Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Donald Prothero)   Old news: Scientists laughing at the so-called Creation "Museum." New hotness: A paleontologist visits. Finds the first fossil display is a fake. Many of the real fossils are incorrectly identified and the docents don't know jack   (skepticblog.org) divider line 224
    More: Amusing, Old News, second law of thermodynamics, Stephen Jay Gould, Ken Ham, Answers in Genesis, flowering plants, industrial parks, real image  
•       •       •

9278 clicks; posted to Geek » on 09 Mar 2012 at 11:18 AM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



224 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-03-09 05:34:28 PM  

BurnShrike: halfof33: BurnShrike: You're wasting your time with halfof33. He's a master at avoiding difficult questions, running his logic in circles, ad hominem attacks, moving the goal posts and changing the subject. You won't get anywhere trying to have a rational discussion with him.

I'M IN YOUR HEAD!

lulz.

/although to be fair, I know that you are a rabid anti-religion bigot

Thank you.


Whoa burn!

Just kidding, hypocrite.
 
2012-03-09 06:29:41 PM  
I'm either on Bevets ignore list or he doesn't have a good answer for my question earlier...
Bevets:
So to recap: The guy visits a poorly funded museum and discovers that the exhibits fall short of multi million dollar atheists cathedrals. I guess this is easier than engaging [was a link, talking about Richard Dawkins being uninterested in a debate with William Lane Craig, with the implication Mr. Dawkins was afraid to.] people in discussion.
Moi:
So you are suggesting William Lane Craig has more to contribute to the debate than say the Archbishop of Canterbury? [with whom Dawkins debated.]

A serious question I'd like an actual answer to. Even now seven hours later.
 
2012-03-09 07:18:37 PM  

sno man: I'm either on Bevets ignore list or he doesn't have a good answer for my question earlier...
Bevets:
So to recap: The guy visits a poorly funded museum and discovers that the exhibits fall short of multi million dollar atheists cathedrals. I guess this is easier than engaging [was a link, talking about Richard Dawkins being uninterested in a debate with William Lane Craig, with the implication Mr. Dawkins was afraid to.] people in discussion.
Moi:
So you are suggesting William Lane Craig has more to contribute to the debate than say the Archbishop of Canterbury? [with whom Dawkins debated.]

A serious question I'd like an actual answer to. Even now seven hours later.


You're not on his ignore list. Bevets has a history of not responding to questions, and if he does it's only to post some tangentially-related out-of-context quotes. It's why so many people think he's just a bot.

I'm not saying you shouldn't push him for responses to his nonsense, but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for an answer.
 
2012-03-09 07:30:14 PM  

i^2: swaniefrmreddeer: What an "atheists cathedral " looks like, funded by sweet,sweet government dollars.

I can't wait until my two year old goes through his intense dinosaur phase and is old enough to justify the trip south from Edmonton.

Have you been to Reptile World in Drumheller? Definitely worth a visit if you're in the vicinity.


Check out Jurassic Forest near Gibbons if you haven't already. It's small, but very well designed, pretty cool to be walking through a forest trail, turn a corner, and see a dinosaur in your face.
 
2012-03-09 07:46:59 PM  

BurnShrike: You're not on his ignore list. Bevets has a history of not responding to questions, and if he does it's only to post some tangentially-related out-of-context quotes. It's why so many people think he's just a bot.

I'm not saying you shouldn't push him for responses to his nonsense, but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for an answer.


I've been here a while, and have had a few not answered by him. That he treats real questions like the vast majority of the bites he gets saddens me. There are also others all full of bluster that as soon as you ask an honest question, they have no idea what to say. Speaks to their commitment to their alleged ideas...
 
2012-03-09 08:04:01 PM  

SphericalTime: Vodka Zombie: Aarontology: And this is surprising how....

No shiat. In that little Temple of Stupid, it's got to be expected.

I have to third all of this. Why is anyone surprised that Creationists don't actually care about science?


what i find hilarious is the fact they try to put science into it while at the same time calling science liars...
 
2012-03-09 08:21:53 PM  

Virulency: what i find hilarious is the fact they try to put science into it while at the same time calling science liars...


It's okay to lie for Jesus. Just ask Bevets.
 
2012-03-09 08:50:01 PM  

Ess_Aytch: Ed Grubermann: We aren't children and God isn't limited in His ability to make us able to understand Him, like our parents are. The analogy falls apart when you're dealing with an omnipotent being.

As a species, we are very much children. Poorly behaved, uneducated children at that. Collectively, we haven't figured out how to play nice. We still want the other person's toy, and will push them over to get it. The collective humanity is barely capable, if at all, of introspection. How many years does it take for adults to learn those skills (if they even do)? If seven days is billions of years, then it could take humanity hundreds of thousands or millions of years to develop to the point where we can fully understand or even begin to think like a god-like being.


Wow. That's some heavily concentrated self-hatred right there. And it still doesn't refute the fact that what the Bible, and every other religious text that tries to describe the beginning of the world, is factually incorrect. Like I said: muddled soft-headed thinking.
 
2012-03-09 09:46:55 PM  
bevets.com
WHAT THE F*CK?!?

Bevets, I've not often agreed with you, but up until this thread I've some level of respect for your dedication to your beliefs. That ends with this... That chart is 200 years out of date, period, an historical curiosity. It was light on 'fact' even then, but facts weren't what that was about... That chart was about making pasty white folks (like you and I) feel better about how they were treating everyone else that was not pasty white.
 
2012-03-09 10:13:57 PM  

halfof33: We gotta look to progressive, enlightened Countries like England man.


Well they do have a better educated populace and far fewer social problems.
 
2012-03-09 11:08:27 PM  

shivashakti: Via Infinito: This. Isn't building a misinformation museum way more dickish to begin with?

I don't think it is.
They're doing it as a sincere expression of their faith. They're not doing it to be dicks or to spread misinformation. This is what they believe (even if I think it's wrong).


A museum's mission is to educate. That was established by AAM, ICOM and other professional authority bodies. If an individual museum is engaging in deliberate misinformation, then what does that say of the overall museum field?
 
2012-03-09 11:11:04 PM  

WhyteRaven74: halfof33: We gotta look to progressive, enlightened Countries like England man.

Well they do have a better educated populace and far fewer social problems.


lulz. You are talking about the nanny state, right?

Tell that to the people who are clamoring to get into the United States, where there are unbelievable douchebags like yourself biatch about rights while shiatting all over the country that gives you the rights you take for granted.
 
2012-03-09 11:28:18 PM  

halfof33: You are talking about the nanny state, right?


Yeah the nanny state where a year's worth of private health insurance that puts the best policies in the US to shame costs about $1500 to $1800, a year. And where you can get a BA or BS for less than what many Americans pay for a year of undergrad.

while shiatting all over the country that gives you the rights you take for granted.

I'm not particularly worried about myself. I am however worried about people who work over 40 hours a week with no overtime pay and piss poor benefits. I'd like to see all exemptions to overtime pay done away with. Meaning any employee who works over 40 hours in a week gets at least time and a half for each extra hour worked. Also employers must pick up at least 80% of all benefits, meaning 80% percent of all health insurance premiums, 80% of contributions to retirement and so on. Also, something about mandatory vacation, 14 days would be nice. And days off have to be days off. Also on the benefit front, think employers above a certain size should be required to fund pension plans. They used to do it all the time and things were good, was no reason to get away from that.
 
2012-03-10 12:30:37 AM  

TimeWaste: I'd like to use this thread as an opportunity to apologize to everyone here for any debates or arguments I encouraged in past threads. For 28 years I was a devout Christian, believing most of this stuff with the utmost sincerity. Until a couple months ago, that is. I now see the world differently, and I was absolutely wrong about God (but you already knew that). So, thanks for your patience, but I'm sorry for wearing it so thin.


What changed your mind?

/Seriously
 
2012-03-10 10:00:39 AM  

fat boy: Paging Docent Bevets


Bevets: Last Feb. 11, the day before Darwin's 203rd Birthday, I was invited by Ross Blocher and Carrie Poppy of the "Oh, no, it's Ross and Carrie" podcast to accompany them, along with Emery Emery and Heather Henderson of the Ardent Atheist podcast, to visit the Creation Museum in Santee, east of San Diego, California (videoblog available here). This museum was originally built by the Institute of Creation "Research" (ICR), once led by the late Henry Morris and Duane Gish, which has since relocated to Texas. At one time ICR was the leading creationist organization in the U.S., but lately they seem to have lost their influence (they couldn't even get their school accredited in conservative Texas!). Now they are overshadowed by Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis and his multi-million-dollar creation museum in Petersburg, Kentucky (which I saw back in 2009).

So to recap: The guy visits a poorly funded museum and discovers that the exhibits fall short of multi million dollar atheists cathedrals. I guess this is easier than engaging people in discussion.


Fat Boy, you UTTER UTTER BASTARD, YOU!

/nice timing
 
2012-03-10 10:38:00 AM  
Bf+:

s3.hubimg.com

/Seems obligatory.


Bevets:

HO206a.jpg

Teach The Controversy


sno man:

Bevets, I've not often agreed with you, but up until this thread I've some level of respect for your dedication to your beliefs. That ends with this... That chart is 200 years out of date, period, an historical curiosity.

In contrast to Bf+ I linked to actual arguments I have made on the topic. You missed the point when you chose to get hung up on an illustration rather than reading the arguments.

Bevets:

I guess this is easier than engaging people in discussion.

sno man:

So you are suggesting William Lane Craig has more to contribute to the debate than say the Archbishop of Canterbury?

I havent found anyone who would describe the Williams v Dawkins 'debate' as revealing anything profound. Dawkins has a habit of pontificating on topics he hasnt studied and then ducking any serious debate on the topic. Craig would have done a much better job of picking apart the arguments Dawkins attempts to advance. Of course even a debate with Craig would be far easier than a debate with Michael Behe or Kurt Wise -- that would require Dawkins to answer problems on the record that he is actually competent to address.
 
2012-03-10 12:26:16 PM  
Without copy and pasting, yes or no Bevets. Do you believe the Earth is really less than 10,000 years old?
 
2012-03-10 02:32:59 PM  

shivashakti: Y'know, I'm generally fairly critical of fundamentalists, but this just seems dickish. You know this isn't going to be real science because they're basing everything on a literal interpretation of Genesis.

So why go in, mock them on your blog and point out everywhere that they're wrong scientifically?


I live near these dickheads. The reason is that if you're going to "create" a museum of scientific fact, no matter what it's based on, it helps to include real science in your exhibits. Otherwise, don't call it a science museum, call it "fairy tale theater" or the "this is what our book says" exhibit. Just don't include the word "science" in the displays.
 
2012-03-10 02:46:01 PM  

big pig peaches: It's like trying to hammer nails in with a boneless ham. No matter how hard you hit you can't drive them in.


You're supposed to freeze the ham, moran.
 
2012-03-10 09:56:22 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2012-03-12 05:31:35 AM  

Mugato: Without copy and pasting, yes or no Bevets. Do you believe the Earth is really less than 10,000 years old?


If you get an honest answer, please contact me. I have this wall who I believe was cheating at poker last night at my friend Gary's house. It's like getting blood from a stone trying to get him to 'fess up. (for want of a beter similie)
 
2012-03-12 09:19:40 AM  

FarkinHostile: TimeWaste: I'd like to use this thread as an opportunity to apologize to everyone here for any debates or arguments I encouraged in past threads. For 28 years I was a devout Christian, believing most of this stuff with the utmost sincerity. Until a couple months ago, that is. I now see the world differently, and I was absolutely wrong about God (but you already knew that). So, thanks for your patience, but I'm sorry for wearing it so thin.


Assuming this post is true, with complete honesty answer this:

Did you really? Did you with the utmost sincerity believe in creationism against all evidence? Or did you know in your heart that it was hogwash, but couldn't consciously admit it due to childhood indoctrination/brainwashing?


I should have been more specific. I never believed all of the creationism stuff, such as the earth being 6000 years old. But I believed the rest of the bible, like Adam and Eve and the flood. I certainly didn't believe in the big bang or evolution, and I thought all evidence pointing towards it was a trap from Satan. That feels silly to admit now.

MacWizard:

What changed your mind?

/Seriously


One day I thought strong and hard about there not being a god, and what I would feel like. I realized I felt relieved. This scared me, because my whole life was based around church and Christ. I decided to look into it all with a completely open mind, and not with a Jesus-filter.

Once I learned about how much evidence there actually is for the big bang, as well as evolution, the ball started rolling. Then I started learning about how the bible came about, the history of basing many of the stories off of older religions (again, I always thought this was a lie from Satan. But the facts are there). The real clincher was when I learned about the New Testament, and how the books were actually written, and how it wasn't decided for sure that Christ rose from the dead until 300 years later when it was in the church's best interest.

So these all opened my eyes to the idea that I was part of the greatest hoax of all time, and every argument against God was a circular argument (The bible is true because god wrote it, and we know god wrote it because the bible is true).

From there I've had an unquenchable thirst for knowledge that I haven't felt since I was a teenager. I've been reading about the cosmos and learning incredible facts about our universe. Each fact I learn suggests the ridiculous idea that the universe has been created for humans. And best of all, I feel fantastic. The world is so much more beautiful to me now, and I'm taking life much more seriously now that I only have one.

Some of the amazing sources that kick started it all has been christianitydisproved.org, and a guy on youtube named Evid3nc3 and his very well done series on how he de-converted, which can be found here: http://www.youtube.com/user/Evid3nc3

tl;dr: I began a legitimate search for truth, instead of searching for arguments in my favor as I had always done before.
 
2012-03-12 02:07:17 PM  

TimeWaste: tl;dr: I began a legitimate search for truth, instead of searching for arguments in my favor as I had always done before.


Interesting response (the entire thing, not just the tl;dr summary). Thanks for sharing.
 
2012-03-12 07:16:32 PM  

MacWizard: TimeWaste: tl;dr: I began a legitimate search for truth, instead of searching for arguments in my favor as I had always done before.

Interesting response (the entire thing, not just the tl;dr summary). Thanks for sharing.


Ditto. Nice to meet you! :-)
 
Displayed 24 of 224 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report