Quote# 59877

The Evo-atheists can’t stand the FACT that their big hero was a nobody who was an academic failure. He was a pathetic dabbler in a sea of professionals. He was simply out of his league. He was pontificating on botany and geology and natural history, but was studying theology, which he couldn’t even get right. The man with no scientific training whatsoever is the “scientist” we are supposed to worship? Sounds more like L Ron Hubbard than Isaac Newton. lol

ToGodBeTheGlory, freerepublic 97 Comments [2/27/2009 11:01:06 PM]
Fundie Index: 6

Username  (Login)
Comment  (Text formatting help) 

1 2 3 4 | bottom


I didn't know atheism required worship!

2/27/2009 11:02:55 PM



2/27/2009 11:03:08 PM



2/27/2009 11:04:22 PM

Bass X


2/27/2009 11:05:46 PM



2/27/2009 11:05:47 PM


Earthworms. Barnacles. And do tell us what scientific training Newton had.


2/27/2009 11:06:09 PM


Thanks a lot Psittacosis! D:<

2/27/2009 11:06:38 PM


cccccccombo breaker!

2/27/2009 11:08:08 PM


More L. Ron Hubbardthan Kent Hovind? I think not!

2/27/2009 11:08:18 PM


Oh dear God you people are delusional. The only people that care THAT much about Darwin are you obsessed lunatics (just like the only people that care THAT much about gay sex are you obsessed lunatics). This is becoming more common - since the anti-reality madmen have given up trying to refute evolution with facts, they start gossiping about Darwin's personal life. He was a card-carrying member of the Stonecutters, he married his aunt, his bloodlines trace back to the powerful Teutonic Knights, his uncle gave blowjobs to Nietzsche, they had strange ceremonies on the night he was born, etc etc.

2/27/2009 11:10:55 PM


Damnit, even though the rest of you spoiled it, I'll say, "How?"

2/27/2009 11:11:44 PM



2/27/2009 11:15:39 PM

The Jamo

What the fuck is with this constant need to worship everybody? Nobody "worships" scientists, you moron. Also, being an academic failure [if at all] has nothing to do with being a good scientist. Science is the search for knowledge. There is no pre-requisite in terms of training to prepare you for it. You are either inquisitive or you're not. Now shut the fuck up.

2/27/2009 11:17:21 PM

If you mean Charles Darwin. I don't really give shit about him.

2/27/2009 11:18:22 PM

On and on anon

Listen, ToGodBeTheGlory. I have never met you and you will likely never read this. But I can deduce from your statements - so vacous and ignorant that they, frankly, boggle the mind - that you are a pox on the face of humanity. And if it's a choice between eternity in heaven with you, or eternity in the intimate company of Satan's red hot poker; I'm siding with Beelzebub.

I will never understand why you - and others of your ilk - must insist on poisoning my - and others' - brain(s) with your vile opinions and dragging us all down into the paranoia inducing, herd-mentality effecting pit you inhabit.

Thank you, and goodnight.

2/27/2009 11:20:47 PM

Old Viking

All Darwin did was establish one of the most vital and productive scientific theories of all time, upon which all modern biology is based. ToGodBeTheGlory, on the other hand, is noted for ... wait, I'm sure it will come to me.

2/27/2009 11:23:07 PM


There's no worship involved, dumbass, and even if you were correct about Darwin, that would not reflect at all on whether or not evolution or natural selection take place (they do!).

2/27/2009 11:24:04 PM


Scientists don't need heros.

Besides, so what?

2/27/2009 11:26:25 PM


You can slander Darwin all you want. Even if it was discovered that he was a baby raper, it would have no bearing on the evidence for evolution.

2/27/2009 11:31:03 PM


Poor fundie, he thinks science is like politics, where you can just dig up or make up shit about the opposition and you'll win.

2/27/2009 11:35:50 PM


You sound more like Kent Hovind than a rational human being.

2/27/2009 11:40:26 PM



Don't forget that he recanted everything on his deathbed.

2/27/2009 11:41:16 PM


Kinda funny how it's ok to make fun of credited scientists with them, but don't you dare mock their church leaders

2/27/2009 11:44:42 PM

Bob of QF

If you are speaking of Darwin, you're sadly deluded.

For science, unlike religion, does not require the person who *discovers* scientific information to even be a nice person.

All it requires is facts.

Facts to prove the scientific discovery.

Darwin *discovered* the *fact* of evolution of life on earth.

If he had not discovered it, someone else would have: that is the way of discoveries. They are facts waiting for someone to stumble over them.

Contrast this with religion: it's based entirely on belief. Thus, the messenger is sacrosanct. If the messenger is unworthy, then the message is useless.

No one needs to even *respect* Charles Darwin, let alone "worship" him.

Only a religious fool would think otherwise.

2/27/2009 11:55:38 PM


The Evo-atheists can’t stand the FACT that their big hero was a nobody who was an academic failure.
Yeah he was. So what?

Okay look here's the thing. If Darwin was so out of his leauge, if he was so over his head and his ideas were so silly and ridiculous, why wasn't he laughed out of the scientific community? Why have his ideas became the corner stone of modern biology?

The ones who can't stand the facts are you.

2/27/2009 11:59:06 PM

1 2 3 4 | top: comments page