So Palin Doesn't Believe in Evolution...

Again, you totally missed the point.

And spare us the "I'm so much smarter than you" lectures... it really isn't all that impressive and is really kinda douchey.

Hit that one on Wiktionary.

Don't give yourself too much credit. I got your point. It was just asinine.

Aren't all posts on here "I's mo much smarter than you" at heart?

At any rate, I am not concerned with your assessment of my posts.

When discussing an academic and scientific issue like evolution, ignorance makes sense for rejecting the data.

When discussing an issue of theology, it's a matter of faith or lack there of and not ignorance. As I said, you can't quantify the existence of God.

The fact that you guys blur the lines between science and religion is why this debate is more convoluted then it should be.
 
Last edited:

I don't see anything there that says 40% of Americans believe in creationism.
(the 22% in my Gallup poll is scary enough)

Haha!

Classical insight into the meaningless of most of these statistical exersizes. In one of the above polls:

A) 28% of people thought that human evolution over millions of years was definitely false.
but!!!!
(B) 39% of people thought that creationism with humans being created by god in the last 10000 years was definitely true.

In conclusion then: at least 11% of people didn't listen to or understand these questions.
They hear catchwords like 'Creationism' and say YES!
Obviously if you take position A, you are logically constrained (given the lack of any other options like fairies at the bottom of the garden) to take position B aswell.

I guess the pollsters ask this sort of question for data calibration puposes or something.
 
Gov. Palin doesn't believe in evolution and, like Bush, is a Christian. I know the left will cry that her beliefs is a threat to liberty and the separation of church and state but look at the first amendment and it starts out with "Congress shall pass no law...". This specifically refers to the actions that the congress can't do and that is pass a law respecting the establishment of a religion or....(you know the rest).

Her expressing her religious beliefs is not passing a law that would bind anyone into obedience to her faith which frees anyone to have disagreeing beliefs. However, the left seems not to realize this and thinks that the personality of the president somehow influences the citizen in such a way that has almost as much power as legal law which is why they decry "separation of church and state" over the idea that a president can have or even express religious beliefs that they themselves may not want to embrace.

Does this not say something about the mentality of our political thinking where the will and personality of the leader becomes as powerful as any law that is passed?

I would never vote for anyone who did not believe in evolution

I would vote for a christian but he/she would have to be a moderate or liberal christian.

I would never vote palin

or newt..."we must change the laws of the land to reflect our religious beliefs and see to it that they can never be changed again"
 
Valid point Kaz.. the left is constantly imposing their beliefs on us under the notion that it is for the common good. IF you speak out it inevitably turns into...

What idiot wouldn't support _________________________? You fill in the blank.


impose their beliefs?

how so?


what beliefs have they imposed?

health care?

didn't obama win the election?
didn't he promise health care?
didn't he deliver?

is that "imposing"

if so then i can only conclude that conservatives want to impose THEIR beliefs on everyone, too.....

in which case I am left with 2 choices;

liberals who want to impose THEIR beliefs;
be nice
be tolerant
gays are ok
atheists have rights, too
lets eradicate poverty

and conservatives who want to impose THEIR beliefs;
make homosexuality a crime
lets kill pot smokers
atheists are NOT citizens
lets kill everyone we don't like
FEAR HATE FEAR KILL

now you 2 ignorant morons can go back to your ignorant discussion
 
Oh my God. That means Palin is as dumb as George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln. They didn't believe in evolution either.

It would have been hard for them to believe in a theory that hadn't been proposed yet.

Species was published in 1859. All of these men, with the exception of Lincoln were dead by then.

Lincoln had better things to do in the next five years of his life than debate the natural sciences I would suspect.

Damn you guys look stupid when you make this point.
 
You uber-smart leftist genius' do understand that it is the theory of evolution?

Oh, wait, you still buy debunked claims of anthropogenic global warming.

N E V E R M I N D.

Yes and its also the 'theory of relativity',

and the 'theory of plate tectonics'.

Fancy an argument about their validity?
 
Well, I've read this entire thread.

You made the claim. Now back it up. Shouldn't be hard.

Still got that sphincter clamped I see...... Ain't perspective a wonderful thing..... :lol:

It's okay, I suspected you would back away from your silly claim when called on it.

And I suspected you would claim victory if I didn't respond the way you wanted me to, so I guess we're even. :rofl:

chillpill2.jpg
 
Still got that sphincter clamped I see...... Ain't perspective a wonderful thing..... :lol:

It's okay, I suspected you would back away from your silly claim when called on it.

And I suspected you would claim victory if I didn't respond the way you wanted me to, so I guess we're even. :rofl:

chillpill2.jpg

I "claimed victory"? Not quite. I just asked you to comment on your own post.

I know, it's a monumental task.
 

Attachments

  • $xanax.jpg
    $xanax.jpg
    21.5 KB · Views: 36
The problem with any politician publicly stating they don't believe in a fact is that it makes the politician look uneducated and narrow minded. Evolution is a fact, you can believe a gawd was the cause of it, but the artifacts and the biology and research of today rests on it being scientific fact.

The Short Proof of Evolution

NCSE | National Center for Science Education - Defending the Teaching of Evolution in Public Schools.

Someone needs to define the word "proof" for you twerps. It's apparently right up there with "is" on the list of words y'all can't figure out. Here's a hint: a long-winded diatribe about "now we must assume THUS, so logically THAT must be the case" is not proof.

Yet far better than belief without empirical support of any kind.
 

Forum List

Back
Top