common-sense use of the word "religion"). Peloza appealed to the Supreme Court, which declined to hear the case.
Want to compete? I point this out to you. You literally have no idea what you are getting into.
Its like me challenging Mike Tyson to a boxing match/ear eating contest/rape.
Going to end with me getting hurt. Likewise you are attempting to take on something far more powerful than you can ever imagine.
Tell you what. You provide one peer reviewed piece of research. I mean actual peer review. As in an experiment done to see how something "evolutionary works" and provide us with a creationist experiment. Then we will talk. Remember rules of peer review apply and "bible" = "source" since you cannot replicate magic.
And the mob uses concrete.
"and forced to compete against rival theories of origins in the free market of scientific ideas."
By this he probably means peer review, in which case evolution has been one of the most doggedly reviewed theories ever. Suffering even more scrutiny than the theory of gravity.
You lost. Get over it, stop pretending you're winning. There is no conspiracy to promote evolution over ID (creationism), its just that evolution was a genuinely better theory. This is just like the flat earth vs round earth debate and the geocentric vs heliocentric debate, no matter how much you religious nuts don't want to believe it, we're right, you're wrong, we researched objectively, you didn't, we subjected ideas to criticism and review, you ignored it.
@cake:
What Orwell said regarding the implication of mixed metaphors is exaggerated at best, insofar as "The Fascist octopus has sung its swan song" is a mixed metaphor. The fascist octopus metaphor merely indicates that he pictures every fascist movement, from the Ku Klux Klan in the former Southern Confederacy to the Greyshirts in Iceland and the New Guard in New South Wales, as appendages of some central organisation just as the tentacles of an octopus or, for that matter, the wings of a swan (a similar statement now about any other ideology might end up on CTSTDT); the swan song metaphor merely analogises whatever the original writer saw that he believed were the dying acts and words of fascism with the death throes and cries of an animal. Essentially, because the metaphors are compatible, all the sentence shows is that the writer thinks of ideologies as individual animal-like beings that control their adherents for the good of the ideology and can be killed somehow; therefore, although his thinking is comprehensively wrong (all fascist groups, by definition ultranationalist, cooperating irrespective of nationality? Is it therefore not fascism when jews do it? How can an ideology have vital organs?), he is, technically, "really thinking".
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.