The Most Fucked Up Logic Ever

[devogue]

http://www.answersingenesis.org/article ... -scripture

Read it and try not to let your jaw hit the floor too hard.

[Animavore]

Here's PZ's take with link to original article from which the quote is mined (as AiG didn't have the decency to do it).

EDIT: Ah bollox. Forgot to add linkage.

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009 ... ons_th.php

[Drewish]

Actually, it makes sense (based on what PZ said.) If in fact it turns out that it's more beneficial to survival (either personal, genetic or ideological) to have a faith element in one's belief system, then it will in fact beat out rational thought based on the principles of evolution (even if you don't believe in evolution.) That's one of the reasons I reject postmodernism.

[Animavore]

Actually, it makes sense (based on what PZ said.) If in fact it turns out that it's more beneficial to survival (either personal, genetic or ideological) to have a faith element in one's belief system, then it will in fact beat out rational thought based on the principles of evolution (even if you don't believe in evolution.) That's one of the reasons I reject postmodernism.

I don't get you.

[Rum]

What a load of total wank. Please don't discuss it any more.

Thank you.

[Trolldor]

Actually, it makes sense (based on what PZ said.) If in fact it turns out that it's more beneficial to survival (either personal, genetic or ideological) to have a faith element in one's belief system, then it will in fact beat out rational thought based on the principles of evolution (even if you don't believe in evolution.) That's one of the reasons I reject postmodernism.

Postmodernism is adverse to rationality, to 'defining'.
Secondly, there's no actual evolutionary benefit to 'faith' that has been demonstrated.

[devogue]

The article discusses "right" and "wrong" with reference to morality and then equates the same "right" and "wrong" with the teaching of scientific fact and creationism.

It's like saying that there is a "good" answer and an "evil" answer to 2+2=4.

[Drewish]

Secondly, there's no actual evolutionary benefit to 'faith' that has been demonstrated.

Oh I didn't say that it did. But one should keep in mind that the atheist movement is fairly male-heavy (at least in the US) for example, so if I were a single male looking for a date, it would actually potentially advantageous to be a believer. Self-interest alone does not a justification for atheism make.

The article discusses "right" and "wrong" with reference to morality and then equates the same "right" and "wrong" with the teaching of scientific fact and creationism.

It's like saying that there is a "good" answer and an "evil" answer to 2+2=4.

Exactly! there is no difference between the two. Well, at least not according to my belief system. Except that in this article it attempts to use moral 'right' to prove factual 'right' which is backwards, at least in relation to my moral system.

[Rum]

Please! Stop this nonsense! Now!

[devogue]

Please! Stop this nonsense! Now!

Bend over and take it, byatch!

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Here's PZ's take with link to original article from which the quote is mined (as AiG didn't have the decency to do it).

If linky there, me no see.

[Rum]

Please! Stop this nonsense! Now!

Bend over and take it, byatch!

*sphincter muscles clamp tight*

Fuck off you!

[devogue]

Please! Stop this nonsense! Now!

Bend over and take it, byatch!

*sphincter muscles clamp tight*

Fuck off you!

Nyah haaaaa....this one plays hard to get...

[Rum]

Please! Stop this nonsense! Now!

Bend over and take it, byatch!

*sphincter muscles clamp tight*

Fuck off you!

Nyah haaaaa....this one plays hard to get...

This one is actually fucking off to bed. Go eat a £3.33 grape and think of the starving kids in Africa!

*kiss*

[devogue]

This one is actually fucking off to bed. Go eat a £3.33 grape and think of the starving kids in Africa!

*kiss*

£3.33 your hole. That's the cheap shit!

£10.00 a grape is what I want.