I can't believe this is happening in America.

Bulerias said:
ryudo_dragoon said:
Bacon Boy said:
Bulerias said:
Evolution is a theory, creationism is religion. Creationism should not be taught in schools because it has no scientific merit.
Yet it is taught as a truth, not as a theory.
A theory which may be incorrect, we know next to nothing, we at one time thought the earth was flat, eh?
Excuse me, but we know a little bit more about evolution than "next to nothing"... there is more proof of evolution than creationism.
We think we do, besides, aren't a few fossils missing, such as the transitions between creatures?
Fossils are the main supports to evolution while the books of a religion are it's main supports.
True that a fossil might seem more concrete as evidence, hell, many people have already changed and translated the bible, coughkingjamescough, but still, I think there isn't enough support.

But we are just trying to figure out life's mysteries, sadly, we are incapable of doing so.
 
WAIT A MINUTE! Einstein was a creationist? Wow... I'm sorry, but that's wrong.

"I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one. You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our own being. "

"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly."

http://atheism.about.com/od/einsteingodreligion/tp/Was-Einstein-an-Atheist-.htm

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/einstein.html
 
ryudo_dragoon said:
Bulerias said:
ryudo_dragoon said:
Bacon Boy said:
Bulerias said:
Evolution is a theory, creationism is religion. Creationism should not be taught in schools because it has no scientific merit.
Yet it is taught as a truth, not as a theory.
A theory which may be incorrect, we know next to nothing, we at one time thought the earth was flat, eh?
Excuse me, but we know a little bit more about evolution than "next to nothing"... there is more proof of evolution than creationism.
We think we do, besides, aren't a few fossils missing, such as the transitions between creatures?
Fossils are the main supports to evolution while the books of a religion are it's main supports.
True that a fossil might seem more concrete as evidence, hell, many people have already changed and translated the bible, coughkingjamescough, but still, I think there isn't enough support.

But we are just trying to figure out life's mysteries, sadly, we are incapable of doing so.
Be careful. I have a feeling you don't entirely know what you're talking about.

You can't attempt to disprove a theory by saying "We think we know, etc"

Because, quite frankly, one might say that we "think we know" there's a God.

Fossils aren't necessarily the main support behind Evolution, either. Again, you might want to fact-check before stating things like that.
 
Bacon Boy said:
Bulerias said:
ryudo_dragoon said:
Bacon Boy said:
Bulerias said:
Evolution is a theory, creationism is religion. Creationism should not be taught in schools because it has no scientific merit.
Yet it is taught as a truth, not as a theory.
A theory which may be incorrect, we know next to nothing, we at one time thought the earth was flat, eh?
Excuse me, but we know a little bit more about evolution than "next to nothing"... there is more proof of evolution than creationism.
how? how can something so simple change into something so sophisticated that not even the leading minds can understand. Should we not forgot that Einstein and some of the world's greatest minds were Creationists?
It's a two way road, some idiots were creationists too, that is because we simply do not know, we just hope.
 
ryudo_dragoon said:
Bulerias said:
ryudo_dragoon said:
Bacon Boy said:
Bulerias said:
Evolution is a theory, creationism is religion. Creationism should not be taught in schools because it has no scientific merit.
Yet it is taught as a truth, not as a theory.
A theory which may be incorrect, we know next to nothing, we at one time thought the earth was flat, eh?
Excuse me, but we know a little bit more about evolution than "next to nothing"... there is more proof of evolution than creationism.
We think we do, besides, aren't a few fossils missing, such as the transitions between creatures?
Fossils are the main supports to evolution while the books of a religion are it's main supports.
True that a fossil might seem more concrete as evidence, hell, many people have already changed and translated the bible, coughkingjamescough, but still, I think there isn't enough support.

But we are just trying to figure out life's mysteries, sadly, we are incapable of doing so.
correct, I mean no one was around 6000 years ago when the Earth was created. So how can we know?
 
The Earth was not created 6000 years ago. Our planet was formed 4.54 billion years ago. The former is a religious belief, whereas the latter has actual scientific merit...
 
How Do You know the earth wasn't created 6000 years ago lmao i don't know how the earth got here and personally don't want to
 
SaRawRin said:
How Do You know the earth wasn't created 6000 years ago lmao i don't know how the earth got here and personally don't want to
Because there is a thing called empirical evidence that puts the Earth's age in the billions. Consider researching radiometric dating.
 
SaRawRin said:
How Do You know the earth wasn't created 6000 years ago lmao i don't know how the earth got here and personally don't want to
There really isn't anything to "lmao" about.

There's tons and tons of scientific evidence behind it.

If you don't know, and don't care to know, that's fine and dandy. And if that's truly the case, I suggest you don't ask that sort of question. You'll get an explanation, and since you just stated you don't want to know, you won't like the explanation.
 
Hehe, this thread died after nobody could counter my evolution argument... but back to the main topic... these teabaggers don't know what they're protesting...
 
Bacon Boy said:
ryudo_dragoon said:
Bulerias said:
ryudo_dragoon said:
Bacon Boy said:
Quoting limited to 5 levels deeptheory
A theory which may be incorrect, we know next to nothing, we at one time thought the earth was flat, eh?
Excuse me, but we know a little bit more about evolution than "next to nothing"... there is more proof of evolution than creationism.
We think we do, besides, aren't a few fossils missing, such as the transitions between creatures?
Fossils are the main supports to evolution while the books of a religion are it's main supports.
True that a fossil might seem more concrete as evidence, hell, many people have already changed and translated the bible, coughkingjamescough, but still, I think there isn't enough support.

But we are just trying to figure out life's mysteries, sadly, we are incapable of doing so.
correct, I mean no one was around 6000 years ago when the Earth was created. So how can we know?
The Earth was created billions of years ago.
 
fullofmyself said:
Bacon Boy said:
ryudo_dragoon said:
Bulerias said:
ryudo_dragoon said:
Quoting limited to 5 levels deeptheory
Excuse me, but we know a little bit more about evolution than "next to nothing"... there is more proof of evolution than creationism.
We think we do, besides, aren't a few fossils missing, such as the transitions between creatures?
Fossils are the main supports to evolution while the books of a religion are it's main supports.
True that a fossil might seem more concrete as evidence, hell, many people have already changed and translated the bible, coughkingjamescough, but still, I think there isn't enough support.

But we are just trying to figure out life's mysteries, sadly, we are incapable of doing so.
correct, I mean no one was around 6000 years ago when the Earth was created. So how can we know?
The Earth was created billions of years ago.
no it wasnt

next your gonna say tbt was made years ago it was made november 2008 when city folk was made
 
Hm, how did I just notice this thread? Yesterday, when I saw the video (edit: referring to interview your pictures come from... thought the video you posted was that video at first) I couldn't believe it either. I couldn't believe how one-sided that reporter was acting. Is she a counter-protester or a reporter?

I didn't read the 8 pages here, but of course America is turning fascist. It has been doing so since Wilson I'd say. Started going much faster 50 years ago... then with the Bush and Obama administrations, the rise of fascism has really taken off.

edit: Based on the posts I am seeing above, let me remind you all to stay on topic.

edit2: Bulerias, I've read your 3 posts in this thread related to the actual topic. Not only are they all incorrect, but you are attempting to discuss these issues using insults, which 1) doesn't work 2) isn't allowed here. I'm shocked you would sink to this level.
 
Bulerias said:
Umm, yeah, they were brainwashed to think that Obama is a fascist maniac who will tax everyone into oblivion! These people really don't know what they're talking about... what they also fail to realize is that capitalism or socialism exclusively will fail. There needs to be a healthy mix of both. Under ideal circumstances, both systems are actually pretty good.

If we assume that the free market will not take advantage of having no regulations, then capitalism by itself should be fine... if we assume that the government will not take advantage of its regulatory powers, then socialism should be fine... but that's called a utopia. Anyone who relies on either political ideology exclusively is a moron.
Hello. I am a lurker here but I decided to make my first post to respond to your comments.

First off, I do contend that there is some truth to your comments about the attendees of the tea parties. Indeed, some of them are quite ill-informed, and have accepted the ridiculous notion that the problems we face are because of the "liberal democrats" and Barack Obama. However, the growth in government has been a bipartisan phenomenon. The prescription drug program, no child left behind, and the first bailout all occurred under the so-called "conservative" administration of George W. Bush. Obama himself is not a radical change from his predecessor, but instead has continued his big-government policies of deficit spending and bailouts. For this reason, such protests need to focus on the direction of the federal government rather than the current puppet in office. You must concede that certain folks, libertarians especially, recognize this and are expressing discontent over the entire system rather than the socialist tendencies of President Obama.

My main purpose for posting is that I find great fault with your criticism of the free market. You insist that anyone who supports an entirely free economy is a moron. This comment is offensive to me, considering I have spent a great deal of personal research before concluding that capitalism is the greatest source of prosperity the world has ever seen. I must make this distinct point, though - any economic problems we face, or have faced, have not come from excessive reliance on the free-market but instead from deviation from it. Take, for instance, the current crisis. Many in congress like to point to "deregulation" as the source of the sub-prime catastrophe. If only these banks were more closely regulated, they maintain, they would not have been so greedy as to take all of these risks that ultimately brought them to their knees.

The truth is, the acquirement of these toxic assets had little to do with "greed." After all, greed wasn't suddenly invented in the year 2000. As Peter Schiff notes, George Bush's assertion that "Wall Street got drunk" was not the worse of analogies. What the former President left out was "who was giving them the alcohol?" The answer? The federal reserve, then overseen by Alan Greenspan, had been maintaining a policy of artificially low interest rates for a decade. This, coupled with affirmative action programs such as the Community Reinvestment act, made acquiring risky assets more desirable to these banks.

None of this would have occurred in a completely capitalist society.

In a free market, the greatest regulation comes from the fear of loss. A bank will not take as many risks out of fear that the borrowers will default. If a company chooses to make mistakes, it will suffer financially, and eventually go bankrupt so new, more effective firms will replace it.

Our current system perpetuates fraud. The federal reserve's monopoly over our currency, the ridiculous ponzi scheme known as "fractional reserve banking," and other government mandates interfere with the system by creating tremendous moral hazards. It has been a historical consistency for the overseers of "mixed" economies to cause problems by government intrusion, but blame them on the "free" part of the society so as to maintain further control.

I recommend the following resource:
www.mises.org
 
Yes, somebody who is left leaning can TOTALLY be a facist when facism is a RIGHT leaning party. Last I checked, the Republicans, were more facist than the Democrats.

I hate idiots who don't know *censored.3.0* all about politics, then bash people because they aren't who they wanted in office.
 
Dragorium15 said:
Yes, somebody who is left leaning can TOTALLY be a facist when facism is a RIGHT leaning party. Last I checked, the Republicans, were more facist than the Democrats.

I hate idiots who don't know *censored.3.0* all about politics, then bash people because they aren't who they wanted in office.
Uh... you don't know what fascism is. You're simply trying to label it as left/right... this makes no sense. But fascism is essentially corporatism and collectivism. This is, of course, exactly what the Bush and Obama administrations have been participating in. The bailouts being the obvious example of corporatism.

And I suggest everyone in the thread reads Mark's post too. =)
 
Back
Top