But it's so gay 
Posted on 12/30/2005 7:40:09 AM PST by dougp59
A new website attacking evolutionary dogma has been launched. The site; young and old alike, with an interest in the subject of origins. Visitors are challenged with a series of questions that current evolutionary theory has no answers for.
Non-serious URL. Blog flogging?
Other excellent scientific-methodology type resources:
www.ICR.org
www.AnswersInGenesis.org
Now that this has been moved to Bloggers/Personal, a note or two:
1. Calling a site anything with the word "sucks" in the URL is not a really good way to attract folks looking for educational tools.
2. Several pro-creationism sites already exist, and are well known.
3. Blogs are NEVER Breaking News. Flogging your blog is not a good tactic on FR.
All the asinine rhetoric used by evolutionists is being thrown back in their faces.
Reading more ...
"The site; www.evolutionsucks.org is designed with students in mind, "
Yeah, the large bolded title "EVOLUTION SUCKS!!" is really what I want my kids using for "educational purposes".
The entire site was filled with misinformation and questions that are unanswered by Creationism.
In short, that website "SUCKS".
Thanks for the quick reply. I was unfamiliar with how FR works. I'll be sure to not do that again.
As for the URL name, it was designed with mostly High School students in mind. I wanted something catchy, easy to remember and provocative.
I've surfed many a thread where far worse language is hurled at those who dare to question evolutionary dogma.
Thanks again for the quick reply.
That is a rather knee jerk reaction. I bet you did not even spend five minutes on one of the questions. Is that the right way to approach a challenge?
I am pleased to hear it. I do not approve of anything that tampers with natural ignorance. Ignorance is like a delicate exotic fruit; touch it and the bloom is gone.-- The Importance of Being Earnest.
"That is a rather knee jerk reaction. I bet you did not even spend five minutes on one of the questions. Is that the right way to approach a challenge?"
You're probably right on the 'knee jerk' part...But I read all the questions.
My question is, do you want such scrutiny applied to Biblical Creationism?
Why the name? Are you obsessed with thoughts of falatio?
To quote a fellow anti-evolutionist on the Net, “Free minds asks questions.”
But alas, the first amendment does not exists in that school district.
LOL!
Years ago, the first definition of the word gay now appears as definition #2 at dictionary.com
1.) Of, relating to, or having a sexual orientation to persons of the same sex.
2.) Showing or characterized by cheerfulness and lighthearted excitement; merry.
3.) Bright or lively, especially in color: a gay, sunny room.
4.) Given to social pleasures. Dissolute; licentious.
Sucks is also listed at dictionary.com as;
Vulgar Slang. To be disgustingly disagreeable or offensive.
That is the essence of evolution, disgustingly disagreeable or offensive.
You know darn well that the phrase "That sucks" as in use today almost never refers to fellatio.
Enough said.
re: "The site; www.evolutionsucks.org is designed with students in mind, young and old alike"
A site name that "sucks" hardly is designed for those seeking facts and the truth. A terrible choice of name. And we wonder why we aren't taken seriously by the other side.
Question #5
"the speed of light is a constant as summed up in E=Mc2"
leads to Question #8.
Do you think you might want to either rephrase or research that one.
But it's so gay
Excellent site.
Lots of material to counter the evolution cultists.
Appropriate site name, to boot.
Bookmarked.
Following are facts extreme evolutionists don't want the public to know.
1. I am a recently retired public middle school mathematics teacher in West Virginia with over 30 years experience as an educator including administration.
For the last five years of my full-time career, with the full knowledge of State, County, and ACLU officials, I demonstrated to my students that mathematics proves beyond the shadow of doubt that evolutionism is nonsense. The students saw that the evidence clearly shows that every item associated with humans, animals and plants are Intelligent Designs and Intelligent Design is science because it is observable by billions of people trillions of times, always has been, always will be. I always let them figure it out for themselves and allowed them to believe what they chose, but at least they were exposed to the scientific facts that extremists want to censor from the minds of public school students. After the lesson a student from an atheist family said, "Evolution is silly."
2. Currently, as a substitute teacher, I have contact with more public school students than ever and take advantage of every opportunity to provide them with the facts described above.
3. Evolutionists are bluffing when they say their beliefs are scientific. Be sure to look at the list of evolutionists who refuse the debate challenge from my friend Dr. Joseph Mastropaolo. See the list at http://www.csulb.edu/~jmastrop/. Click on the Life Science Prize at the bottom.
Karl Priest
kcpriest@aol.com
The great break in the organic chain between man and his nearest
allies, which cannot be bridged over by any extinct or living species,
has often been advanced as a grave objection to the belief that man is
descended from some lower form; but this objection will not appear
of much weight to those who, from general reasons, believe in the
general principle of evolution. Breaks often occur in all parts of the
series, some being wide, sharp and defined, others less so in
various degrees; as between the orang and its nearest allies-
between the Tarsius and the other Lemuridae- between the elephant, and
in a more striking manner between the Ornithorhynchus or Echidna,
and all other mammals. But these breaks depend merely on the number of
related forms which have become extinct. At some future period, not
very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will
almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout
the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor
Schaaffhausen has remarked,* will no doubt be exterminated. The
break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it
will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may
hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon,
instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.
* Anthropological Review, April, 1867, p. 236
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.