…and this is a 
SIWOTI Syndrome Open Thread
Category: Creationism
Posted on: November 23, 2008 2:47 PM, by PZ Myers
At Owlmirror's suggestion, this is a new thread to cope with the flaming wrongness of this recent creationist pimple, Teno Groppi, on the Entropy and evolution thread (which is now closed, by the way). This happens, now and then: some obtuse and confident creationist, made even more stubborn by an abysmal ignorance, shows up and starts babbling. So of course people rebut him, but he completely ignores everything that he's told, which means more people jump in to hammer on him, and because he's too stupid to recognize what's going on, he babbles more. And then the thread expands in an endless game of whack-a-mole.
You can keep playing right here. The old thread was just getting too long.
Comments
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp, KoT, OM | November 23, 2008 3:00 PM
WHACK
I can easily say Teno is one of the more flamingly stupid trolls we've had. If it wasn't so enjoyable to smack him around it would be infinitely frustrating.
Posted by: SC | November 23, 2008 3:03 PM
I did learn quite a bit from the responses to him, so thanks, Owlmirror et al.
Posted by: Richard Harris | November 23, 2008 3:05 PM
Rev., what do you expect from these people? Take the a & the o from creationist & you've got cretinist.
Posted by: Holbach | November 23, 2008 3:07 PM
Whacking this moron with logic or a club is useless as his head will only resist both forces. Maybe he'll run into something more substantial, as a truck, which should leave an impression on both his bones and skull, and then he can ruminate why his god permitted this to happen, a loyal moron.
Posted by: GodSlayer | November 23, 2008 3:09 PM
That was a great thread.
I was in a a long conversation with a YEC colleague who used the entropy idiocy to disprove evolution, and his god along with it! LOL!
His whole argument was everything we know is wrong except for that which supports a 6000 year old earth.
What an awesome god to fool me like that! I admit, I totally bought all the 'observable' and 'empirical' evidence.
Oh, help me Jeebus!
Posted by: cthellis | November 23, 2008 3:10 PM
Hey, I didn't know abb3w was showing up around these parts... He's a dirty FARKer!
;-)
Posted by: Sven DiMilo | November 23, 2008 3:12 PM
I kind of doubt ol' Teno will be back. If he does return it's my intention to continue shunning the dumbshit. Explaining stuff to brick walls is not a wise or enjoyable use of my time.
Posted by: John | November 23, 2008 3:14 PM
I debated Teno Groppi about a year and a half ago, during the summer. I'm genuinely surprised to hear his name come up again. He would basically make an argument and then change the subject whenever he was refuted, and after a while he reached a point where he called Darwin a racist and said that evolution was "un-American" because the founding fathers did not believe it. I shit you not. He also went on a tangent about gay people for some reason.
By the way, he has a couple of (incredibly scary) blogs if anyone cares to look them up.
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead | November 23, 2008 3:15 PM
The old thread was having trouble loading at work due to its length. Thanks PZ.
This wackaloon believes the bible is scientific. If one thing in the bible is right, the whole book is correct. Typical creationist troll.
Posted by: Janine ID AKA The Lone Drinker | November 23, 2008 3:16 PM
Especially when that brick wall thought your sarcasm was support for his beliefs.
Posted by: mothra | November 23, 2008 3:17 PM
I never get to these threads soon enough to deliver a solid [=original]'WHACK.'
I have vast contempt for anyone using the entropy argument, first for the Borgia quality stupidity and second, Jerry Faldwell spouting this nonsense caused a 30 year estrangement between my father and myself. Teno, my most fervent wish is that your ignorance and culpable stupidity will visit you, unfailingly and repeatedly in some non-beneficial way throughout the time of your life.
Posted by: Sili | November 23, 2008 3:18 PM
Damn! 1300+ posts without a mention of crackers?!
Methinks, PeeZed will end up with another mac soon enough.
Posted by: Russell | November 23, 2008 3:19 PM
Well, it's true, the founding fathers didn't believe evolution. Or quantum mechanics. Or even Maxwell's equations. Smart as they were, they lacked that refined knack for predicting the future.
Posted by: Chris | November 23, 2008 3:22 PM
The thing that has always utterly baffled me about the 'entropy argument' from creationists is that if their claim were correct it is not just evolution that would be impossible: life itself could not exist. Turning things like CO2, H2O, NH3, etc. into living bodies makes a whole lot of order out of disorder. Being ALIVE causes a local decrease in entropy. Simply the fact that anything is alive demonstrates the nonsense of the argument.
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead | November 23, 2008 3:23 PM
We're trying. Gotta keep the trophy daughter in tuition too. Almost a hundred posts discussing a possible Poe. We are an opinionated ilk.Posted by: JohnnieCanuck | November 23, 2008 3:30 PM
I'd rather be pinionated ilk. Fly my pretties, fly!
Posted by: skepsci | November 23, 2008 3:31 PM
Does SIWOTI originate from http://www.xkcd.com/386/, or does it predate that?
Also, you closed the other thread two posts too late.
Posted by: Feynmaniac | November 23, 2008 3:47 PM
Seems like our guy.
BTW, Teno, you still haven't answered my question!!!
Posted by: Roger Stanyard | November 23, 2008 4:02 PM
Yep, Teno is a world class fundamentalist bigot. The lot - Baptist, KJV Only, homophobe, Ron Paul conservative and all round cretinist.
Posted by: Kel | November 23, 2008 4:02 PM
Teno has got to be the biggest moron I've ever dealt with on here. There's ignorant, there's really ignorant, there's Robert Byers, but Teno eclipsed them all by a long way. He still won't explain how we saw a supernova 168,000 light years away.
Posted by: tresmal | November 23, 2008 4:23 PM
Steve C provided these Teno related links on the other thread:
nutjob
And:moonbat
The second provides links to other Groppi blogs.
Ooooh boy! He's a live one.
Posted by: Stanton | November 23, 2008 4:25 PM
GODDIDIT, duh.
Posted by: Kel | November 23, 2008 4:29 PM
I always find that absurd. They are alleging that all stars beyond 6,000 light years are an illusion, put there by God to fool those damn mathematicians and astronomers. So when it went supernova, not only did God send light to look like it's from that star, but he sent like to make it look like a supernova too. It's almost as if God wanted us not to believe my making all the evidence look like he doesn't exist.
Posted by: Calvin | November 23, 2008 4:32 PM
Over 10 years ago, I was a member of a small mailing list that included evolutionists, creationists and undecideds. Just before I joined, they had expelled Teno Groppi for being an insufferable pain in the a. He was so incapable of any civil discourse or rational conversation that even most of the other creationists voted to get rid of him. In fact, this stuff looks like it came from the list in question - Teno's proud of his stupidity:
http://www.baptistlink.com/godandcountry/creation/cedebate.html
Posted by: IST | November 23, 2008 4:32 PM
The moonbat link is hilarious... according to Teno, T-Rex lived less than 100 years ago. Amazing that no one seems to have noticed a 40ft predator wandering around...
Posted by: Touch of Grey | November 23, 2008 4:32 PM
"All things are wearisome, more than one can say.
The eye never has enough of seeing,
nor the ear its fill of hearing.
What has been will be again,
what has been done will be done again;
there is nothing new under the sun.
Is there anything of which one can say,
"Look! This is something new"?
It was here already, long ago;
it was here before our time."
Ecclesiastes 1:8-10
http://tinyurl.com/59dzwe
Posted by: abb3w | November 23, 2008 4:35 PM
cthelis: I didn't know abb3w was showing up around these parts... He's a dirty FARKer!
Yeah, yeah, so I got up late and haven't taken my shower yet. I've been gardening, so there wasn't much point.
We'll have to wait and see if Teno shows up again. He doesn't seem to have answered (among other points):
Apropos nothing at hand, I'll also ask again if anyone still about cares to throw out description of how/why Evolutionary variation is radiative, especially when selective pressures are absent/neglected?
Posted by: Kel | November 23, 2008 4:37 PM
Woah! So much fail.Posted by: Nerd of Redhead | November 23, 2008 4:39 PM
Yeah, Teno is a guinea short of a pound.
Posted by: Newfie | November 23, 2008 4:48 PM
Do any of the "Creation Science" folks ever try to explain the method of creation? Beyond the dust and pilfering a rib, that is. Or was it all a Barbara Eden arm cross, head nod and cute nose twitch? Because, "God did it." is just acceptance, and not science by definition.
Posted by: tresmal | November 23, 2008 4:49 PM
Nerd, is that like being 99c short of a dollar?
Posted by: biogeek | November 23, 2008 4:51 PM
If god went and made people smart enough to figure out supernovas and fossils, he'd expect us to be competent enough to use those same brains to understand the implications of those things. If he gave us the lump of fatty tissue between our ears, he'd have expected us to use it, and use it well. He would probably not appreciate the dedicated use towards unbelievable levels of deceit, such as that necessary to try to argue that the creation(ism) myth is fact. (Only *their* creation myth, of course. All the *other* creation myths are actually wrong wrong wrong.)
I think even s/he'd be annoyed with creationists and their deliberate refusal to use the brains he gave them.
Posted by: Kel | November 23, 2008 4:53 PM
I always think with people like him: "Is this it? Is this the best God can come up with? He's supposedly omnipotent / omniscient yet anyone who speaks for him has the intellectual capacity of a used teabag.
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead | November 23, 2008 4:55 PM
Tresmal, even worse. 1 Guinea = 21 shillings. 1 Pound = 20 shillings. He's in the negative numbers. (I'm a Sherlock Holmes fan.)
Posted by: tresmal | November 23, 2008 4:56 PM
Biogeek: Brains are fer believin' not fer thinkin'!
Posted by: Kel | November 23, 2008 4:58 PM
Indeed they are:
http://www.fstdt.com/fundies/comments.aspx?q=32303
"Knowledge is good or whatever... but when you look at the facts people who are extremely smart have a hard time believing in god but people who are real simple... don't have a problem believing in god, they don't have that big ol' brain to get in the way."
Posted by: Wowbagger | November 23, 2008 5:15 PM
Holbach, way up at #4, wrote:
I like that - 'loyal morons'. That's yet another nail in christianity's coffin: that a being like the god they describe is going to want to appeal to the stupidest, least perceptive and intellectually retarded of his creatures; that thinking and learning are antithetical.
Surely, if god existed he'd make understanding him the end result of some sort of puzzle that would challenge humans to new heights - not base it on adherence to a poorly-written (and poorly-edited) book of mismatched, illogical and often contradictory stories.
Our society has been bettered, over and over, by what the more experimental and creative amongst us have achieved, due to their intellect and determination. Christians, on the other hand, tell us their god wants the opposite. It's an outlook which would doom humanity to a perpetual dark age.
Loyal morons indeed.
Posted by: Steve_C | November 23, 2008 5:22 PM
Yeah. He's a kook. Won't even answer a sinple question. How old is the earth?
Won't type the o in God either.
Posted by: Owlmirror | November 23, 2008 5:33 PM
Y'know, that's something that I would have thought would make sense. Problem is, religion all too often asserts that something that makes sense doesn't and vice versa.
Religious anti-intellectualism started early; see in particular 1 Corinthians.
Frex, 1 Corinth. 1:21 -- "For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not come to know God, God was well-pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe."
Think about the implications of this. He's actually saying that God looked down at humans and said "Wow, they're not able to find me through philosophy. Maybe it's too hard? Maybe I should make it easier on them? Nah, fuck the philosophers. Hell, fuck everyone. I'm going to come up with this stupid way to reveal myself, so that only stupid people who believe this particular stupid thing (and not all of the other stupid religious beliefs out there, which are idolatrous, heretical, or superstitious) will be saved. And that very stupidity itself amuses me."
I mean, it's completely obvious that he's saying that God is either utterly malign or utterly insane.
Well, obvious to someone smart enough to think about it carefully for a few seconds.
Not all smart Christians become Deists or atheists, but I do wonder how they reconcile verses like that with what they believe God to be.
I suppose they just stop thinking about it.
Posted by: Katkinkate | November 23, 2008 5:37 PM
The game's not 'whack-a-mole', PZ, it's wack-a-troll!
Posted by: Wowbagger | November 23, 2008 5:45 PM
Tenuous Teno was a particularly befuddled example of troll-kind. He really was testing the upper limits of what Poe's Law entails.
Posted by: Kel | November 23, 2008 5:58 PM
There was a couple of moments where I thought he was a poe, there was just no way anyone could say anything of that ilk with a straight face.But I was wrong, satire has another stairway to climb to compete with the supreme idiocy Teno brought to the thread.
Posted by: Wowbagger | November 23, 2008 6:10 PM
I know. When he was prattling on about how everything in science had been predicted by the bible, and that all modern military used tactics based on what the Jews did in the old testament, my jaw hit the desk in front of me. I mean, I find regular levels of christian rationalisation to be laughable; Teno's astounding leaps of logic, on the other hand, were at another level entirely.
Like I said to him: using his arguments you could claim the bible predicted computer technology because the bible mentions sand, a form of which is used to create silicon; similarly, because the bible mentions the moon it foresaw the Apollo space program.
A pity about all the things it doesn't mention which might have actually benefited humankind - germ theory, for example.
Posted by: Feynmaniac | November 23, 2008 6:19 PM
For those of you who don't have the stomach and/or patience to read Tenacious G's comments here are the cliff notes:
1. Shows up with five bad arguments. Curiously, numbers them 1-6 with no 4.
2.
3. Blatant plagiarism.
4.
5.
During all of this he repeatedly ignores questions asked by various commenters
Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | November 23, 2008 6:24 PM
What? Why? Because it didn't happen earlier, I was able to fulfill my promise of posting all three abstracts instead of just the first.
http://www.lolcatbible.com/index.php?title=Ecclesiastes_1
1) Selective pressures are never absent for a whole genome. If the environment is stable and has been for some time, you get stabilizing selection (because deviations are less well adapted to the present circumstances than the average is). If it isn't, you get directional selection.
2) Mutations can go any way.
3) One selective pressure is competition. In the absence of competition, you can expect a population to branch out into more and more ecological niches simply because it can: sooner or later the necessary mutations will happen, and if they don't lead the organism to compete with one that is better adapted to the niche for which the mutated allele fits, it will survive and reproduce.
Posted by: Carlie | November 23, 2008 6:33 PM
A friend of mine sent this:
God's facebook page.
Quite amusing, especially the part about making fake fossils.
Posted by: Holbach | November 23, 2008 6:39 PM
Wowbagger @ 37
Yes, how true and poignant that society has been improved by persons who were ill at ease over stultifying existing conditions, and acted upon those insights to light our lives and our sight by forsaking candles, voodoo medical practices, and a system of human endeavors to advance us from the strictures that religion has had in place for hundreds of years. If people like Darwin, Galileo, Einstein and all those of intellectual superiority that rejected religion for a rational purpose had not endured and prevailed we would be living in a renewed dark age. It is these people that we are in debt and awe to, and has made it that much more enforcing for us to stem the hordes of irrational and superstitious religionists. I have never for one moment ever doubted my atheism and am proud to link my name and rationality to my forebears and those currently among us who espouse rational thinking and will always despise and ridicule the forces of unreason.
Posted by: ManhattanMC | November 23, 2008 6:54 PM
This is OT-
but does anyone have info on this new creo-bot argument ?
This paper-
"Identification, characterization and comparative genomics of chimpanzee endogenous retroviruses
Nalini Polavarapu Nathan J Bowen and John F McDonald" (available on line)
contains a little claim in the paragraph on CERV2-chimpanzee endogenous retrovirus 2-that LTR dating shows this particular virus predates divergence of chimps and humans by 20 or s million years-and is not found in humans-
you know the rest-'therefore we must throw out all of modern biology'.....
any knowledgeable person who will comment on this would be appreciated.
thanks
Posted by: RickrOll | November 23, 2008 6:55 PM
Hey David, i was wondering if we could take our previous conversation up here again lol.my last comment is still there at the very bottom of that post. If you would be so kind lol.
Posted by: Pete Rooke | November 23, 2008 6:58 PM
I must commend Teno's efforts, although I am slightly wary of some of his conclusions. I usually quit after I realize how close minded arch-Darwinists can be.
_____________________________________________________________
My blog is blocked to those I do not know as a result of the vileness that has been so frequently posted in the comments.
Posted by: Kel | November 23, 2008 7:04 PM
Close minded? lol. I find it funny how creationists try and use insults directed to religion against those who do so.Posted by: Feynmaniac | November 23, 2008 7:08 PM
OMFSM!!! Pete Rooke has formed an alliance with Teno Groppi? Hours of hilarity are certain to follow.
Posted by: Wowbagger | November 23, 2008 7:10 PM
Pete, did you not feel the sharp sting of irony as you wrote, after describing arch-Darwinists (I'm fairly sure such a creature exists only in your imagination; there are no arch-Einsteinsts or arch-Newtonists, after all) as 'close-minded', that you were limiting access to your blog to only people 'you know'?
Posted by: Pete Rooke | November 23, 2008 7:13 PM
I do it out of necessity to limit the frequent blasphemies and various other incidences of vileness posted.
_____________________________________________________________
My blog is blocked to those I do not know as a result of the vileness that has been so frequently posted in the comments.
Posted by: Tabby Lavalamp | November 23, 2008 7:14 PM
Peter Rooke wrote:
What I find funny is that conservatives rail so vociferously about liberals and the "culture of victimization", yet so often they are more than willing to play the part of poor, put-upon victims.
Plus I find it highly amusing that he has shut off dissent on his blog but continues to infest the comments section of this blog.
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead | November 23, 2008 7:14 PM
I see Pete "well meaning fool" Rooke is living up to his name. I also see he is limiting access to his pitiful web site, like a typical scared of criticism godbot. Open minded? Pete, are you open to concept of no god? Then STFU. Pete, I won't ever even look at your site, much less post there. Cat-o-lick cooties and all.
Posted by: raven | November 23, 2008 7:16 PM
Without reading the paper, all I can do is guess.
1. The virus itself could be 20 million years old and infected chimps after the human chimp divergence.
2. More likely they mean it was in the common ancestor of humans and chimps and was subsequently lost in the human lineage. ERVs are dynamic on evolutionary timescales and can be gained or lost and/or move around.
The usual, someone with a nonexistent biology background quote mining a paper to display their ignorance.
Posted by: davem | November 23, 2008 7:16 PM
Hmmm, looks like Pete Rooke has blocked all access to his blog ramblings. I always thought that the whole point of a blog was to attract new readers.
Looks like an all-round win situation there, then.
Posted by: Kel | November 23, 2008 7:18 PM
I myself am an arch-Hubbleist. The universe is expanding, and I'll defend that finding until all data showing the expansion is invalidated. I would have been an arch-Darwinist 100 years ago, but there's no point in being on any more. Evolution is true as much as heliocentric orbit of the solar system is true. You'd have to be a retard to think otherwise, it's like knowing the earth is spherical. Not a point that needs defending at all, despite the flat earthers who use the bible or those who think it sits on the back of a turtle. (what does the turtle stand on? It's turtles all the way down)
Posted by: Rey Fox | November 23, 2008 7:18 PM
This blog is great, but I just remembered what it really needs: annoying ".sig files" on the end of every comment. Thanks for reminding me, Pete.
________________________________________________________
Wank, wank, wank
Posted by: tresmal | November 23, 2008 7:18 PM
Regarding Teno's intellect, keep in mind the curious case of "Currious" who apparently looked up to Teno as some sort of authority on the bible and evolution.
ManhattenMC: One possibility that springs to mind, assuming the science is legit, is that the virus genes were secondarily lost, perhaps during chromosome fusion.
Posted by: Owlmirror | November 23, 2008 7:19 PM
If you dislike "blasphemies" so much, why, then, do you come here?
Posted by: Wowbagger | November 23, 2008 7:21 PM
I'd prefer to have Pete's blog open for all to see, since it (and he) provides a excellent object lesson as to what strong religious belief does to a person's mind. Right now I'd like to see what was written there that so offended him.
Pete, can you at least give us some specifics of the 'vileness' of which you speak?
Posted by: Josh | November 23, 2008 7:22 PM
Also, you closed the other thread two posts too late.
Why? Because David posted some SVP abstracts? I agree that they're kind of annoying because although they get indexed in GEOREF, the once-over that the committees give them can't be considered any sort of real peer-review (i.e., you're really trusting that the authors have their shit together--not something that's universally true), but they're a hell of a lot better than any frickin' Wikipedia entry.
He was communicating data. I don't know what's wrong with that.
Posted by: Pete Rooke | November 23, 2008 7:23 PM
Good question Owlmirror: I do it to offer a different perspective to those who would otherwise muddle on in continued misunderstanding. The abuse I receive is an unfortunate after effect.
Posted by: Satan | November 23, 2008 7:24 PM
Clearly, he enjoys resisting forbidden fruit. Like an ascetic with a secret cookbook filled with lavish recipes and lush photographs, he comes here and licks his lips.
Oh, ewww. Did I really just say that?
Posted by: raven | November 23, 2008 7:26 PM
Naw, we know the reason. You don't want to share your latest victim or carcass with the other monsters. That would be communism.
So, how is St. Dracula's Church of the Undead doing these nights? Must be all downhill till next Halloween in 11 months.
Posted by: Josh | November 23, 2008 7:27 PM
I usually quit after I realize how close minded arch-Darwinists can be.
Uh, Pete, are you accusing us of having been close-minded with Teno? Example?
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead | November 23, 2008 7:28 PM
Pete "well meaning fool" Rooke, you receive abuse because you give abuse. You come to an atheist web site and godbot. You will be refuted. For example, can you show me physical evidence for your imaginary god that will pass muster with scientists, magicians, and profession debunkers? You seem to think you should not be refuted. OK, show me in writing from legitimate sources outside of yourself that you cannot be mocked at this site.
Posted by: Holbach | November 23, 2008 7:30 PM
Pete Rooke @ 50
Why do you substitute arch-Darwinists for rationalists? If there is anything counter to the insanities of religion you always manage to attach a description that will lessen your irrationality and try to defame the offending principle. Why don't you call us arch-rationalists? Because the opposite of rationalist is irrationalist which is the correct term for the religiously insane. When you call me and my fellow idealists arch-Darwinists, even though you mean it offensively, we accept it as the highest praise to be so linked with the man who reminds religion that they originated from the gutter of abject insanity.
Posted by: Owlmirror | November 23, 2008 7:36 PM
On the one hand, that "different perspective" is exactly what you reject on your own blog, which is more than a little hypocritical.
On the other hand, the "misunderstanding" is in fact confirmed rather than refuted: everyone here is more certain than ever that devout religious people are insane to a greater or lesser degree. And that is reinforced directly by everything you have ever posted on religious beliefs.
Posted by: Kel | November 23, 2008 7:39 PM
Come now Pete Rooke. Teno demonstrated over the course of 800 posts that he didn't even understand the most rudimentary knowledge of anything to do with science. People here over those 800 posts tried explaining the basics to Teno, yet he without even the slightest understanding proceeded to try and show how right he was. It's embarrassing to read creationists, they are the only people I've seen who wear their ignorance as a badge of honour.
So Pete Rooke, why is it the ones who have gone to great lengths to know and teach others are the ones you label close-minded, while the one who refused to even learn the slightest bit of rudimentary knowledge is a victim of arch-Darwinists? It just seems you want to play the persecution card against those who reject the concept of the magic sky daddy.
Posted by: Moses | November 23, 2008 7:40 PM
Really? Even I know the creationist answer: God created the light on the way coming out of the a pre-exploded Supernova... Really, don't these guys listen to Gish anymore?
Really, there is no evidence that you can't "explain away" with "God did it!"
Posted by: Kel | November 23, 2008 7:44 PM
Of course that has the theological implication that God is deliberately trying to hide the age of the universe, that he is not only testing faith but deliberately trying to mislead people in the process. The question could be answered "Goddidit", but by doing so it's commenting on the nature of God and in such a negative way that it constructs a God that is not worthy of worship.In short, the question was never there to get a legitimate answer about the nature of our reality, just there to highlight the absurdity in the way that idiots like Teno construct the concept of God.
Posted by: Moses | November 23, 2008 7:44 PM
Well meaning? Only if "well meaning" translates to "openly expressing brutal and excessively perverted rape fetishes"...
Posted by: Pete Rooke | November 23, 2008 7:44 PM
"It just seems you want to play the persecution card against those who reject the concept of the magic sky daddy."
Tell that to the "IDiots", (as the posters on here refer to them as). Tell that to their families after they are fired from their positions at public universities.
I have to go though, until next time, Pete Rooke.
Posted by: Owlmirror | November 23, 2008 7:50 PM
Which IDiots were those?
http://www.expelledexposed.com/
Posted by: Moses | November 23, 2008 7:50 PM
Who was fired?
Posted by: Kel | November 23, 2008 7:52 PM
Can you even name one person who was fired simply for being an IDiot?*waits for an echoing of Expelled*
Posted by: Kel | November 23, 2008 7:57 PM
Also, good non-sequitor there, way to avoid answering the question. You've called us closed-minded for not listening to people who don't even have the slightest rudimentary knowledge on the subject at hand. Why is that? Because people want their beliefs to have a fair go?!? They do get a fair go, and in the academic arena those beliefs have been found not to be of any value. That's the problem isn't it? It's that what you hold sacred has been shattered by science.You are nothing more than a self-deceiving hack Pete Rooke. Get an education before you spout off nonsense.
Posted by: Wowbagger | November 23, 2008 8:04 PM
Let's put it into context, Pete - you love analogies; here's one for ya.
A medical doctor in a first-world hosptital has a sick patient. Instead of using modern medicine to treat them he/she does a magic healing dance instead. The patient dies.
Do you think the doctor should be fired, yes or no? Because the situation I described is exactly the same as what ID proponents do - go against what is known to work, and instead claim that magic is just as likely an explanation.
Posted by: raven | November 23, 2008 8:06 PM
Rooke gets abuse because:
1. He is crazy, possibly a serial killer wannabe at the least.
2. He is dumb and ignorant.
3. He is dishonest. There is definitely persecution going on in science. The vast majority is from the christofascist Liars, Haters, and Killers for jesus bunch: Old post below. One evo guy was knifed to death.
Posted by: Feynmaniac | November 23, 2008 8:13 PM
Whack-a-troll indeed. This thread was set up to whack one creobot and another one pops up!
Posted by: Matt | November 23, 2008 8:17 PM
Really? Even I know the creationist answer: God created the light on the way coming out of the a pre-exploded Supernova... Really, don't these guys listen to Gish anymore?
@Kel
Out of curiosity, do these people think that anything exists farther than 6000 light years from the earth? Or is all of that empty space, with heaven-sent light coming from appropriate distances to confuse and bewilder us?
Posted by: Kel | November 23, 2008 8:29 PM
I have no idea, I can't comprehend how they can think that the universe made as said in Genesis with everything being only 6000 years old. It would mean that every star apart from our son would have had to have been an illusion at one time or another given the closest is 4.5 light years away. Day 4 he created the stars, but Adam and Eve couldn't see it until well after they bumped uglies and produced the demonspawn known as Cain...This is what happens when people try and rationalise faith, it's absurdity is highlighed. If anyone wants to believe the world is sitting on the back of a turtle, then they are welcome to. But to try and take that belief and apply it to the spherical earth orbiting the sun based on the curvature of space as caused by gravity will make a silly concept even silliar. Creationism is all about believing, not about science. They had their answer 3,00