Latest dumbshit creationist (May 9, 2008)

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2008-05-10 12:51pm

Zixinus wrote:Another lovely case of never ever hearing about a subject called "philosophy" that talks about things like, where does morality come from, what is morality, etc. The kid is not capable of seperating social and biological Darwinism because he doesn't understand that the two are completely seperate things. Or he doesn't WANT to understand because then he would fall under himself.

It goes deeper than that: this kid is unable to separate material reality from philosophical fancy at all.

wautd · Post by **wautd** » 2008-05-10 12:56pm

Darth Wong wrote: He's a Kent Hovind follower, after all. It's too bad they couldn't all go to prison with him.

I always find it delightfully ironic when creationists bring up morality and follow a guy who's in prison.

You should ask if he finds Osama Bin Laden a moral person. That's a creationist too after all

Vehrec · Post by **Vehrec** » 2008-05-10 09:40pm

It's possible to use evolutionary theory as the basis for a moral system, but it's not an easy system to use because it's situational and very dependent on a lot of factors. Say you want to murder someone and take their money. Congratulations, that's a short-term fitness increase. You can go out, find a hooker, pay her money to have sex with you without a condom and knock her up. Go you. But your hooker can have an abortion, because you don't stick around to pay child-support. Your fitness just went back in the hole, you stupid shit. Worse, cops have dragged your sorry ass off to jail, where you are going to spend the next 40 years of your life taking it up the ass from hairy guys named Bubba. By the time you get out, you're well past reproductive age and your fitness is 0 because you didn't think it through.

Evolutionary Morality is not for anyone who doesn't want to spend two weeks deciding if they want a hamburger or chicken fingers by using Game Theory. You're much better off just being nice to everyone and not being a total jerk unless someone does something to you first, it tends to work wonders.

Dracofrost · Post by **Dracofrost** » 2008-05-11 12:32am

By that morality it would seem the best thing to do would be massive donations to sperm banks. And convert to Mormonism.

Superman · Post by **Superman** » 2008-05-11 01:28am

HAHA That crook Kent Hovind has followers. And yes, we can call him a crook with no risk of slander or libel whatsoever. Oh well, I guess some people still watch Jim Bakker too.

I'm so sick of this super retarded notion that "morality" must come from a god. It's not a great argument, it's not even a good argument, yet fundies repeat this nonsense in every argument they'll ever have. I can understand how a few of them might come to believe it, but how did practically all of them start accepting this bullshit? It's completely out of left field, "uhh... we know right and wrong, so therefore god exists!" I can just as easily say the fact that retarded people exist firmly disproves the possibility of any god. It's just as fucking valid.

Kitsune · Post by **Kitsune** » 2008-05-11 08:59am

Superman wrote:I'm so sick of this super retarded notion that "morality" must come from a god. It's not a great argument, it's not even a good argument, yet fundies repeat this nonsense in every argument they'll ever have. I can understand how a few of them might come to believe it, but how did practically all of them start accepting this bullshit? It's completely out of left field, "uhh... we know right and wrong, so therefore god exists!" I can just as easily say the fact that retarded people exist firmly disproves the possibility of any god. It's just as fucking valid.

I hear it from people who I would not consider fundies...I try to argue but it never seems to do any good.....

Meest · Post by **Meest** » 2008-05-11 01:51pm

Think people like this just got braver because of the Expelled documentary. It's going to be sad when they have some pseudo documentary and think they can back their claims. The exact same crap came out of Ben Stein's mouth in the latest link in that thread.

MJ12 Commando · Post by **MJ12 Commando** » 2008-05-12 07:56am

I am, as a favor to this poor oppressed man, trod over by the Evil Atheist Gestapo, providing all the evidence in support of creationism below. Surely, armed with this knowledge, the horrible atheists will have no choice but to cower in their godless dens of sin!

Well, I did say all the evidence, right?

Zixinus · Post by **Zixinus** » 2008-05-12 01:31pm

Was there any followup to this, Mike?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2008-05-12 01:50pm

Zixinus wrote:Was there any followup to this, Mike?

Not yet. I imagine he was like most creationists: he expected me to react like a character in a Chick tract, and became completely discombobulated when I didn't. In his mind, it was supposed to go like this:

1) Creationist makes initial argument.
2) Evolutionist makes rebuttal, the actual contents of which can be ignored.
3) Creationist expands on his initial argument by simply repeating it, but with more words.
4) Evolutionist immediately concedes, falls on his knees, and praises Jesus.

Step 4 didn't happen as planned. I imagine that took him completely by surprise.

Majin Gojira · Post by **Majin Gojira** » 2008-05-12 02:34pm

At first I thought that was surprising, but then I remembered a creationist I got to talk to in person once. When I pointed out a biblical error, he claimed that there was a translation error from the older texts (that he had).

When I asked "Really? Can we look at them?" Because I like learning about language differences (IE: How many different ways can you translate "Love" in a single language?).

There was a pause.

And then he changed topics.

I was a little to disapointed to mark a "I called your bluff" win on my side, but it was quite telling.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2008-05-12 02:47pm

Majin Gojira wrote:At first I thought that was surprising, but then I remembered a creationist I got to talk to in person once. When I pointed out a biblical error, he claimed that there was a translation error from the older texts (that he had).

When I asked "Really? Can we look at them?" Because I like learning about language differences (IE: How many different ways can you translate "Love" in a single language?).

There was a pause.

And then he changed topics.

I was a little to disapointed to mark a "I called your bluff" win on my side, but it was quite telling.

That guy was clearly inexperienced. A more experienced creationist would have said "I'm actually not the expert. if you really want to know more, you should really come to our youth Bible study meetings and talk to our pastor". Remember, it's a sales job. They want to trick you into attending the timeshare- er, Bible sales meeting. Once you get there, they'll make sure to drown you in affection, thus appealing to your emotional weakness. If they have any pretty girls, they'll make sure to put a few of them in front of you too.

Darth Servo · Post by **Darth Servo** » 2008-05-12 03:00pm

Superman wrote:I'm so sick of this super retarded notion that "morality" must come from a god. It's not a great argument, it's not even a good argument, yet fundies repeat this nonsense in every argument they'll ever have.

Isn't that the case with ALL their arguments? None of them are actually good.

I can understand how a few of them might come to believe it, but how did practically all of them start accepting this bullshit?[/quote]
Because they're trained from birth to not question anything they hear from the pulpit. Their preacher says it, it MUST be the truth. And their entire system is designed to perpetuate their beliefs indefinitely. Look at how many continue spouting the "thermodynamics disproves evolution" or "radiometric dating has been refuted" bullshit.

Finagle · Post by **Finagle** » 2008-05-12 03:26pm

Darth Servo wrote: Look at how many continue spouting the "thermodynamics disproves evolution" or "radiometric dating has been refuted" bullshit.

Wait, what? OK, I never really paid much attention to the whole evolution vs. creationism debate (largely because I never understood how it's even possible for anyone to debate against evolution and keep a straight face while doing so), but how exactly is thermodynamics supposed to disprove evolution? What form of idiocy is this?

The Vortex Empire · Post by **The Vortex Empire** » 2008-05-12 03:32pm

Finagle wrote:
Darth Servo wrote: Look at how many continue spouting the "thermodynamics disproves evolution" or "radiometric dating has been refuted" bullshit.
Wait, what? OK, I never really paid much attention to the whole evolution vs. creationism debate (largely because I never understood how it's even possible for anyone to debate against evolution and keep a straight face while doing so), but how exactly is thermodynamics supposed to disprove evolution? What form of idiocy is this?

They say something to the effect of "something can't come from nothing, so evolution is fake".

Darth Servo · Post by **Darth Servo** » 2008-05-12 03:35pm

Finagle wrote:
Darth Servo wrote: Look at how many continue spouting the "thermodynamics disproves evolution" or "radiometric dating has been refuted" bullshit.
Wait, what? OK, I never really paid much attention to the whole evolution vs. creationism debate (largely because I never understood how it's even possible for anyone to debate against evolution and keep a straight face while doing so), but how exactly is thermodynamics supposed to disprove evolution? What form of idiocy is this?

They idiotically assume an increase complexity = a decrease in entropy without any justification. They also think that intelligent intervention can override the laws of physics.

Darth Servo · Post by **Darth Servo** » 2008-05-12 03:37pm

edit: they also don't understand the difference between an open and a closed system; how the entropy of an open system can decrease when coupled to an even greater increase in entropy elsewhere.

Adrian Laguna · Post by **Adrian Laguna** » 2008-05-12 04:39pm

Finagle wrote:Wait, what? OK, I never really paid much attention to the whole evolution vs. creationism debate (largely because I never understood how it's even possible for anyone to debate against evolution and keep a straight face while doing so), but how exactly is thermodynamics supposed to disprove evolution? What form of idiocy is this?

In their own words,

"One of the most basic laws in the universe is the Second Law of Thermodynamics. This states that as time goes by, entropy in an environment will increase. Evolution argues differently against a law that is accepted EVERYWHERE BY EVERYONE. Evolution says that we started out simple, and over time became more complex. That just isn't possible: UNLESS there is a giant outside source of energy supplying the Earth with huge amounts of energy. If there were such a source, scientists would certainly know about it."

Sadly the original no longer exists, but the thread where we all mock it lives on.

Kanastrous · Post by **Kanastrous** » 2008-05-12 04:52pm

Adrian Laguna wrote:That just isn't possible: UNLESS there is a giant outside source of energy supplying the Earth with huge amounts of energy. If there were such a source, scientists would certainly know about it."

There's that big bright shiny thingum up in the daytime sky...

...naw, that probably wouldn't be it.

Darth Servo · Post by **Darth Servo** » 2008-05-12 04:57pm

Adrian Laguna wrote:Sadly the original no longer exists

What are you talking about?

Galvatron · Post by **Galvatron** » 2008-05-12 09:48pm

Darth Wong wrote:Once you get there, they'll make sure to drown you in affection, thus appealing to your emotional weakness. If they have any pretty girls, they'll make sure to put a few of them in front of you too.

I hear Christian girls are into anal in a big way.

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2008-05-12 10:58pm

Adrian Laguna wrote:"One of the most basic laws in the universe is the Second Law of Thermodynamics. This states that as time goes by, entropy in an environment will increase. Evolution argues differently against a law that is accepted EVERYWHERE BY EVERYONE. Evolution says that we started out simple, and over time became more complex. That just isn't possible: UNLESS there is a giant outside source of energy supplying the Earth with huge amounts of energy. If there were such a source, scientists would certainly know about it."

Oh yes. This quote. I think the reply to it the first time I saw it was "Congratulations, you've discovered the sun."

bilateralrope · Post by **bilateralrope** » 2008-05-13 12:53am

Adrian Laguna wrote:
Finagle wrote:Wait, what? OK, I never really paid much attention to the whole evolution vs. creationism debate (largely because I never understood how it's even possible for anyone to debate against evolution and keep a straight face while doing so), but how exactly is thermodynamics supposed to disprove evolution? What form of idiocy is this?
In their own words,

"One of the most basic laws in the universe is the Second Law of Thermodynamics. This states that as time goes by, entropy in an environment will increase. Evolution argues differently against a law that is accepted EVERYWHERE BY EVERYONE. Evolution says that we started out simple, and over time became more complex. That just isn't possible: UNLESS there is a giant outside source of energy supplying the Earth with huge amounts of energy. If there were such a source, scientists would certainly know about it."

Sadly the original no longer exists, but the thread where we all mock it lives on.

I thought that was sarcastic mocking of creationists who used the thermodynamics argument.

Finagle · Post by **Finagle** » 2008-05-13 01:17pm

I'm utterly speechless. To be honest, I'm having some trouble believing that somebody educated enough to have heard of thermodynamics (which isn't saying much, I grant you, since anyone who has ever taken a science class above the grade 8 or 9 level should know about thermodynamics in the abstract at least) could possibly be stupid enough to come to such a conclusion. Part of me insists that this person, and anyone else making the same or similar claims, must be having a laugh, and can't really believe what they're saying.

I've always believed in an abstract sense that the potential stupidity of humanity knows no bounds, but that really doesn't prepare me to be faced with such blatant examples of it. Holy shit. I think maybe I need to go back to ignoring the whole evolution/creationism "debate" in order to retain what little faith I still have in the intelligence of the human race.

TithonusSyndrome · Post by **TithonusSyndrome** » 2008-05-13 03:03pm

Galvatron wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:Once you get there, they'll make sure to drown you in affection, thus appealing to your emotional weakness. If they have any pretty girls, they'll make sure to put a few of them in front of you too.
I hear Christian girls are into anal in a big way.

Around here, we call them "technical virgins" or "TVs".