What is Digg?726 Comments
- TexasShiv, on 04/17/2008, -33/+204This should be e-mailed to every single Baptist church in the bible belt. Immediately
- aks123, on 04/17/2008, -14/+184Another very common misconception: that evolution is an explanation for the origin of life.
- MattNF, on 04/17/2008, -4/+73" Zebras with built-in machine guns would rarely be bothered by lions, some point out."
Dugg. - nblsavage, on 04/17/2008, -4/+66Yes I are believe in evolution, I are not however believe in spyware and spam. So I are reporting you.
- grungegbunny, on 04/17/2008, -34/+95The bottom line is this: Evolution has over a hundred years worth of evidence collected in its favor. Creation has absolutely 0 evidence to support it.
- Shawshanksr, on 04/17/2008, -51/+107***** intelligent design
- Agrajag, on 04/17/2008, -2/+44None of what you just mentioned is evolution.
- serif69, on 04/17/2008, -7/+46"Evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics"
My brain hurts trying to think of how that could possibly be an argument against evolution. I can understand how many people believe God created everything since religion is so prevalent, but trying to use a complete misunderstanding of one science to bolster a complete misunderstanding of another is flat out retarded. - Stratochief66, on 04/17/2008, -16/+52A very thorough and illuminating read on evolution. Fun for the whole family tree.
- Ramble, on 04/17/2008, -3/+39For example?
- brstilson, on 04/17/2008, -9/+44I don't lose sleep over people believing in God any more than I do over water dowsers. It's when they start trying to push their religious views into the science class that I have a problem with.
- nblsavage, on 04/17/2008, -10/+45Um...care to list the "evidence" supporting creationism?
- Shawshanksr, on 04/17/2008, -13/+48how can you still believe that evolution hasnt been proven?
- grungegbunny, on 04/17/2008, -9/+43So what part of this well established science are you still skeptical of? If you truly have looked at the evidence you would logically know its sound and rational.
- inactive, on 04/17/2008, -1/+32No he doesn't. He knows very well they aren't the same thing. However, he also knows that his target audience doesn't know that.
- inactive, on 04/17/2008, -17/+48Email it to pat robertson, mike Huckabee, and Ron paul while you're at it...
- exomni, on 04/17/2008, -6/+36This is all extremely basic stuff everyone should know by the time they enter highschool, definitely by the time they graduate. If anyone older than 13 finds this "illuminating" it is evidence of the complete and total abysmal failure of our education system.
- Sinai, on 04/17/2008, -5/+34Well, there's dozens of books supporting creationism, many of them our oldest historical records!
...it's just a damned shame they can't seem to agree on their basic facts. - Someguy101, on 02/19/2009, -9/+37"It's just a matter of what evidences you're willing to accept"
Evidence for Creation: The Bible, a book of stories with no proof whatsoever other than the word of previous generations who say it's all true. No physical evidence whatsoever.
Evidence for Evolution: Tons of physical evidence from behavioral to molecular throughout the entire world. Geological evidence that supports it. Geographical evidence that supports it. Evolution has been so extensively proven (with actual observable FACTS) that it is absolutely impossible for a person who's studied it in depth to deny that evolution is the means whereby every living thing on this earth came to be. I doubt any other theory has withstood so much scrutiny for so long. And the only thing that opponents to the theory of evolution can bring to the table is "It's just a matter of what evidences you're willing to accept". Play the I don't accept your evidence card and all will be well. - VIrus9, on 04/17/2008, -9/+36It's also never been "proven" that the sun isn't powered by millions of hamsters running on their little wheels, but much like ID, you'd have to be a moron to believe it.
- Quactaur, on 04/17/2008, -2/+29No. "Evolutionists" believe in natural selection and evolution. Creationists believe in 7 days, floods, etc. The difference is that "evolutionists" have facts, lots of facts, all the facts, whilst creationists have a book and ignorant perversions of facts.
Its telling of just how stupid you are when you call people evolutionists. People who believe in evolution do not do so for dogmatic beliefs, they do so because they have a scientific mindset and, given the evidence, incorporate an acceptance of evolution into their picture of the world. - VIrus9, on 04/17/2008, -3/+28Nice straw man argument. Too bad you have your positions reversed.
- sockpuppets, on 04/17/2008, -7/+32Heretic! Email is the pipeline to the devil!
- Baloo52, on 04/17/2008, -5/+29I'm an Orthodox Jew and I STRONGLY believe in evolution.
The problem with both sides is that they are so quick to criticize all those that disagree with them after only taking a quick face value glance. (I'm not talking about Ben Stein because he grossly misconstrued information and made up lies to tarnish Darwin and demonize all those who believe that scientific proof overrides the irrational, but other articles I have read have been guilty of this type of face value evaluation of Evolution) At the same time the 'evolutionists' are just as at fault of this I was about to Digg this article until I read their arguments about issues in the Torah, most of which have been dealt with by the commentators (for example rabbits do eat their own dung recycling nutrients they have already eaten. While they may not chew their cud in the same way cows do, it still is a form of recycling predigested food. The Nephilim were not necessarily giants and definitely not the same giants that are described as have lived in Israel when the Jews arrived) etc.
Evolution is fact, but if evolutionists want to be taken seriously they need to take a long hard deeper look at the religious texts before criticizing. Let them leave the name calling and inaccuracies to Ben Stein and his cronies
The thing that gets me the most is how creationism is becoming synonymous with Religion and Evolution with Atheism. Maimonides (the Jewish philosopher) writes, "Heaven forbid the Torah contradict empirical science." I asked one of my Rabbis his view on archaeological evidence contradicting certain texts in the Torah to which he responded, if science contradicts what is stated in the text, we don't understand that text properly."
Creationists need to stop trying to get in the way of truth but proponents of evolution need to stop with the name calling and start focusing on refuting them with proper, well researched evidence.
Rant over... - Differentiate, on 04/17/2008, -2/+26dude. you live in freaking NYC. new york is in no way indicative of the rest of the nation. i live in DC and I'm surrounded by the idiot creationists with all their terrifying talk of taking the government "back to god". These people actually think nuclear war with Iran will bring Jesus back, and some of them even think 2/3 of Israel has to die before they can be raptured.
If that doesnt scare you, you have giant brass balls of epic proportions. - sykotik, on 04/17/2008, -2/+25Red Bull, seriously, do you read what you write? The reason the evidence for intelligent design isn't "credible" is because there is NO EVIDENCE OF INTELLIGENT DESIGN. NONE. ZERO. ZILCH. NADA. READ IT AGAIN, AND AGAIN, AND AGAIN, AND AGAIN UNTIL THE LIGHTBULB GOES ON.
Simply saying "Oh my, that's so complex, it must have been designed... by a DESIGNER!" does NOT constitute evidence. It constitutes simple minds thinking simple thoughts. - scottfarner, on 04/17/2008, -2/+25forgot a big step. The appearance of nucleic acids, carbohydrates, lipids, and amino acids
- Brainmodder, on 04/17/2008, -10/+33don't forget Ben Stein, who thinks evolution is lightning striking a mud puddle.
- ExRe, on 04/17/2008, -1/+23What support is there from the creationists side?
- Fartbandit, on 04/17/2008, -1/+23Let me fix it for you!
Evolutionists: We think there's more to it than that, let's continue to investigate and research it.
ID'ists: The case is closed, THIS is how it happened, just believe it.
THIS is how science works. Science isn't about belief but testable empirical evidence, and accurate theoretical predictions. Evolutionary theory isn't cast in stone but is constantly being revised thanks to new evidence being found that may contradict previous idea's of how evolution works but in the last decade and a half no evidence AT ALL has ever been found to show that evolution is false.
Religion however made up its mind several millennia ago about the origins of the universe and simply tries in vain to find evidence to fit its own ideology thus violating the scientific method by doing what it believes to be 'science' backwards. - cranium, on 04/17/2008, -2/+24To what evidence? Oh that's right, you got nuthin'.
- djbon2112, on 04/17/2008, -0/+22So I could write a book mentioning New York City tomorrow, and even though EVERYTHING else in it is wrong, it's correct because I mention a real city?
Your stupidity boggles my mind. - nblsavage, on 04/17/2008, -2/+23If creationists would keep out of the education system, I don't think there would be as much of an issue. Creationism (or it's cover story - ID) is not science.
- Quactaur, on 04/17/2008, -8/+29Religion is a moral crutch. Deist belief in God is irrational but harmless, and can give some people a (admittedly empty) sense of happiness.
The problem comes with just about any doctrinaire belief in God. In order for me to experience the wonderful love of Jesus, or salvation through Islam, i must believe that Homosexuals are unnatural and evil, that people who believe in multiple Gods (through no fault of their own) are going to hell, and that living the most saintly life imaginable can still land someone in eternal damnation if their flavor of monotheism is wrong. - Jambi, on 04/17/2008, -5/+26No one's refusing to allow any questioning of the mechanics of evolution, or even the entire theory as a whole, but as of yet no one who's done so has provided any credible evidence in support of their alternatives. None at all.
- nblsavage, on 04/17/2008, -8/+28That will only happen religion keeps it's snout out of government and the education system. There are already suitable places in society for religion - churches and the home.
- djbon2112, on 04/17/2008, -0/+20You're seriously ignorant. Most scientists NEVER though the earth was flat. The Ancient Greeks knew it was round. Columbus knew it was round. The only people who denied it was round was the Church. See a pattern here?
And what does mapping the entire surface have to do with anything? Straw man. - VacantThoughts, on 04/17/2008, -11/+31Don't you love creationist idiots who use the "its only a theory" defense, my reply to them is always "its just a book full of lies"
- Zlorp, on 04/17/2008, -1/+20im pretty sure you dont even know what you just said.
- eir574, on 04/17/2008, -2/+20I don't really understand your question. The atoms and molecules that make up living beings give those living beings certain properties that non-living beings don't have. Mutation is not a property of matter; it's a property that's specific to living cells. Are you asking why my coffee table doesn't mutate and procreate in the same way that living beings do? It doesn't sound like a sensical question to me.
- nblsavage, on 04/17/2008, -5/+23If it can't be scientifically tested it's not science and has no business being promoted as such. You want to believe that God created the universe, go ahead but quit trying to pretend that it's science.
- inactive, on 04/17/2008, -4/+21and the RIAA
- kingmanic, on 04/17/2008, -3/+20repeat after me: There does not exist a self identifying group known as "evolutionists". Evolutionist is a derogatory term used by certain groups against the people who oppose them. I am no more a evolutionists as i am a gravitiest, general realtivist or 2nd law of thermoninamicist. It's simply a well support theory in Science which has a fairly radical and ignorant opposition.
- DiggyTime, on 04/17/2008, -0/+17"Just because there isn't support for one doesn't mean the whole book is false." -cawpin
Well, on the flip side, just because there is evidence to support one thing, doesn't mean the whole book is true.
If I were to write a story about an enormous tomato devouring China, would it make the story true just because China exists? - grungegbunny, on 04/17/2008, -1/+18One side support comes in the form of evidence that has passed through a skeptical peer review of scientists. The other are assertions that provide no evidence to back it up.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. - jcastillo81, on 04/17/2008, -5/+22That would require logical and empirical evidence from them, which they do not have.
- Sinai, on 04/17/2008, -5/+22I really, really wanted to bury this for being a repackaging of common knowledge, but alas, it turned out to be relatively good packaging.
Dugg. -
Show 51 - 100 of 722 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is