FreeHovind - HAHAHA! DI is gonna get suuuued

HAHAHA! DI is gonna get suuuued

7 Comments - 1923 Views

Submitted By thebiblewascompiledin325AD on 09/06/12

FreeHovind, thebiblewascompiledin325AD, Creation and Evolution

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1JQ96ou4WA

and this explains

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nL0T_ySG-U

spread the word.

» Reply to Discussion Threaded Hybrid Flat 7 Replies

9tails

2 days - 3,026v

Posted 2009/06/12 - 11:41 GMT

It is of the highest irony and disgust with practically everything I have observed coming from liberal academia, liberal news media and liberal politics, concerning evolution and really anything with a conservative counter position.

I have heard an echo coming from the left, chanting that creation"ism" is all lies, deception, stupid and ignorant. While evolution is somehow a holy truth. Evolution has been chanted to be some kind of indisputable mechanism of science.

Not just with evolution, but everything aspect of physical science and social science. Everything that liberalism has touched teems with some toxic nasty that turns everything true into a lie, lies into truth. everything good bad, and making bad into good. Everything positive into negative, and negative into something positive. The list goes on and on. Evolution is just one bug in the hair.

Everything I see anymore is wrought with this ironic, odd, perverted dark sided stuff. I'm serious, it's scary. What's ironic about this, is that I have observed complete opposites being played. All this chanting about how creation is so deceptive and a lie and we're forcing people to believe in god and everything hypocritical and bad.

I have observed just the opposite from this mantra. I have found very few faults with creation, and understand the plight very well. While everything about the people advocating evolutionism has been completely what they throw on creation.

I have really come to detest everything about liberal governments and liberal agendas, not for the inherent qualities, but because they intentionally are backwards from everything normal and right and good.

Sometimes I have trouble believing that liberals are not extremely deranged. That new fairy obama's nominee for supreme court justice, the fat racist, sotomayor, she's up one day talking about being mexican makes her inherently wiser than a white man, of course, no liberal outrage at that disgusting remark. She gets up again, yesterday, and spews that empathy in the courts is a good thing, and that is where policies are made. Bah! everything is turning into a backwards liberal cesspool.

Going back to Evolution. Evolution is crap. It is nothing but an attack on science. Dr. Hovind sums it up best.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsXrJBA-Png

I still can't choke down how a lie can be enforced, like an enforced drug, meant to dumb down it's subjects with a sick pyschosis. I could go on all day.

thebiblewascompiledin325AD

5 days - 8,032v

Posted 2009/06/12 - 12:23 GMT

9tails...im not even going read the rant before i respond.

wathc the vids.

DI filed a false DMCA, they commited a crime. if they go on with it they'll go to court. and get sued accordingly.

simpel as that.

you commit a crime to cencor someone, you pay the price for that crime.

"I have heard an echo coming from the left, chanting that creation"ism" is all lies, deception, stupid and ignorant."

it IS stupid, and ignorant. that's thye entire premis of how they come to their conclusions.

and the advocates ARE decietfull and lying, just look at all their quote mining.

"Evolution has been chanted to be some kind of indisputable mechanism of science."

well it IS observable fact you know...

how can you justifiy not explaining that fact with science? thus formulatign ToE.

"Everything that liberalism has touched teems with some toxic nasty that turns everything true into a lie, lies into truth. everything good bad, and making bad into good."

ha ha...ur havent even the slightest clue as to what liberalism applies too.

the foundign fathers where liberals, u callign them evil?

Voltair was a liberal, you calling him evil?

"All this chanting about how creation is so deceptive and a lie and we're forcing people to believe in god and everything hypocritical and bad."

well your camp does house a few of the most pristine examples of hypocracy, like Ted Haggard, and you also are well know for your lies and deceptions, quotemining, and you only opt to teach biblical creation in science classes, not all the other creation myths, so you ARE forcing YOUR god onto those children.

and i call hypocrits, liers and forcing ones beliefs on children under false pretenses BAD.

"I have found very few faults with creation,"

that's because the moment we show you them you put on your bible glasses, and all the counter evidence seems to magically "disappear".

"While everything about the people advocating evolutionism"

here you go again labelign all the natural explinations to the univers under the term "evolutionism". USE THE APPROPTRAITE TERMS FOR ONCE.

you'r connecting ToE to the explanation of stellar formation, or the origin of the univers and the formation of life, WHICH IT DOES NOT APPLY TOO!

"I have really come to detest everything about liberal governments and liberal agendas,"

aah, so you detest freedom or religion? because that's what liberals advocate.

"That new fairy obama's nominee for supreme court justice, the fat racist, sotomayor, she's up one day talking about being mexican makes her inherently wiser than a white man, of course, no liberal outrage at that disgusting remark."

WOW...im not even going to point out how racistly inclined that remark is...the hypocricy.

"Dr. Hovind sums it up best."

for the last time hovind doesn't even understand BASIC science...how can you even consider him equiped to argue science.

"It is nothing but an attack on science."

"I still can't choke down how a lie can be enforced, like an enforced drug, meant to dumb down it's subjects with a sick pyschosis. I could go on all day."

Ooooh irony, where would we be without thie....

thebiblewascompiledin325AD

5 days - 8,032v

Posted 2009/06/12 - 12:24 GMT

"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsXrJBA-Png"

ooh, wil you look at that..

ratign disabled.

comments diabled.

i WONDER why.....

not only that, he butchered Michael Ruse's quote.

that had NOTHING to do with ToE, it had to do with the philosophical implications of acceptence of the theory.

In Science 299, 1523 - 1524, (March 2003), Michael Ruse investigates the idea that evolution operates as a kind of secular religion. He traces the three stages of the history of Evolution:

the conversion of evolution from a pseudo-science to a real science by Charles Darwin's proposal for a testable mechanism for the process.

the use of evolution by Huxley and other reformers in a strictly non-scientific way, to support the notion of progress towards virtue, where evolution was used an example for how things progressed from chaos to order, from simplicity to complexity, from primitive origins to virtue. In this stage, cathedrals to the evolutionary 'religion' were erected, such as the grand halls of the Natural History Museum in London (see above)

the triumphant scientific development of the modern synthesis by mathematicians and empiricists who integrated genetics with natural selection to form the basis of neo-Darwinism, but who, Ruse claims, were originally attracted to evolution because of its quasi-religious aspects.

As a consequence, in the third phase, in the 1940s and 1950s, there were two sorts of study of evolution: very professional empirical work and, in parallel, works using evolution as a basis for moral exhortations and calls to action. Ruse gives the example of George Gaylord Simpson with his straight scientific text 'Tempo and Mode in Evolution' in 1944, followed by the popular 'The Meaning of Evolution' in 1949 which included material justifying the claim that the American way was superior to communism.

Ruse claims that this continues to today: evolution as straight professional empirical science in parallel with, sometimes from the same authors, evolution as secular religion. Ruse's thesis relies on those scientists who wish to use evolution as a means to undermine theology and replace it with the 'religion' of evolution. He uses E O Wilson as an example and quotes his 'On Human Nature'.

But ultimately, Ruse defends the science of evolution against the claims of creationists that it is simply a secular religion. He concludes the essay as follows:

So, what does our history tell us? Three things. First, if the claim is that all contemporary evolutionism is merely an excuse to promote moral and societal norms, this is simply false. Today's professional evolutionism is no more a secular religion than is industrial chemistry. Second, there is indeed a thriving area of more popular evolutionism, where evolution is used to underpin claims about the nature of the universe, the meaning of it all for us humans, and the way we should behave. I am not saying that this area is all bad or that it should be stamped out. I am all in favor of saving the rainforests. I am saying that this popular evolutionism--often an alternative to religion--exists. Third, we who cherish science should be careful to distinguish when we are doing science and when we are extrapolating from it, particularly when we are teaching our students. If it is science that is to be taught, then teach science and nothing more. Leave the other discussions for a more appropriate time.

Michael Ruse, Science 299, 1523 - 1524

So, according to Ruse, the creationists are ultimately wrong in their claim that evolutionary science represents only a secular religion and nothing more."

http://www.evolutionpages.com/Abstracts/michael_ruse.htm

Sci Borg (doctorofscience)

3 days - 4,501v

Posted 2009/06/14 - 16:42 GMT

I could go on all day.

Yes, that is abundantly clear.

Amusingly, if you search for every instance of the word "liberal" and replace it with "Dark Side," your rant sounds like dialogue from a Star Wars movie.

Molecular Biology kicks creationists ass (Ellman)

2 days - 2,415v

Posted 2009/06/14 - 20:08 GMT

his rants about liberalsim is pure bullshit. He doesn't even know what it is. If oyu ask him he will just give you anything conservopedia writes excluding what it really means. Like describing it from prejudice only.

Sci Borg (doctorofscience)

3 days - 4,501v

Posted 2009/06/22 - 14:46 GMT

He doesn't even know what it is.

That's for sure. It seems to be the standard far-right tactic these days: cherry-pick the looniest, most far-left character they can find and then claim that represents liberalism as a whole.

And of course the irony is that many aspects of modern conservatism are based on classical liberalism (people like John Stuart Mill, Adam Smith, etc). Which makes the absolutist "us vs. them" rhetoric seem even more ridiculous.

Molecular Biology kicks creationists ass (Ellman)

2 days - 2,415v

Posted 2009/06/22 - 17:56 GMT

yep, he's been reading too much Ann Coulter.

» Reply to Discussion Threaded Hybrid Flat 7 Replies