Dear creationists:

[PSUFAN]

Yes 29% of them, to be precise

you're a fine one to swallow poll results whole when they go how you'd like them to.

I think the comparison is pretty fair...there's probably a similar ratio of Creationist Dems and of gay Republicans...both groups need to have their heads examined...

[Terry in Crapchester]

there's probably a similar ratio of Creationist Dems and of gay Republicans...both groups need to have their heads examined...

For that matter, I'd include atheist Republicans in that category as well . . . although, for some strange reason, there seems to be a plethora of them on this board.

[Jimmy Medalions]

gay Republicans...need to have their heads examined...

I think that happens quite often.

Just sayin.

[Jimmy Medalions]

COME OUT FROM BEHIND THE TROLL, CANIBUS!

If you only knew the real deal...

[Dinsdale]

fruited plane

THAT'S what this thread needed -- an appearance by Van.

Of course, that appearance would have been much sweeter if he knew the difference between the Midwestern United States and his last flight out of San Francisco International, but what the heck...

[PSUFAN]

hmm...

"lapping all available moisture out of fecal cisterns" and "having their heads examined"...yep, I guess you're right.

[Dinsdale]

If you only knew the real deal...

Oh, I can only imagine, brother.

And at this point, I'm pretty sure I don't even want to know.

Unlike basic world problems, sometimes ignorance is indeed bliss.

[PSUFAN]

You can't stave off global warming by sucking the methane out of your Log Cabin Repub lover's brown eye...despite all efforts to the contrary.

[Dinsdale]

Can you even name the most significant green house gas?

Uhm tard -- we've beeen down this road before. And you plungered yourself on that one, too.

Really.

BUT, if you're down, go right ahead.

I already know the exact tack you're going to take here, and trust me, it won't end well for you.

But, if you're so inclined, go right ahead.


Dazzle us all with your brilliance...tell us about that #1 greenhouse gas....please?

Come on, make your move.

[Tom In VA]

There are definitely an assload of plungers in this thread, but to any objective reader, they are not anywhere near mvscal's ass.

You sure? Clinton being President from 1992-200 out front should have told you.

I'm pretty sure it's understood that a man elected in 1992 becomes "President Elect", rendering the incumbent a "lame duck" primarily focused on transition.

Technically, you are correct. But the reason you're splitting this specific hair is very transparent.

[ChargerMike]

...what's the big deal?..



sin... tadpole, polywog, frog

[Y2K]

I simply debunked your claim.

You did? It looked like you proved my origional point for me.

Their political affiliation revolves around power and the special group of insiders (as well as close friend's "sup SEC") interest in the corporate bottom line. Now you know how fucking stupid it is when people cry about Bush, Oil, Cheney, Haliburton ect. People are so fucking stupid they can't grasp that this is the same game played for a couple hundred years with a vast number of players but "these days" it's supposed to be different than those "other days."
It doesn't mean dick to these people who's "in power" as long as the money they've invested to get them there pays off.

[Mikey]

gay Republicans...need to have their heads examined...

I think that happens quite often.

Just sayin.

Funniest take yet in this thread.

[Terry in Crapchester]

I simply debunked your claim.

You did? It looked like you proved my origional point for me.

But the post I was responding to was one in which you mentioned the Rockefellers alongside the Kennedys and LBJ, prominent Democrats. You implied that all of the Rockefellers were Democrats. That simply isn't the case.

[Tom In VA]

Usually any assertion that begins with 'All of ...... " is pretty easy to debunk. Case in point your assertion that all creationists are Republicans. And as you've shown with the Rockefellers, it only takes ONE to debunk said assertion.

[Y2K]

I simply debunked your claim.

You did? It looked like you proved my origional point for me.

But the post I was responding to was one in which you mentioned the Rockefellers alongside the Kennedys and LBJ, prominent Democrats. You implied that all of the Rockefellers were Democrats. That simply isn't the case.

Hell I know that..... Jeebus....

They are people that make billions of dollars the good ole fashioned way, by manipulateing whole commodity markets. The only thing that I can affiliate with the Donkey party is the whimpering bitches these families put out as a front to make people look the other way as they fuck consumers in the ass.

[Terry in Crapchester]

As usual, Dins has it all figured out. He knows exactly how much CO2 and other greenhouse gases should properly be emitted into the atmosphere in order to maintain the planet's temperature at its appropriate fixed point.

If we all listen to Dins, and heed his cogent advice, we won't have to suffer through any more climate changes. If you park your SUV and stop mowing your lawn, the planet's climate will stay exactly the way it is supposed to be.

But if we don't listen to Dins, we'll certainly go through another climate change.

Change "Dins" to "mvscal" and the meaning of the above doesn't change. Not one fugging bit.

[Jimmy Medalions]

This thread couldn't be going any worse for Terry. Bob, back to you.

[Terry in Crapchester]

Hardly, Jimmah.

[ChargerMike]

This thread couldn't be going any worse for Terry. Bob, back to you.

ROF

[Terry in Crapchester]

This thread couldn't be going any worse for Terry. Bob, back to you.

ROF

Okay, put your money where your mouth is.

mvscal asked me to drop some links to support my point. I did (several, in fact) then challenged him to do the same. He then ran away.

So how could this thread not possibly be going worse for me?

[Jimmy Medalions]

Creationists crack me up.

You are aware that they reside exclusively within your party?

Yeah. Looked up exclusively and all I found was the following:

ex·clu·sive; adj.

1. Excluding or tending to exclude: exclusive barriers.
2. A word which is sometimes foolishly used in poorly-thought out takes, often foreshadowing a significant backpedal, followed by diversionary tactics and ultimately an unpleasant but curiously-enjoyable beatdown.

[Terry in Crapchester]

Creationists crack me up.

You are aware that they reside exclusively within your party?

Yeah. Looked up exclusively and all I found was the following:

ex·clu·sive; adj.

1. Excluding or tending to exclude: exclusive barriers.
2. A word which is sometimes foolishly used in poorly-thought out takes, often foreshadowing a significant backpedal, followed by diversionary tactics and ultimately an unpleasant but curiously-enjoyable beatdown.

And I proved that all of the political figures supporting creationism are Republicans.

[Jimmy Medalions]

Desperation leads to spin jobs. That's what you proved.

Move on, you are losing by the minute here.

[Terry in Crapchester]

You don't get it, do you, Jimmy? I'll dumb it down for you, then.

What some yayhoo in Montana believes about the origins of the world affects my life not a bit. However, what a local school board chooses to have the school district teach my children about the origins of the universe affects me greatly, as they will need to be at least functionally literate in science in order to succeed in the world. Replacing standard biology textbooks with the Book of Genesis will not accomplish that.

Now, unfortunately, there is an assault on evolution from some in the political spectrum. Those leading this assault are all Republicans (although not all Republicans are behind this assault).

And while we're at it, let's not forget that Pat Robertson recently said that the people of Dover, PA should not expect God's mercy, because they committed the unpardonable (in his eyes, anyway) sin of voting out members of a school board who had approved the teaching of creationism. Didn't Pat Robertson run for President once? Which party's endorsement did he seek?

Care to dispute any of this? You can't. So continue to parse my words, if that floats your boat. That's all you've got, after all.

[Terry in Crapchester]

Those leading this assault are all Republicans (although not all Republicans are behind this assault).

So...for the record, you're saying that no Democratic politicians favor teaching ID in public schools?

Is that your final answer?

What I'm saying is that I've asked you to identify one, and thus far, you haven't.

And that's my final answer.

[Van]

Terry, just for the record, this is what you wrote...

Creationists crack me up.

You are aware that they reside exclusively within your party?

You made no mention of Congress, or any elected officials.

I said that there sure as hell are Dems who are also Creationists. You then turned it into a different discussion, and you and MV have been going back and forth about that different spin ever since.

Bottom line though, you used the word "exclusively", which means "no exceptions", and there's no way in hell you can back up such a specific claim.

[Terry in Crapchester]

Terry, just for the record, this is what you wrote...

Creationists crack me up.

You are aware that they reside exclusively within your party?

You made no mention of Congress, or any elected officials.

I said that there sure as hell are Dems who are also Creationists. You then turned it into a different discussion, and you and MV have been going back and forth about that different spin ever since.

Bottom line though, you used the word "exclusively", which means "no exceptions", and there's no way in hell you can back up such a specific claim.

Maybe I exaggerated in that regard, although, as PSUFAN mentioned, Democratic creationists should have their heads examined (along with Republican homosexuals, and, as I pointed out, Republican atheists).

But it is, or at least should be, patently obvious that I do not know, nor can I possibly claim to know, what every Democrat believes on every single issue. What I can say with certainty is that every elected official of whom I am aware espousing creationism is a Republican. And again, in this regard, what the elected officials espouse has the ability to affect my life, whereas what the grassroots believes does not necessarily affect my life.

This isn't -- at least it shouldn't be -- about parsing my words. I may have stated my premise in a somewhat clumsy manner originally, but I believe I have now sufficiently clarified it. And no one has yet refuted it, as so clarified.

[Y2K]

Wow..
So all these surveys and studies come to a conclusion that 64% of Americans believe that creationisim as well as evolution should be taught in schools but not 1 Democrat considers their opinion worth taking a stand for. Now there's that "party of the people" working hard to stay in touch with constituants....

Democrat Legislators are blind (on purpose) have no balls or stupid.
Whatever your personal stance on this issue it shouldn't be a badge of shame because someone actually speaks out on behalf of over 2/3's of American's.

So Republicans are exclusively doing the job they're elected to do.

[Terry in Crapchester]

So...for the record, you're saying that no Democratic politicians favor teaching ID in public schools?

Is that your final answer?

What I'm saying is that I've asked you to identify one, and thus far, you haven't.

And that's my final answer.

No, that isn't what you're saying.

In English, please?

I've been quoting "what you have been saying" and it keeps changing from minute to minute as each quote gets shoved up your ass.

Then apparently you didn't read Page 3, moron.

You really ought to be scouring the web for evidence that it is only Republicans that want creationism taught in public schools.

I guess the fact that you're here making pedantic and pointless irrelevant comments in a desperate effort to divert the issue means you couldn't find any.

Well?

You don't really want to go there, do you?

Bush endorses creationism . . .

http://pharyngula.org/index/weblog/comm ... eationism/

Republican candidates for Montana governor support teaching creationism in schools . . .

http://atheism.about.com/b/a/080447.htm

Santorum drafts anti-evolution bill . . .

http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=3636

Republican War on Science . . .

http://www.motherjones.com/news/qa/2005 ... ooney.html

Republicans back creationism . . .

http://www.langston.com/Fun_People/1999/1999AOB.html

McCain backs "intelligent design" . . .

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2005/ ... esign.html

All of these just from Page One of a google search.

Now, why don't you link us up to similar articles about Democrats? Or STFU, cretin.

[Uncle Fester]

George Will wrote an interesting piece last week regarding the climate change debate. He noted that it is primarily a debate driven by the media.

Is that the same George Will who wrote a column in Newsweek about how the movie, "The China Syndrome," was an irresponsible piece of trash that scared people unnecessarily about nuclear power?

The near meltdown at Three Mile Island happened exactly one week later.

Yeah, I thought so.

[silvurna]

my .02
Creationists may occasionally cite examples from Holy Scriptures, I'll use the Bible as an example, a collection of writings loaded with symbolism and empiricism, minus the experimentation. I can't say the Bible inspires great confidence in me, especially when artifacts such as The Dead Sea Scrolls exist.

Evolution theory proponents may occaionally cite Darwin's Theories. There are gaping holes in Charlie's ideas as well..using his Theory, how does one explain the change in physical form that a tadpole takes to become a frog? This is a quantum leap, no pun intended...a creature that lives in the water and the next stage in its development is become one that's at home on land and breathes air....it doesn't fit Charlie's mold.

So here we have six pages of, 'I have pasta, you have pasta, my elbow macaroni will stick to the wall but your spaghetti does not.'
Carry on, peeps.

[Van]

Terry, being agnostic I'm not quite a Republican atheist but I'm pretty close. I certainly lean closer to atheism than Creationism. That being said, I don't think I need my head examined.

I'm a registered Republican and yep, on many financial/foreign policy issues I'm quite classically conservative and Republican. Thing is, on most social issues I'm as liberal as it gets. I'm probably the biggest tree hugger/pro choice/animal rights dork you'll ever meet, even though I'm a Republican.

I suspect many people are like me; people aren't 100% across the board adherents to either party's platform.

Of all the poeple here you're the last one I'd expect to see engaging in such blanket statement pigeonholing...

[Terry in Crapchester]

Wow..
So all these surveys and studies come to a conclusion that 64% of Americans believe that creationisim as well as evolution should be taught in schools but not 1 Democrat considers their opinion worth taking a stand for. Now there's that "party of the people" working hard to stay in touch with constituants....

Democrat Legislators are blind (on purpose) have no balls or stupid.
Whatever your personal stance on this issue it shouldn't be a badge of shame because someone actually speaks out on behalf of over 2/3's of American's.

So Republicans are exclusively doing the job they're elected to do.

First of all, it was one survey. And you might want to go back and read it -- there's some evidence to suggest that a number of the respondents were confused as to what "creationism" and "evolution" mean.

Not to mention that at least one court has held that teaching creationism violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. You can't enact the will of the people if doing so violates the Constitution.

[Terry in Crapchester]

Are you saying that there are no Democratic politicians who support the inclusion of ID in public school curricula?

I don't need another lengthy meltdown or weak spin job. A yes or no response is all that is required.

I'm asking you to provide an example of one. For, I think, the fifth time on this thread.

[Diogenes]

Creationists crack me up.

You are aware that they reside exclusively within your party?

Beat me to it, Terry.

Dude tells us that he believes evolution is fact, yet gives unwavering support to a prty that wants to teach something he himself believes isn't true in PUBLIC schools.

It's party, dumbfuck.

And if you are claiming the GOP 'wants to teach' creationism in public schools, you are as full of shit as usual.

[Terry in Crapchester]

Van, I said back on Page One that I don't expect anyone to adhere to their party's platform 100%. Rather, my comment about Republican atheists was based on the fact that the vibes the Republican Party sends out suggest, at least to me, that atheists are about as welcome in their Party as are homosexuals.

I can't speak for everybody, of course, but I personally wouldn't want to be part of any organization where I clearly was unwelcome.

[Diogenes]

1. Move this to the political forum

2. The move it to the Theology forum

3. Then bring it back here so it can be laughed at

1 Yes.
2 Only if you're actually discussing Creationism, ID has nothing to do with religion.
3 Move it back to 2, nobody goes there anyway.

[Y2K]

Wow..
So all these surveys and studies come to a conclusion that 64% of Americans believe that creationisim as well as evolution should be taught in schools but not 1 Democrat considers their opinion worth taking a stand for. Now there's that "party of the people" working hard to stay in touch with constituants....

Democrat Legislators are blind (on purpose) have no balls or stupid.
Whatever your personal stance on this issue it shouldn't be a badge of shame because someone actually speaks out on behalf of over 2/3's of American's.

So Republicans are exclusively doing the job they're elected to do.

First of all, it was one survey. And you might want to go back and read it -- there's some evidence to suggest that a number of the respondents were confused as to what "creationism" and "evolution" mean.

Not to mention that at least one court has held that teaching creationism violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. You can't enact the will of the people if doing so violates the Constitution.

So the PEW Reasearch Survey is skewed because it shows elected Democrats underrepresenting their constituants because they were confused?

I for one have no problem with the courts doing their job, I believe their decision is OK, it's one of those wonders of one of 3 branch's of Government actually doing their job.

[Van]

Terry, I couldn't care less if the Republican or Democratic Parties welcome me.