[Rob Instigator]

This fucker is running for the Presidential nimonation from the Republican party.

This article talks about Senator Brownback

a quote from the article

Suppose we asked a group of Presidential candidates if they believed in the existence of atoms, and a third of them said "no"? That would be a truly appalling show of scientific illiteracy, would it not? And all the more shocking coming from those who aspire to run a technologically sophisticated nation.

Yet something like this happened a week ago during the Republican presidential debate. When the moderator asked nine candidates to raise their hands if they "didn't believe in evolution," three hands went into the air—those of Senator Sam Brownback, Governor Mike Huckabee, and Representative Tom Tancredo. Although I am a biologist who has found himself battling creationism frequently throughout his professional life, I was still mortified. Because there is just as much evidence for the fact of evolution as there is for the existence of atoms, anyone raising his hand must have been grossly misinformed.

I don't know whether to attribute the show of hands to the candidates' ignorance of the mountain of evidence for evolution, or to a cynical desire to pander to a public that largely rejects evolution (more than half of Americans do). But I do know that it means that our country is in trouble. As science becomes more and more important in dealing with the world's problems, Americans are falling farther and farther behind in scientific literacy. Among citizens of industrialized nations, Americans rank near the bottom in their understanding of math and science. Over half of all Americans don't know that the Earth orbits the Sun once a year, and nearly half think that humans once lived, Flintstone-like, alongside dinosaurs.


Here are some direct quotes from this ignorant dipshit


"The unique and special place of each and every person in creation is a fundamental truth that must be safeguarded."

"I firmly believe that each human person, regardless of circumstance, was willed into being and made for a purpose."

". . the process of creation—and indeed life today—is sustained by the hand of God in a manner known fully only to him."

"While no stone should be left unturned in seeking to discover the nature of man's origins, we can say with conviction that we know with certainty at least part of the outcome. Man was not an accident and reflects an image and likeness unique in the created order. Those aspects of evolutionary theory compatible with this truth are a welcome addition to human knowledge. Aspects of these theories that undermine this truth, however, should be firmly rejected as atheistic theology posing as science."



"According to Brownback, we should reject scientific findings if they conflict with our faith, but accept them if they're compatible. But the scientific evidence says that humans are big-brained, highly conscious apes that began evolving on the African savannah four million years ago. Are we supposed to reject this as "atheistic theology" (an oxymoron if there ever was one)? The religious conviction that "man" is unique in ways that really matter is compelling in many ways—surely our language, art, music, and science itself are unique products of life on this planet—but holding our uniqueness to be a dogma immune to scientific analysis is an arrogant, and ultimately foolhardy, declaration of authority. " - JERRY COYNE is a professor in the department of ecology and evolution at the University of Chicago, where he works on diverse areas of evolutionary genetics. He is the author (with H. Allen Orr) of Speciation.

[davenotdead]

what is your point? politicians are stupid? ok.

[Rob Instigator]

my point is nowhere near as juvenile and base as your statement.

Why, in this day and age, in a nation supposedly at or near the technological forefront of science and research and technology, do we, the people, allow such pandering ignorant cynical bastards to run for public office without calling them on their BULLSHIT?

Fully 1/2 of all americans (supposedly) believe that the earth was created 10,000 years ago. supposedly, more than half do not know that it takes a year for the earth to travel around the sun.

OUr civic leaders, (no matter what you think of politicians and politics in general, they are civic leaders) should guide the ignorant populace to informatio and reason, not pander to their base ignorance by pretending to be down with their pseudo religious stupidity.

This woorld is going to pot and it is all because of religion. religion teaches that ignorance is bliss, that knowledge is unattainable, that life is pointless because the "true" existance occurs after death.

Fuck I hate this shit.

[davenotdead]

why do we allow it? its politics...there is no real answer...

politics are as juvenile and base as my previous statement.

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

This fucker is running for the Presidential nimonation from the Republican party.

This article talks about Senator Brownback

a quote from the article

Suppose we asked a group of Presidential candidates if they believed in the existence of atoms, and a third of them said "no"? That would be a truly appalling show of scientific illiteracy, would it not? And all the more shocking coming from those who aspire to run a technologically sophisticated nation.

Yet something like this happened a week ago during the Republican presidential debate. When the moderator asked nine candidates to raise their hands if they "didn't believe in evolution," three hands went into the air—those of Senator Sam Brownback, Governor Mike Huckabee, and Representative Tom Tancredo. Although I am a biologist who has found himself battling creationism frequently throughout his professional life, I was still mortified. Because there is just as much evidence for the fact of evolution as there is for the existence of atoms, anyone raising his hand must have been grossly misinformed.

I don't know whether to attribute the show of hands to the candidates' ignorance of the mountain of evidence for evolution, or to a cynical desire to pander to a public that largely rejects evolution (more than half of Americans do). But I do know that it means that our country is in trouble. As science becomes more and more important in dealing with the world's problems, Americans are falling farther and farther behind in scientific literacy. Among citizens of industrialized nations, Americans rank near the bottom in their understanding of math and science. Over half of all Americans don't know that the Earth orbits the Sun once a year, and nearly half think that humans once lived, Flintstone-like, alongside dinosaurs.


Here are some direct quotes from this ignorant dipshit


"The unique and special place of each and every person in creation is a fundamental truth that must be safeguarded."

"I firmly believe that each human person, regardless of circumstance, was willed into being and made for a purpose."

". . the process of creation—and indeed life today—is sustained by the hand of God in a manner known fully only to him."

"While no stone should be left unturned in seeking to discover the nature of man's origins, we can say with conviction that we know with certainty at least part of the outcome. Man was not an accident and reflects an image and likeness unique in the created order. Those aspects of evolutionary theory compatible with this truth are a welcome addition to human knowledge. Aspects of these theories that undermine this truth, however, should be firmly rejected as atheistic theology posing as science."



"According to Brownback, we should reject scientific findings if they conflict with our faith, but accept them if they're compatible. But the scientific evidence says that humans are big-brained, highly conscious apes that began evolving on the African savannah four million years ago. Are we supposed to reject this as "atheistic theology" (an oxymoron if there ever was one)? The religious conviction that "man" is unique in ways that really matter is compelling in many ways—surely our language, art, music, and science itself are unique products of life on this planet—but holding our uniqueness to be a dogma immune to scientific analysis is an arrogant, and ultimately foolhardy, declaration of authority. " - JERRY COYNE is a professor in the department of ecology and evolution at the University of Chicago, where he works on diverse areas of evolutionary genetics. He is the author (with H. Allen Orr) of Speciation.

sorry, evolution is not as obvious and scientifically accepted as your first example, atoms (believe it or not, there is actually a photograph of an atom, where as evolution continues to remain a widely accepted theory. secondly, I think that the USA is an Idiot for believing with any sincerity that they have any say in electing their president, and worse, for believing he might for one second represent their interests.

[davenotdead]

also, i hope you are not insinuating that organized religion has a purely negative effect on science/technology/culture/politics...this country has never not had strong religious ties (has any country been completely religion-free?)...you have no proof that America would be better or even half as good as it is now, if there was not strong religious conviction in the majority of people...and its a pretty juvenile view to think that the eradication of religion would solve most of the political/social problems of a country....

[Rob Instigator]

the worst eras of humanity have occurred under political systems aligned strongly with religion.
The single worst catastrophes of human against human are due to differences in religion.

How is it juvenile to desire for an end to the supersition?

How is it juvenile to wish that we lived in a world that judged people not by their stated belief in a big ol ghost but by their own merits?

I am insinuating NOTHING. I am outright YELLING IT FROM THE ROOFTOPS that religion has had PURELY a negative effect on science, technology, cutlutre and politics.

most advancements in our human history (which goes back just a mere 20 thou years or so recorded) were done outside, or in spite of, or under the direct suppression of, religions and religious groups.

religion is a pointless system by which those in power maintain the status quo.
religion is a purely human construct designed to appease the ignorant and bribe the gullible with promises of rewards after death if you just do as they say.

long live the sheep.

[Rob Instigator]

and yes, if you study biology, paleontology, genetics, eviolutionary biology, quantum biology, etc, you will see evidence of evolution through natural selection just as strong as that evidence for the atomic theory of matter.

we have NOT taken images of atoms. what we have done is image the electron "cloud" around these atoms.

for example, here is a Cobalt atom on top of a sheet of Silver atoms

 

[SynthethicalY]

I feel your pain Rob, I hate people who take religion over science. I mean I don't think faith should run the country, especially in science.

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

the worst eras of humanity have occurred under political systems aligned strongly with religion.
The single worst catastrophes of human against human are due to differences in religion.

How is it juvenile to desire for an end to the supersition?

How is it juvenile to wish that we lived in a world that judged people not by their stated belief in a big ol ghost but by their own merits?

I am insinuating NOTHING. I am outright YELLING IT FROM THE ROOFTOPS that religion has had PURELY a negative effect on science, technology, cutlutre and politics.

most advancements in our human history (which goes back just a mere 20 thou years or so recorded) were done outside, or in spite of, or under the direct suppression of, religions and religious groups.

religion is a pointless system by which those in power maintain the status quo.
religion is a purely human construct designed to appease the ignorant and bribe the gullible with promises of rewards after death if you just do as they say.

long live the sheep.

You know I like you a lot, Roberta, but that's just dumb. Religion is only a side effect of much more vicious things done under economical strain between nations. By any any nation that can claim a piece of land their own.

[Rob Instigator]

come on sarramkrop

the spanish inquisition was not about economic strain. the killing of cathiolics by protestant englannd was not about economic strain. the dark ages were not brought about by economic strain but by pure supersition replacing logic, the greeks having been wilfully ignored. the Rennaissance was a renewal of interest in logic and greek and arab teachings and science, a repudiation of religion as THE guiding force of humanity.

religion is what it is. ceebrate the new dark age. the USA is leading the world to it.

IT BLOODY WAS!!!!!! Do paedophiles only attract children to supply them with candies? EH?

[Rob Instigator]

by your logic, the pedo uses candy (promise of salvation) to get the kids in the sack (the religion)

the religion is not the promise of salvation but a code of control. a code of conduct and beliefs you must accept without question.

your analogy is faulty!

[SpectralJulianIsNotDead]

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

Because there is just as much evidence for the fact of evolution as there is for the existence of atoms,

I'm not arguing against evolution, but there is much more evidence for the existence of atoms than for the existence of evolution. In a murder trial, it would be the difference of a bunch of eyewitnesses vs. a bunch of forensic evidence.

[Rob Instigator]

which is which my friend spectra?

forensic evidence is ALL WE HAVE for natural selection.
speciation has been witnessed in the lab and in nature.
genetics shopws us a road map of mutations and adaptions carried out throughout history. It also shows when speciation occurs. FACTUAL, not through guessing.

atomic theory and evolutionary theory are on almost equal footing. the difference is minimal.

[!@#$%!]

from that excellent article rob posted:

As science becomes more and more important in dealing with the world's problems, Americans are falling farther and farther behind in scientific literacy. Among citizens of industrialized nations, Americans rank near the bottom in their understanding of math and science. Over half of all Americans don't know that the Earth orbits the Sun once a year, and nearly half think that humans once lived, Flintstone-like, alongside dinosaurs.

 

[demonrail666]

One thing (amongst many) that I like about Americans that I've met or in some way come into contact with is the way that they face the cultural failings of their country head on. They're genuinely embarrased when details of mass ignorance are disclosed. This doesn't happen nearly as often in Europe where, I can assure you that - at least among younger generations - such ignorance is just as widespread.

[SpectralJulianIsNotDead]

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

which is which my friend spectra?

forensic evidence is ALL WE HAVE for natural selection.
speciation has been witnessed in the lab and in nature.
genetics shopws us a road map of mutations and adaptions carried out throughout history. It also shows when speciation occurs. FACTUAL, not through guessing.

atomic theory and evolutionary theory are on almost equal footing. the difference is minimal.

Yeah, I mean we've got forensic evidence for natural selection, but for atoms we can look at them through high powered microscopes.

[SpectralJulianIsNotDead]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

from that excellent article rob posted:

 

Great movie.

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

the worst eras of humanity have occurred under political systems aligned strongly with religion.
The single worst catastrophes of human against human are due to differences in religion.

that is absolutely full of shit. what about the cold war (i am talking about the proxy wars fought in Asia, Latin America and Africa during the 1950s-1990s), or WWII? or Stalin? was any of that religious? and yet these events killed hundreds of times as many people as any religious war or any disease previous... we are talking about hundreds of millions of people who have died or were killed for reasons that had nothing to do with religion..... your logic is faulty.

you just happen to be more motivated to look at religion as a cause of human suffering, and this bias has made you overlook the reality of the 20th century, where religion has little to do with the actual conflicts. today the poverty gap between developed and developing nations is the major contributing factor in war and human suffering. religion is just a clever subterfuge in the 21st century....