I hate that evolutionists are pushing evolution as a fact simply because they don't want to believe in something higher than themselves. It has prevented me from validifying their scientific discoveries because I believe there is alterior motive. Arguing evolution vesus ID is like me arguing reality with my nintendo. Who am I to argue a billion years of evolution didn't occur in a single day when I am restricted by time and he is not. You should be forming mathematical proofs to prove that 0=1 instead of arguing with christians, whom are going to believe in creation whether evolution is fact or not. Why not try arguing why our ancestors evolved instead of arguing if they evolved. The fact that so many evolutionists are still arguing "if" leads me to believe you aren't so confident in your findings.
25 comments
Well, in that case, refuse to call your arguments debate, your beliefs science and bear the consequences. Don´t use this computer to begin with. If you have no time, it´s your problem. Don´t play soccer if you´re a limp.
Yes, it's so much better to state falsehoods as the ultimate truth than it is to admit that there may someday be a better interpretation of the data.
christians ... are going to believe in creation whether evolution is fact or not. One day, an Ice Age scientist and an Ice Age shaman were sitting around a fire. Snow had been on the ground for as long as anyone could remember, and no one for generations had seen grass, though they had heard about it.
"I hate that evolutionists are pushing evolution as a fact simply because they don't want to believe in something higher than themselves."It always amuses me that you Fundies presume that they know why I accept the ToE and why I am an atheist. I understand the ToE and I accept it because, given the existing evidence, it is the best explanation we have for the development of the lifeforms on earth. If you would produce some credible, compelling evidence to the contrary, I would be happy to reexamine my stances on the ToE and atheism.
"It has prevented me from validifying their scientific discoveries because I believe there is alterior motive."
So, you are incapable of reviewing the evidence, because you believe the people presenting the evidence have an alterior motive, not because the evidence is in anyway faulty? That's stupid.
"Arguing evolution vesus ID is like me arguing reality with my nintendo."
I agree.
"Who am I to argue a billion years of evolution didn't occur in a single day when I am restricted by time and he is not."
Who are you to assert the existence of God with no supporting evidence? Put the cart before the horse, geatz.
"You should be forming mathematical proofs to prove that 0=1 instead of arguing with christians, whom are going to believe in creation whether evolution is fact or not."
No, trying to prove 0=1 is pointless. Some of the brighter Christians may be swayed by a fair presentation of the ToE vs ID facts, therefore, that is not pointless.
"Why not try arguing why our ancestors evolved instead of arguing if they evolved. The fact that so many evolutionists are still arguing "if" leads me to believe you aren't so confident in your findings."
If you knew anything about the ToE and it's supporters, you would know that we DO explain or "argue" WHY lifeforms evolve.
Science always allows for the possiblity that findings may be incorrect. The better supported a position becomes, the less likely it is that that position is incorrect, but being incorrect is always a possibility. Those positions which are found to be incorrect will be corrected as better evidence becomes available. One of the problems with religious dogma is that it is fixed. It is confidently proclaimed to be correct regardless of evidence to the contrary.
I think that "evolutionists" will somehow manage to survive without your "validification"...Why not try arguing why our ancestors evolved instead of arguing if they evolved. The fact that so many evolutionists are still arguing "if" leads me to believe you aren't so confident in your findings."
How and why hominids evolved is what scientists are researching. The only scientists arguing if they evolved are the ones brave, patient or foolish enough to try and attempt to enlighten fundies about paleontology and what the ToE really says.
I hate that evolutionists are pushing evolution as a fact simply because they don't want to believe in something higher than themselves.
"If" is because, unlike Christians, scientists are open to the idea that, yes, they could be wrong. That's the whole point of science.
You should be forming mathematical proofs to prove that 0=1
Patches - a very good story. But I think ths shaman at the end should, in true fundie fashion, accuse the scientist of having painted all the grass green in order to make the shaman and his "white grass" theory look bad.
Uh...I'm not a scientist, bro; I'm not even really all that knowledgeable about it, I've always been more of an English and History guy. But I can tell you why humans evolved just fine: adaptation. Just like everything else.
The malapropisms are certainly classic... "alterior" (does this have something to do with height?), "validifying", and my all-time favorite, the misuse of "whom".
I have a feeling you have lost many an argument to a home gaming system.image
Proof Proves Nothing!
People argue reality with their Nintendos *all the time*. You don't think so?
I must admit that I do that quite often with my computer, when I play Diablo II in Hell difficulty and that the "drink potion" macro doesn't work in time: "I KNOW that I pressed the key in time, why didn't you drink that fucking Full Rejuvenation potion before that fucking lightning-enchanted monster killed you!!!?"
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.
