Slashdot Mirror
Putting Anti-Evolution Candidates On the Spot
hmccabe writes "YouTube is currently taking submissions for their next debate, in which the Republican candidates will answer questions. This seems like a good opportunity to challenge those candidates who say they do not believe in evolution. But since I am not an expert in the subject, I would be interested in how you all feel the question should be presented. For my own part, I think it is important to present the overwhelming body of evidence on the subject as incontrovertible fact, much the same way DNA evidence is presented during a criminal trial, and ask why the candidate feels they can pick and choose what facts they believe in. Moreover, I am wary of coming across like Christopher Hitchins, so vitriolic the candidate will defend themselves rather than answer the question. Perhaps the most important aspect of posing the question is to inform the viewers who watch the debate that this is really not a matter of opinion, but of science. So my question is: 'Hey geneticists, have you considered addressing evolution in the YouTube debates? Can you do it in 30 seconds?'"
It boggles my mind when guys like you dump their crap on readers like that.
Not believing in something, like creationism, doesn't give you the right to describe all those who believe in the presence of a creator as morons or insane. You can make your point without trashing others, and you'd be well received, but refusing to hear but your own voice makes you completely useless and noisy.
That said, let me try to rectify some of the damage you made.
Assume there's another planet entirely filled with robots. Those robots are programmed to produce new robots through a very specific process and tools. This process and tools they use were defined by an earlier generation of less intelligent robots. That earlier generation was programmed to produce the necessary technology (tools & process) to generate the more sophisticated robots. But wait! That earlier generation must have had a prior generation that produced it as well, right?
Ok, let's keep back tracking where this all started. Do you think that this robotic world started as some atoms molecules gathered themselves and formed the first wire? And that those early wires gathered themselves and made connections to each others? And that diodes and transistors evolved from that? And those transistors decided to arrange themselves into complete circuits? Out of which a robot system eventually formed?
If you believe so, then I guess you know who's the moron.
What's the point of bringing it up in an election debate?
The point is, quite simply, left-wing evangelism. The question isn't being asked to have a debate on evolution, much less one that actually matters in terms of policy. It's being couched that way, but the purpose is to attempt to drive votes away from right-wing candidates, because the left-wing is under the mistaken impression that they can paint any candidate who disagree with them as either a hypocrite or a moron. You can thank the Daily Show for that; they've essentially taught their base that you can manufacture hypocrisy and pin it on whomever you want, just by putting people on the spot and then stringing the appropriate sound bites together.
Speaking of supreme idiots... you're a troll and should have been modded that way and in any objective normal forum filled with open-minded rational and thoughtful people, and not NAZI thought-police like you, you would have been. However, the fact that your article was rated insightful is part & parcel of all the wonderfulness and charm that is Slashdot, Slashwrist, or whatever... I call it the deep-end of an intellectual cesspool either way.
See I can do it too... you're stupid, you're dumb, you're an idiot, you're a moron... whatever... luser. You don't agree with me, so I hate you so that makes me right and you wrong.
That's an informed and intelligent opinion if I've ever seen one... wow, you're astounding. Let's mod you up!
Someone call the freaking WAAAH-mbulance, we got a crybaby on our hands here!
By the way... for the record, I don't think it's an issue... every presidential election we get bombarded by shite like this that is expressly designed to divide people along irrational lines. Let's face it, what real and substantial changes have been made in legislature over the last 35 years on any of this controversial crap? This stuff is the gift to the media that keeps on giving and giving and meanwhile, we end up running the country into debt, destroying our standing in the world, subjecting our population to defective crap from China, and enriching corporations... all at our expense. But hey! We finally got one of our guys in there that is rational and doesn't believe in any of this creation crap. Whoopee! I'm glad I was able to make my vote count.
Now, how about that lead content in those toys? Or how are we going to deal with Warsaw Pact 2? Or how about a real solution to Iraq that doesn't involve more senseless death?
Nah... don't bother with it, it will fix itself. Plus, we don't really want anything to change anyways. We just want to keep you feasting on emotionally charged issues like creationism versus evolution, because that way, no one will pay any attention to the real issues and we'll keep on operating as before.
Considering that I hired a lady who handles poisonous snakes due to the fact she is damd good at her job, I wouldn't have a problem with it. Beliefs that don't directly affect the job do not matter. Congratulations, you're a bigot. *golf clap*
In God we trust, all others require data.
"And before you think I'm trolling, I'll ask all of you here this: Would you, or would you not, vote for somebody to believed the biblical rapture was close to happening and that their main priority was laying the groundwork for it to kick off?"
Well that person would be a whack job because the Bible makes it very clear that no man knows the day or the hour when that will occur. It come be 10 minutes from now it could be hundreds of years off, we simply don't know and won't until it does occur.
Unstable Apps: Our Android Apps Don't Suck
The thing you idiots ignore to continue your fantasy is that there is nothing to prove on the side of reason. There is no evidence for any sort of god. There never has been, there never will be. The reason for this is that such a thing DOES NOT EXIST.
Get some fucking proof (good luck, since it doesn't exist and never will) or get the fuck over your childish superstition.
The Farewell Tour II
I'll put my name to it. You're all a bunch of fucking cowards, on your best days. You also have horrible taste in fiction, particularly your fairy tales. It's honestly sadder than seeing a grown man cry when someone spoils Harry Potter for him. No, wait. It's sadder than a grown man crying because someone spoiled Rainbow Brite.
The Farewell Tour II
There is evidence supporting quantum theory, moron. There is a difference between having no evidence and lacking anyone who understands the evidence. There is no evidence for god and never will be, simply because such a thing does not exist (there'd be even a tiny hint of evidence if there were, and there isn't). There is an immense amount of evidence supporting quantum theory, it's just that no one really understands how or why it works. Some day that will probably be worked out, but until then the predictive abilities of the theory are extremely useful. Which is a lot more than can be said for the ignorant belief in tribal fairy tales.
The Farewell Tour II