Palin thinks that dinosaurs and man co-existed[views:5407][posts:42]______________________________________ [Sep 29,2008 9:11pm - the_reverend ""] http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na...2008sep28,0,3643718.story?track=rss |
| ___________________________________ [Sep 29,2008 9:19pm - demondave ""] [img] |
| ______________________________________ [Sep 29,2008 9:22pm - the_reverend ""] preach on. |
| _________________________________________ [Sep 29,2008 9:57pm - Conservationist ""] Liberals believe there's no biological difference between races or nations. |
| _____________________________________ [Sep 29,2008 10:27pm - GOP 4EVER ""] Conservationist is a true conservative warrior, preaching the GOP's godly truth one local metal music message board at a time! Congratulations on being so "controversial" here on return to the pit, it's really making a big difference in the world! As VP of this nation, which by the way was founded on Judeo-Christian principles, Palin will mandate all public schools have yearly field trips to the creation museum in Kentucky! God put the dinosaur fossils here to test us! Praise be to God! |
| _________________________________________ [Sep 30,2008 12:15am - This_is_Heresy ""] The country is fucked either way, but I truly hope I don't have to listen to this dumb bitch for 4 years or more. |
| ______________________________________ [Sep 30,2008 2:04am - the_reverend ""] yeah, she's dumber than a pole. |
| ________________________________ [Sep 30,2008 3:52am - ernie ""] did you actually read any of that? she is keeping the state seperate from the church like she should, but the media isnt... whos the fucktard here? she can believe what she wants and so can you.. |
| ______________________________ [Sep 30,2008 7:29am - Yeti ""] yes, thats true, it does state that she has never pushed to have her beliefs taught as truth, and yes she is free to believe whatever she wants, but its still disconcerting that someone so out of touch with reality and dangerously naive would be in charge of our fucking country. |
| __________________________________________ [Sep 30,2008 7:32am - corpus_colostomy ""] this is in stark contrast to the late great red sox, carl everett who claimed that "dinosaurs did not exist, because they arent mentioned in the bible." thankfully head butts were covered in deuteronomy. |
| ______________________________ [Sep 30,2008 8:03am - Yeti ""] "but haven't you all seen that documentary called Jurassic Park?" |
| _________________________________________ [Sep 30,2008 9:40am - Conservationist ""] GOP%204EVER said:Conservationist is a true conservative warrior, preaching the GOP's godly truth one local metal music message board at a time! I am not a conservative; I agree more with conservatives, but politics is more complex than that simplistic division. If you want insight into my politics: http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/p/plato/p71r/ You may be posting here to be controversial and get an ego-boost, but I prefer to contribute *wholly* to any community I'm part of, including debunking lies. Are you against debunking lies? |
| ________________________________________ [Sep 30,2008 9:42am - This_is_Heresy ""] ernie said:did you actually read any of that? she is keeping the state seperate from the church like she should, but the media isnt... whos the fucktard here? she can believe what she wants and so can you.. Yes I did. Whole thing actually. And the more I read, the more I thought, "Say... This girl is FUCKING STUPID!" |
| _______________________________ [Sep 30,2008 9:57am - aril ""] I was just thinking about this as I was on the shitter listening to people dab next to me: She believes in this crap, and yet she's all about drilling for oil (Fossil Fuels, mind you) and whatnot? Does she even KNOW what oil is? Does she know it takes millions of years for oil to be created? There's a reason why it's called fossil fuels, and that's because of the ancient plants and animals it derives from. What a fucking BIMBO. |
| _______________________________________ [Sep 30,2008 10:15am - the_reverend ""] simple, god put it there and it only takes 250 years to make oil. |
| ________________________________ [Sep 30,2008 10:18am - aril ""] oh, I didn't know that. I thought it took millions of years for oil to be created. I didn't know it only takes 250 years. Where's Jesus when you need him now? Surely, if he could change water into wine back in the day, today's Jesus would be able to turn water into oil. |
| _______________________________ [Sep 30,2008 10:35am - Yeti ""] pffft, you guys are retarded. oil is Jesus' piss. |
| ___________________________________ [Sep 30,2008 11:49am - cav nli ""] SOMEONE PLEASE POST THE PICTURE OF JESUS RIDING THE DINOSAUR!! |
| ___________________________________ [Sep 30,2008 11:52am - brian_dc ""] who me? [img] |
| ______________________________________ [Sep 30,2008 12:09pm - ouchdrummer ""] holy cow, that pic is hilarious. |
| ______________________________________ [Sep 30,2008 12:14pm - ouchdrummer ""] Yeti said:yes, thats true, it does state that she has never pushed to have her beliefs taught as truth, and yes she is free to believe whatever she wants, but its still disconcerting that someone so out of touch with reality and dangerously naive would be in charge of our fucking country. I agree totally. It's terrifying. That's a big point in "religuous", that a good portion of the people running our country believe in fairy tales. And while i am sure she keeps it separate as far as we can tell, the spotlight is also on her, and her advisers are definitely pushing her to have caution in this area. Where as, if she does have VP type power, she may just let belief in those fairy tales make way into her policy. (i know, she doesn't really have policy, besides waking up and checking for a Russian invasion. ) |
| ____________________________________________ [Sep 30,2008 12:38pm - FuckIsMySignature ""] beliefs influence actions and decisions. |
| __________________________________________ [Sep 30,2008 12:42pm - Conservationist ""] She's pandering to the religious. When society lost direction, many people turned to religion. Fortunately, the smarter ones are reforming religion. |
| _______________________________ [Sep 30,2008 12:44pm - Yeti ""] exactly. no matter how much you say you separate your beliefs from your policies they are still coming from the same person who believes in ludicrous nonsense. it doesn't even bother me all that much if someone strongly believes in god, and even maybe lets it influence a decision, i mean fundamentally you're supposed to follow a righteous path, but we're not talking about good ol' fashioned lord worship here. this kind of grotesque ignorance towards SCIENCE is extremely dangerous. |
| ____________________________________ [Sep 30,2008 12:49pm - dreadkill ""] corpus_colostomy said:this is in stark contrast to the late great red sox, carl everett who claimed that "dinosaurs did not exist, because they arent mentioned in the bible." thankfully head butts were covered in deuteronomy.i immediately thought of carl everett when i read the thread title. |
| __________________________________________ [Sep 30,2008 12:51pm - Conservationist ""] Isn't there blatant ignorance of SCIENCE on almost all sides however? I mean... What about The Bell Curve? Cue first idiot telling us that's an opinion, or it's contested so it isn't real, etc. What about the differences between male and female psychology? Between social classes? Between races? Between individuals? If we really embrace science, there's a lot of unpopular thought people are going to have to face. I'm all for it, but let's not apply the "we need SCIENCE" to just one side of the equation ;) |
| _______________________________ [Sep 30,2008 12:52pm - Yeti ""] fair enough, but i'm just referencing this particular incident. that kind of ignorance is already rampant. |
| __________________________________________ [Sep 30,2008 12:57pm - Conservationist ""] Sure. We should lump all ignorances together in order to fight them, don't you think? I was pretty LOL'ing at some of the news articles out there about the debate and the election. We're paying for people to bloviate in our ears. It's time we rethink mass media too... |
| ______________________________________ [Sep 30,2008 12:58pm - ouchdrummer ""] Conservationist said:Isn't there blatant ignorance of SCIENCE on almost all sides however? I mean... What about The Bell Curve? Cue first idiot telling us that's an opinion, or it's contested so it isn't real, etc. What about the differences between male and female psychology? Between social classes? Between races? Between individuals? If we really embrace science, there's a lot of unpopular thought people are going to have to face. I'm all for it, but let's not apply the "we need SCIENCE" to just one side of the equation ;) ok sir, while i agree with needing it on both sides, it doesn't make it any less scary/fucking nuts. Lets not try to compare liberals with conservatives EVERY time a conservative is bashed ok? She's god damn batshit, and her "beliefs" scare the hell outta me because they could influence very big, very serious policy. I am NOT saying liberals can ignore these same standards, but it's not always us or them. There is a point were we have to say "right or wrong" and that's not always easy to define, but this bitch is wrong. Crazy, stupid, batshit-wrong. |
| _______________________________ [Sep 30,2008 12:58pm - Yeti ""] i'd rather fight some giant malformed creature composed of all ignorance than tons of little annoying ones. |
| _______________________________________ [Sep 30,2008 12:59pm - hunterhunter ""] [img] |
| _________________________________________ [Sep 30,2008 1:01pm - Conservationist ""] ouchdrummer said:Lets not try to compare liberals with conservatives EVERY time a conservative is bashed ok? She's god damn batshit, and her "beliefs" scare the hell outta me because they could influence very big, very serious policy. I think it's important to put them in context. Obama has some crazy beliefs -- equally crazy -- that scare the shit out of me. What's worse than no solution? A false solution. |
| ________________________________ [Sep 30,2008 1:01pm - zyklon ""] Whoever votes for this bitch is seriously fucked up |
| _________________________________________ [Sep 30,2008 1:04pm - Conservationist ""] Biden has sponsored more damaging drug war legislation than any Democrat in Congress. Hate the way federal prosecutors use RICO laws to take aim at drug offenders? Thank Biden. How about the abomination that is federal asset forfeiture laws? Thank Biden. Think federal prosecutors have too much power in drug cases? Thank Biden. Think the title of a “Drug Czar” is sanctimonious and silly? Thank Biden, who helped create the position (and still considers it an accomplishment worth boasting about). Tired of the ridiculous steroids hearings in Congress? Thank Biden, who led the effort to make steroids a Schedule 3 drug, and has been among the blowhardiest of the blowhards when it comes to sports and performance enhancing drugs. Biden voted in favor of using international development aid for drug control (think plan Columbia, plan Afghanistan, and other meddling anti-drug efforts that have only fostered loathing of America, backlash, and unintended consequences). Oh, and he was also the chief sponsor of 2004’s horrendous RAVE Act. http://www.theagitator.com/2008/08/23/biden/ After taking over the Foreign Relations committee, Biden became a staunch ally of Hollywood and the recording industry in their efforts to expand copyright law. He sponsored a bill in 2002 that would have make it a federal felony to trick certain types of devices into playing unauthorized music or executing unapproved computer programs. Biden's bill was backed by content companies including News Corp. but eventually died after Verizon, Microsoft, Apple, eBay, and Yahoo lobbied against it. Last year, Biden sponsored an RIAA-backed bill called the Perform Act aimed at restricting Americans' ability to record and play back individual songs from satellite and Internet radio services. (The RIAA sued XM Satellite Radio over precisely this point.) http://news.yahoo.com/s/cnet/20080824/tc_cnet/83011357831002416338 O RLY |
| _____________________________________ [Sep 30,2008 1:05pm - ouchdrummer ""] Conservationist said: ouchdrummer said:Lets not try to compare liberals with conservatives EVERY time a conservative is bashed ok? She's god damn batshit, and her "beliefs" scare the hell outta me because they could influence very big, very serious policy. I think it's important to put them in context. Obama has some crazy beliefs -- equally crazy -- that scare the shit out of me. What's worse than no solution? A false solution. Whats with the deflection? Instead of agreeing that her beliefs are crazy and she's scary (which you HAVE to believe) you try to in turn put down obama. (who i don't like) dude, i was just saying dont defend the bitch. Thats it, no ones pushing obama on you in this thread, why defend this wacko, or try to make it look like it's not a problem because both sides have issues? |
| _________________________________________ [Sep 30,2008 1:08pm - Conservationist ""] ouchdrummer said: Conservationist said: ouchdrummer said:Lets not try to compare liberals with conservatives EVERY time a conservative is bashed ok? She's god damn batshit, and her "beliefs" scare the hell outta me because they could influence very big, very serious policy. I think it's important to put them in context. Obama has some crazy beliefs -- equally crazy -- that scare the shit out of me. What's worse than no solution? A false solution. Whats with the deflection? Instead of agreeing that her beliefs are crazy and she's scary (which you HAVE to believe) you try to in turn put down obama. (who i don't like) dude, i was just saying dont defend the bitch. Thats it, no ones pushing obama on you in this thread, why defend this wacko, or try to make it look like it's not a problem because both sides have issues? Technically, it's not a deflection. It's an argument for a wider inclusion. I agreed with one poster that SCIENCE is important. However, at that point, the argument has expanded to include all abuses of SCIENCE. I have not actually defended Palin on this, because (a) I don't agree with Creationism in the form she endorses it (b) I think she's pandering to an audience that has proven intractable on this issue, so it's an insoluble problem. My advice is to look at actual policy questions. If we're going to include one candidate as anti-Science, we should keep the debate open about both sides and their failures in Science, which is a way of pointing out a *lack of exclusivity* to the charge in question, therefore decreasing its relevance. |
| _____________________________________ [Sep 30,2008 1:10pm - ouchdrummer ""] Conservationist said:Biden has sponsored more damaging drug war legislation than any Democrat in Congress. Hate the way federal prosecutors use RICO laws to take aim at drug offenders? Thank Biden. How about the abomination that is federal asset forfeiture laws? Thank Biden. Think federal prosecutors have too much power in drug cases? Thank Biden. Think the title of a “Drug Czar” is sanctimonious and silly? Thank Biden, who helped create the position (and still considers it an accomplishment worth boasting about). Tired of the ridiculous steroids hearings in Congress? Thank Biden, who led the effort to make steroids a Schedule 3 drug, and has been among the blowhardiest of the blowhards when it comes to sports and performance enhancing drugs. Biden voted in favor of using international development aid for drug control (think plan Columbia, plan Afghanistan, and other meddling anti-drug efforts that have only fostered loathing of America, backlash, and unintended consequences). Oh, and he was also the chief sponsor of 2004’s horrendous RAVE Act. http://www.theagitator.com/2008/08/23/biden/ After taking over the Foreign Relations committee, Biden became a staunch ally of Hollywood and the recording industry in their efforts to expand copyright law. He sponsored a bill in 2002 that would have make it a federal felony to trick certain types of devices into playing unauthorized music or executing unapproved computer programs. Biden's bill was backed by content companies including News Corp. but eventually died after Verizon, Microsoft, Apple, eBay, and Yahoo lobbied against it. Last year, Biden sponsored an RIAA-backed bill called the Perform Act aimed at restricting Americans' ability to record and play back individual songs from satellite and Internet radio services. (The RIAA sued XM Satellite Radio over precisely this point.) http://news.yahoo.com/s/cnet/20080824/tc_cnet/83011357831002416338 O RLY So why not start a thread about biden? Cause just putting down the other side here makes you look like a desperate supporter of this nut-job looking for a way to divert attention to her wrongs, when you don't realize that no ones trying to push obama, or biden, so you dont even need to put them down, just admit she's scary. or don't if you really don't think she is, but i definitely have more faith in your intellect than that. (seriously, i think your a smart guy, but you get defensive about all conservatives, which is not becoming of you when they are as nuts as she is.) |
| ________________________________ [Sep 30,2008 1:10pm - zyklon ""] Dude whatever bullshit you say is not gonna change my mind about McCain and that bitch so don't even bother ok |
| _____________________________________ [Sep 30,2008 1:12pm - ouchdrummer ""] Conservationist said: ouchdrummer said: Conservationist said: ouchdrummer said:Lets not try to compare liberals with conservatives EVERY time a conservative is bashed ok? She's god damn batshit, and her "beliefs" scare the hell outta me because they could influence very big, very serious policy. I think it's important to put them in context. Obama has some crazy beliefs -- equally crazy -- that scare the shit out of me. What's worse than no solution? A false solution. Whats with the deflection? Instead of agreeing that her beliefs are crazy and she's scary (which you HAVE to believe) you try to in turn put down obama. (who i don't like) dude, i was just saying dont defend the bitch. Thats it, no ones pushing obama on you in this thread, why defend this wacko, or try to make it look like it's not a problem because both sides have issues? Technically, it's not a deflection. It's an argument for a wider inclusion. I agreed with one poster that SCIENCE is important. However, at that point, the argument has expanded to include all abuses of SCIENCE. I have not actually defended Palin on this, because (a) I don't agree with Creationism in the form she endorses it (b) I think she's pandering to an audience that has proven intractable on this issue, so it's an insoluble problem. My advice is to look at actual policy questions. If we're going to include one candidate as anti-Science, we should keep the debate open about both sides and their failures in Science, which is a way of pointing out a *lack of exclusivity* to the charge in question, therefore decreasing its relevance. see, the big mis-communication here is that we weren't talking about who the better candidate/vp would be, we were just saying she's nuts. |
| _____________________________________ [Oct 6,2008 9:54pm - the_reverend ""] [img] |
| ________________________________________ [Oct 6,2008 10:18pm - monster_island ""] bennyhillifier |
| _________________________________________ [Oct 6,2008 11:01pm - Conservationist ""] ouchdrummer said:we were just saying she's nuts. You were saying you disagree with her on the basis of her support for something un-Scientific; I just pointed out that your option is also against Science. That invalidates the basis of your argument... |
| ______________________________________ [Oct 9,2008 10:00pm - the_reverend ""] [img] |