The whole article is exceptionally long, so I'd rather not repost the whole thing, but this really stood out as a gem:
Like a scholarly lemming, she compulsively reads inaccurate antievolutionary sources and accepts them on account of their reinforcement of what she wants to be true. It never once occurs to her that she might find it prudent to check on the reliability of those sources before accompanying them off the cliff, either by investigating critical takes on those sources, or by actually inspecting the original technical literature directly.
I guess it's a good way to get out of being called a liar.
"I didn't lie... they did, I just repeated it... How was I to know that they weren't telling the truth? "
Or you can always just take it out of context and say "well, those are their words... you just don't understand..."
Hasn't that stupid bitch embarassed herself enough already?
When ballots have fairly and constitutionally decided, there can be no successful appeal back to bullets.
—Abraham Lincoln
People pray so that God won't crush them like bugs.
—Dr. Gregory House
Oil an emergency?! It's about time, Brigadier, that the leaders of this planet of yours realised that to remain dependent upon a mineral slime simply doesn't make sense.
—The Doctor "Terror Of The Zygons" (1975)
As I understand the concept behind survival of the fittest, the appendix doesn't do much for the theory of evolution either. How does a survival-of-the-fittest regime evolve an organ that kills the host organism? Why hasn't evolution evolved the appendix away? (Another sign that your scientific theory is in trouble: When your argument against an opposing theory also disproves your own.)
Never apologise for being a geek, because they won't apologise to you for being an arsehole. John Barrowman - 22 June 2014 Perth Supernova.
Countries I have been to - 14.
Australia, Canada, China, Colombia, Denmark, Ecuador, Finland, Germany, Malaysia, Netherlands, Norway, Singapore, Sweden, USA.
Always on the lookout for more nice places to visit.
As I understand the concept behind survival of the fittest, the appendix doesn't do much for the theory of evolution either. How does a survival-of-the-fittest regime evolve an organ that kills the host organism? Why hasn't evolution evolved the appendix away? (Another sign that your scientific theory is in trouble: When your argument against an opposing theory also disproves your own.)
Okaaaay.... Why would "God" or whoever the Designer is supposed to be include an organ that "kills the host organism" in the blueprint for humans in the first place? (Another sign that your unscientific theory is in trouble: When your argument against an opposing legitimate theory also disproves your own.)
When ballots have fairly and constitutionally decided, there can be no successful appeal back to bullets.
—Abraham Lincoln
People pray so that God won't crush them like bugs.
—Dr. Gregory House
Oil an emergency?! It's about time, Brigadier, that the leaders of this planet of yours realised that to remain dependent upon a mineral slime simply doesn't make sense.
—The Doctor "Terror Of The Zygons" (1975)
As I understand the concept behind survival of the fittest, the appendix doesn't do much for the theory of evolution either. How does a survival-of-the-fittest regime evolve an organ that kills the host organism? Why hasn't evolution evolved the appendix away? (Another sign that your scientific theory is in trouble: When your argument against an opposing theory also disproves your own.)
Okaaaay.... Why would "God" or whoever the Designer is supposed to be include an organ that "kills the host organism" in the blueprint for humans in the first place? (Another sign that your unscientific theory is in trouble: When your argument against an opposing legitimate theory also disproves your own.)
...yeah, that was the point of the bold text TO added. I don't see why you felt the need to repat it, though.
As I understand the concept behind survival of the fittest, the appendix doesn't do much for the theory of evolution either. How does a survival-of-the-fittest regime evolve an organ that kills the host organism? Why hasn't evolution evolved the appendix away? (Another sign that your scientific theory is in trouble: When your argument against an opposing theory also disproves your own.)
Okaaaay.... Why would "God" or whoever the Designer is supposed to be include an organ that "kills the host organism" in the blueprint for humans in the first place? (Another sign that your unscientific theory is in trouble: When your argument against an opposing legitimate theory also disproves your own.)
...yeah, that was the point of the bold text TO added. I don't see why you felt the need to repat it, though.
Sorry, thought the bolded part was Coulter instead of TO.
When ballots have fairly and constitutionally decided, there can be no successful appeal back to bullets.
—Abraham Lincoln
People pray so that God won't crush them like bugs.
—Dr. Gregory House
Oil an emergency?! It's about time, Brigadier, that the leaders of this planet of yours realised that to remain dependent upon a mineral slime simply doesn't make sense.
—The Doctor "Terror Of The Zygons" (1975)
Patrick Degan wrote:
Okaaaay.... Why would "God" or whoever the Designer is supposed to be include an organ that "kills the host organism" in the blueprint for humans in the first place? (Another sign that your unscientific theory is in trouble: When your argument against an opposing legitimate theory also disproves your own.)
...yeah, that was the point of the bold text TO added. I don't see why you felt the need to repat it, though.
Sorry, thought the bolded part was Coulter instead of TO.
Don't feel bad, I had to reread it a couple times to understand what was going on.
As I understand the concept behind survival of the fittest, the appendix doesn't do much for the theory of evolution either. How does a survival-of-the-fittest regime evolve an organ that kills the host organism? Why hasn't evolution evolved the appendix away? (Another sign that your scientific theory is in trouble: When your argument against an opposing theory also disproves your own.)
Okaaaay.... Why would "God" or whoever the Designer is supposed to be include an organ that "kills the host organism" in the blueprint for humans in the first place? (Another sign that your unscientific theory is in trouble: When your argument against an opposing legitimate theory also disproves your own.)
...yeah, that was the point of the bold text TO added. I don't see why you felt the need to repat it, though.
Read the original page again. It's Coulter's quote. Patrick Degan FTW!
" 
