What is Digg?32 Comments
- Aeaus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+27The first one is real, the rest are satirical.
- runpete, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19New sticker: "These stickers evolve from serious to humorous. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of stickers. This sticker should be attached with an easily removed adhesive and careless precision."
P.S.: I am a science teacher and these are hilarious! - Barman, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13Haha, are these for real? They get progressively funnier as you go along.
- tidu, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10This book...
has been in he bathroom. - sctechguy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Cobb County...isn't this the same county where the police officer is trying to have a couple arrested, after the couple caught him speeding on their street?
http://www.digg.com/offbeat_news/Cop_caught_speeding_by_citizens_wants_them_arrested
Boy, this county sounds like a barrel full of fun! - CBTF, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8That's the whole joke.
- nogami, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I think I'm going to print off a stack of a few of these to bring with me while travelling...
It's the sort of thing I might put on (in) Bibles in hotel rooms... - MrStabby, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6"This sticker suggests that all textbook disclaimer stickers are unintentionally hilarious. However, the hilarity of these stickers is a controversial topic, not all people accept this theory. This sticker should be approached with a open mind, quickly scoffed at, and immediately peeled."
Great PDF, I might print it out and post in on all of my science professors' doors...
Also Dugg for Cobb County, I went to school there! - Azerael, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Meanwhile, in the future:
Jurassic Park 6: This movie has been rated D for Dinosaurs. It contains ideas that support the theory of Evolution and should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered.
Home Appliances: This Microwave operates using technology derived from theories that directly contradict the beliefs of some individuals and may offend some users, all food processed by this appliance should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered.
Blow-up-globe: The shape of the Earth is a controversial topic, the image portrayed by this item should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered.
Book, On the Origin of Species: This book contains material that supports the existence of Charles Darwin. The Existence of Charles Darwin is a theory, not a fact, and should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered. - PanteroBlanco, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4All except the first one are spoofs.
The creator's point was that calling evolution a "theory" in order to dismiss it is foolish. For example, we can't "prove" that gravity works as laid out in the theory of gravity, but we can be quite sure it does exist.
Incidentally, the first sticker's "theory, not a fact" doesn't make sense, as something can be factual and yet not proven. - PanteroBlanco, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4In all the textbooks I've seen (and I live in one of the most conservative parts of Georgia), interspecies evolution is defined as a theory, but one which has a lot of weight behind it and for which there is no simpler known alternative. Just like gravity.
If you want to see some wild, unsupported claims presented as proven fact, check out some psychology textbooks... - Urusai, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Amurrican edumacashun unner our Feckless Leder, Goerge UU. Bush.
- imakecomments, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3They should put this: http://www.notjustatheory.com/ on a sticker.
- grees17, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Newton's Laws are still laws. Just because Einstein's Theory of Relativity better explain's why gravity is doesnt mean Newton's Laws of HOW gravity is are any less applicable.
You people do not understand the enormous difference between theories and laws. Theories are not uncompromised fact. They can be disproven at any moment if enough evidence is present to come to the new conclusion. Theories are not "bills," they do not become "laws," nor can they be "vetoed" by your cyclic reasoning. If you wish that critical reasoning was applied to every science, than why not apply it to the social sciences, in particular theology.
It makes me question how religion became religion in the first place. - sctechguy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Read it again. The sticker is directly quoting Bush.
- Azerael, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2However, science shouldn't be questioned using concepts that are currently unprovable; such as the existence of, or creation of, the human race by omnipotent gods. The nature of science is of ideas and theories that can be observed in action and their results reproduced.
- steebs, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1*sigh*
I'll probably get dugg down for this because digg doesn't handle opposing opinions well, but i just want to point out that not everyone who disagrees with the theory of evolution thinks the earth is flat. i realize that this article is satire, and i thought it was funny. but i just want people to be aware that not everyone who is skeptical of evolution is an uneducated zealot. after all, an open mind is the basis of the sciences.
ok, that's my rant. hope i didn't step on too many toes. - DyDx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Actually, evolution at the microscopic level has been observed and proven. It is well-known that virii and bacteria evolve such that they are more resistant to antibiotics and allow them to get past our immune systems (that's why you can get the common cold more than once in your life -- your body makes antibodies for one variation of the virus.. then another comes long that it hasn't seen before and you get sick until your body starts making antibodies for the new variation). The biological mechanism is well-studied (crossover during meiotic division).
Proving it on the macroscopic scale is much harder to do, of course, but there is plenty of convincing evidence in the fossil records and even in observing the environments that existing animals live in and the anatomical features they have evolved. The main problem is convincing people that organisms of such complexity could have evolved in "mere" hundreds of millions of years. The thing is that it's extremely difficult to grasp exactly how long hundreds of millions or billions of years really is -- it is truly a huge amount of time and scientists fully believe that it is (must!) be plenty of time for such complex organisms to evolve from very simple organisms. It is just difficult to comprehend and appreciate something so... enormous.
Though it is a "theory" because of the inherent impossibility in proving it on the macroscopic scale (for the time being), there is little to no doubt in the scientific community that it is true (and who are you going to trust when it comes to science? SCIENTISTS or a bunch of lame city officials?). Their is always debate about the details of evolution, but the basic tenets are about as irrefutable as you can get (for something inherently unprovable, of course). - SpacePope, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1what's with the spelling on the last sticker?
- annonimality, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"not everyone who is skeptical of evolution is an uneducated zealot". True. But I think it is fair to say that everyone who is skeptical of evolution is a RELIGIOUS zealot. If they were not they would not have a problem with evolution.
My wife is Japanese, and she thought I was joking when I told her President Bush doesn't believe in evolution. See, in Japan, almost everyone is Buddhist (actually their religion is a hybrid of Buddhism and Shintoism), and evolution doesn't conflict with Buddhism. So all Japanese Buddhists believe in evolution. - manfesto, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3http://www.somethingawful.com/d/comedy-goldmine/real-college-textbooks.php
not really related, but funny nonetheless. - annonimality, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1wrong place... digg down
- GawtMilk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Well actually the earth isn't a sphere, it is more egg shaped, due to the centrifugal force caused by the rotation.
- fivestarsoul, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2These pretzels.... are making me thirsty!
- annonimality, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1In the beginning, the FLYING SPAGHETTI MONSTER created the heavens and the earth.
THAT'S the problem. - timkowal, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0If you all liked those stickers, you'll like "The Dawkins Delusion" at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QERyh9YYEis. Just as these stickers poke fun at the "ridiculous" notion that evolution might be false, The Dawkins Delusion pokes fun at Richard Dawkins's "ridiculous" notion that God might not exist.
- grees17, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I loved the "Holy Bible---Second Edition" one...classic
- thefreshbeats, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3"This textbook claims that the earth is over 4,000 years old. Lies! Lies we tell you! Praise Jesus."
- bellenberger, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1There was once a time when Newton's Theories were considered "Laws" which should not be questioned. That was until Einstein blew them away with Relativity. Even then he encountered resistance from the "mainstream" community.
When you take a scientific theory as uncompromised fact, you lose the science and create a religion. Maybe someone out there will have a new theory that will blow away relativity or plate techtonics, or evolution. Every scientific theory should be approached with an open and critical mind! I only wish this was taught for every science.
Please, don't make science into a religion. - abid786, on 10/12/2007, -21/+3"The shape of the earth is a controversial topic"
WTF????? To whoever that finds any controversy in this, what millennium do you live in?
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is