Making 3/4 of any line of argument several times and then pasting them together is not itself an argument.
This evolution thing is just tiresome. Nobody cares. The fossils exist with or without you.
11/25/2009 4:06:18 AM
Um...catastrophic events are part of how evolution works. "Hey, that kid's got flippers instead of front feet--he's not gonna survive to mate. OMG A FLOOD!" "Hey, sweet, my flippers are useful now!"
Mutations do not happen overnight, but catastrophes can help weed out over-specialized patterns or evolutionary trends that don't work out in the environment.
To pretend that ANYONE believes evolution happened without catastrophes shaping it along the way is to lie to yourself and the scientific community.
And holy mother of fuck, there are more religious nutjobs commenting on that article than there are sane people. On a science site. That's like going to RR and posting about the wonders of chlorophyll, DNA replication and the tensile strength of aluminum.
11/25/2009 4:29:23 AM
""Ignorant on purpose" rules the day, but too bad we couldn't just follow the evidence."
I have that reaction every time I read a FSTDT submission.
11/25/2009 6:30:34 AM
"I find this article hilarious;"
I've noticed that drooling idiots tend to laugh a lot.
"it it perfectly typical of the so called "scientific" community and it's own religious bias against catastrophic events and for evolution."
Wow. One typo, two misplaced/unnecessary modifiers, redundant quotes, and a false dichotomy all in one sentence. I can see how you got that case of athlete's mouth.
"Here is conclusive evidence for powerful forces acting instataneously on the grand time scale ("just days"), but somehow that supports some evolutionary scale process for everything else that they "know" took billions of years."
Where? I must have blinked and missed the actual data that you used in your argument amid all those vague generalities and non sequiturs.
"This type of evidence surely must be atypical since it is the only type of evidence that we ever can observe and therefore could never support a catastrophic event like a flood causing the Grand Canyon."
"...only type of evidence..." Fnord. Bullshit stated as fact for the purpose of blowing smoke. The Mississippi River floods regularly and spectacularly. Please explain why there isn't a second Grand Canyon. Please also explain why you won't remove your head from your ass long enough to examine the geological evidence that explains how the Grand Canyon was formed.
"Isn't that schizophrenic?"
No. Your argument is spurious. Attributing your inner dialogue to external personifications of good and evil is schizophrenic.
"I appreciate the laugh, though."
That's nice. You just keep braying, jackass.
"The state-funded and mandated religion of evolution pervades all official scientific thinking against all evidence."
Your refusal to accept evidence does not nullify the evidence. You have no such super power. Sorry to burst your bubble Laughing Boy.
"Not one single evidence for macro-evolution EVER found and a shockingly huge abyss of "missing-links" and yet those who do not hold this religious view in the "scientific" community are ostracized and not permitted to enter and thrive in their field. "Ignorant on purpose" rules the day, but too bad we couldn't just follow the evidence."
Just see comment starting with "Fnord". Stating you have credible evidence and then failing to produce any will only impress those of equal or greater stupidity than yourself. Please stop fucking with the stupid people. It's not fair, and it's dangerous.
11/25/2009 6:52:58 AM
Evolution is not a religion. There is a missing link in your brain for thinking it is.
11/25/2009 10:59:52 AM
the old firm
I`ll take "Irony Poisoning" for 500, Alex.
11/25/2009 11:36:19 AM
Is that you, VenomfangX?
11/25/2009 3:04:26 PM
Evidence: COULD IT BE A COUNTABLE NOUN?
No, which proves how familiar you are with the concept.
11/25/2009 11:10:12 PM
Macro-evolution is just a long series of micro-evolutions. We are all "missing" links between what was before us and what will come after us.
Isn't anyone, who has an idea and can back it upp with repeatable laboratory experiments and peer reviewed studies, welcome in the "scientific" community? Very few are ostracized because their ideas does not match the current world view, like Copernicus was by his contemporary "scientific" community, ie the church in Italy.
11/26/2009 12:13:19 AM
Well llive, other than the fact that the article you're commenting on has absolutely nothing to do with evolution, there is an extremely remote possibility that you might be right!
Jesus, no matter how many times you try to explain the differences between biological evolution and geology these people just don't listen.
11/26/2009 9:17:58 AM
How the fuck does a crack in Africa prove creation?
And you idiots ban us from all your sites, leave ours the fuck alone. Or is that the evil persecution you're always whining about.
11/27/2009 1:09:17 AM
"I find this article hilarious"
Of course you do. You also laugh at rocks and at your fingers.
11/27/2009 7:14:35 AM
"Ignorant on purpose"
It's good to see that, despite being in jail, Kent Hovind is still well and preaching his junk, at least in spirit...
11/29/2009 4:29:48 PM