And here we go again...This isn't lowering the bar, it's digging a trench and dropping the bar in. Reported by CTV, in an effort to garner the completely ignorant voting bloc, Ontario Conservative leader John Tory barks out this jet of dung gas,
"It's still called the theory of evolution," Tory said. "They teach evolution in the Ontario curriculum, but they also could teach the fact to the children that there are other theories that people have out there that are part of some Christian beliefs."
The comment thread over at CTV is a text book example of the gaping idiocy that infects the populace as soon as the great sky bully is questioned. For every rational voice there seems to be some jabbering loon decrying the tenets of common sense, harping on that because evolution is a "theory" that it shouldn't be taught either. Anyone with a scintilla of wit should be able to recognize that the "theory of creationism" and "intelligent design" are euphemisms for fantastical bull shit. If there is anything that justifies questioning the theory of evolution, it would be that the religious haven't been selectively bred out of the gene pool.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
22 comments:
and in typical fashion, cc has beaten me to the punch. quickdraw mcsnark, he is.
yeah, I didn't figure any of the rest of us would get there first on this one.
btw PSA, I saw a poster up in the subway station in Tokyo today for the release of .45 -- you bad, you worldwide!
that's so funny! i watched it the other night with some friends, it's not a bad little movie and of course my 20 seconds are the best. somehow i doubt that i'm on the poster. cheers rev, that made me smile!
So I suppose the Theory of Gravity is out the window too eh?
Intelligent falling. It's actually angels that push things down because they're bored with executing first-borns.
I really cannot fathom how people so unrepentantly stupid, ignorant, and uneducated, remember to breath.
I propose a new law. If you refuse to believe in science you are no longer permitted to use the benefits of science. No cars, no cell phones, no drugs, no modern foods or preservatives, no clean water. No surgeries. Go ask your invisible sky spirits to clean the water for you.
" If there is anything that justifies questioning the theory of evolution, it would be that the religious haven't been selectively bred out of the gene pool."
Well, way to go. Now you've gone and given them an irrefutable argument.
e in md, you fucking dumbass, even Bugs Bunny knows it is the Law of Gravity. And he never studied law!
"e in md, you fucking dumbass, even Bugs Bunny knows it is the Law of Gravity. And he never studied law!"
first off anonymous, mind your manners. e in md is a regular guest and friend of this blog. you however, are just another cipher. you are the sound of gas escaping, a fart on the breeze. and since we can only assume that you are snotting off because you're one of the benighted dimwits that buy the fantasy of intelligent design, i demand that you prove that bugs bunny didn't study law. what, you can't do it? then intelligent design just can't be true. make believe bunny trumps make believe sky bully.
Here's why our anonytroll is such an idiot: he thinks that if you substitute the term "law" for the term "theory", it makes something scientific. Or true. Or meaningful.
But go ahead, trollmeister. Why don't you tell us what the Law of Gravity is. Maybe without any references to Bugs Bunny -- that way you might actually learn something.
And then we'll talk about why Neptune and Mercury dare disobey your law! And what are we going to do about them!?
I have to take Bugs Bunny at his word that he never studied law.
As for gravity, the force of attraction between two objects is directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. Verifiable by experiment, leading to the measurement of the universal gravitational constant, G. Gravity is one of the four fundamental forces.
Bzzzt! Wrong! Good estimate though. Next time, read up on Einstein's theory of relativity.
Nah, no need. Relativistic effects are hard to detect in my everyday life, so classical mechanics it is!! Classic cartoons, classical mechanics: two things whose time has still not passed!!
And with classical mechanics, you'll see at best part of the picture, and at worst the wrong picture.
Scientists -- you know, people who read stuff other than the bible, and try to actually educate themselves on the way the world works -- refined Newton's law with gravitational equations that describe how gravitational forces work a lot more accurately. Why? Because it wasn't verifiable by experiment. the orbits of both Neptune and Mercury did not conform to the "law".
The fact that classical mechanics do not describe systems like planetary orbits very well shows that its time has indeed passed. Outside of high school physics classes (such as the one you cribbed your notes from), or areas where precise calculation is unimportant (cosmologically short distances and small masses), it's not all that useful.
So "classical mechanics" was forced to make way for more refined and complex ways of understanding the world. The "Law" was not an immutable law at all, despite the fact that -- oo! -- it had a fancy title.
In the same way, the Jewish creation myth has had to make way for better descriptions of the universe. (If Darwin's work had been done three centuries earlier, it too would probably have been called a law.)
Those darned scientists, always wanting to be right. Maybe you could learn something from them, eh, anon?
Incidentally, I agree with you about Bugs Bunny cartoons.
You did read the part where I said "my everyday life", right? You may very well be a rocket scientist but I'm just a regular guy who doesn't often need to calculate planetary orbits or moonshots, who just saw a golden opportunity to use a classic Bugs Bunny line.
And no cribbing was involved, man, I remembered that shit cold turkey....not bad for an old bastard like me.
Okay. So we're agreed. Gravity works according to classical mechanics for your universe, and according to current gravitational theory in everyone else's.
You were trying to make a distinction about the Law of Gravity versus the theory of evolution, and you've fallen back on saying that it doesn't really matter to you. I take this to mean that you agree that the law vs theory nomenclature has nothing to do with the value of teaching something in schools. (Please correct me if I am wrong.)
Maybe you should apologise to E in MD then.
I may be old but I don't recall saying anything at all about evolution. It was a joke. I would have thought the whole Bugs Bunny part gave that away.
Since e in md has not written in to complain, apparently he understood the joke for what it was. Maybe you could learn something from him, eh, m@?
Dumbass creationists are always saying dumbass things like you said. It was a joke, great. Sorry it wasn't funnier.
And dumbass people with little sense of humour are always replying with that little rejoinder. Sorry it went over your head.
Gotta wonder why you think I'm a creationist, though? Is it a necessary part of liking Bugs Bunny?
I thought you were a creationist because you repeated a creationist talking point, and because you sounded like a dumbass. Those are, I admit, necessary, but not sufficient, conditions for being a creationist.
So, you jumped to a conclusion by reading things into the little data you had? For a guy who wants to denigrate my grasp of science, you show an amazing lack of rigour in your thinking. I hope you're not actually a rocket scientist, after all. No, strike that: I know you're not a rocket scientist after all.
Gee, I hope this doesn't go over your head, too.
Well, given what little data you've provided, I think it's been adequately established that you're a dumbass. The rest, I'm willing to leave to your active imagination.
Jumping to conclusions again, m@. Apparently it all did go over your head. Again. I'll try to be nicer. And aim lower, you know, so you'll get it.
Is there a topic you are capable of conversing about without your obvious lack of logical skills inhibiting your performance? We'll step away from science and humour because you've already shown your deficiencies there.
Post a Comment