Trudeau insults Christians in Easter Day Doonesbury cartoon

Doonesbury Cartoon ^ | April 20, 2003 | Gary Trudeau

[JHL]

On Easter of all days, Gary Trudeau uses his Doonesbury cartoon to insult Christians in general, and George Bush's faith in particular. How quick the liberals are to condemn someone else's faith and belief system, but just let a Christian say anything negative about another's belief system and how quick they are to invoke an injunction against "judgementalism."

You can read the cartoon for yourself at the following link CLICK HERE for cartoon

[whattajoke]

Why did you stop answering Dr. Stochastic's questions after one? I believe the next question was:

How old do you believe the earth to be?

Again, we're not looking for extreme accuracy here, you've been given the rather fair parameter of +/- 4.5 billion years!

[longshadow]

Smoldering, "wildly elliptical" blue flatulence-free placemarker

[whattajoke]

Gore3K writes:

"Hey moron, instead of insulting refute it. As usual the #1 moron of evolution has nothing but insults to counter my statements."

And "moron" isn't an insult because...?

You're such a goofball (yes, I'm directly insulting you). You must have been really excited when you stumbled upon this particular thread because there are (were, more likely) many freepers unaware of your persistant, easily refuted lies. People that will read your oh-so-scientific gobbledy gook and say, "hey, this guy knows a thing or two." Unfortunately, those 2 things are 1) how to type, and 2) how to make your posts blue. Whoop de frickin doo.

[js1138]

Maybe we can work Noam chomsky into this crevo/trudeau thread placemarker.

[george wythe]

Nonsense. The Pope spoke specifically against materialistic evolution which is what Darwinism is - pseudo-scientific atheism. The Pope is Catholic.

My mother went to parochial school and was taught organic evolution as the way our bodies came into existence.

I went to parochial school and was taught organic evolution as the way our bodies came into existence.

Our souls were given directly by God, but our bodies came as a result of organic evolution.

That has been a common Catholic belief since my mother was a child.

Apparently, you did not bother to read the link I kindly provided nor did you become familiar with the Catholic position before reacting.

[whattajoke]

Ha Ha, welcome to the warped world of Gore3000. It doesn't matter if you tell him the square peg won't go into the round hole, it doesn't even matter if you fly to his house and show him... if he states it, if he believes it, he will continue to state it over and over... and over... and... oooo... verrrrrrr... again.

[PatrickHenry]

This is the research center where all those amazing blue postings come from:

[HalfFull]

No wonder so many scientists become atheists. They are chased out of the religion by people like you, just for asking questions and taking a serious look at evidence

Scientists become atheists because they rebel against God. They chose to ignore the facts of a Creator and His Creation and instead try to force their anti-God theories (with the help of the willing anti-God media). These "scientists" ignore the impossibility of accidental creation of everything we see around us. They ignore the impossibility of random events generating the design of even the most simple DNA. THEY are the ones who chose to shut out God and attempt to "explain away" what is in front of their face...., that being a wonderfull, special creation of God.

[whattajoke]

Scientists become atheists because they rebel against God.

Huh? Are you even remotely aware that there are actually non christians in this world? There are entire continents of predominantly non-christian populations. And there are scientists there too. Scientists who are able to work un restrained by this strange, almost wholly American, concept of creationism.

They chose to ignore the facts of a Creator and His Creation and instead try to force their anti-God theories (with the help of the willing anti-God media).

You are correct here. They do ignore your particular views on creation, BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT SCIENTIFIC. They are based on faith and zero research and zero peer review and zero rational thought. That's what makes your religion so strong to you! FAITH! Why meddle in things like physics, biology, astronomy, geology, etc?

You can continue to live what I'm sure is a lovely life, full of "Goddidit" explanations for natural phenomena. So be it. But please be aware that there are people in the world who demand a bit more reasoning with book learnin'.

[HalfFull]

But please be aware that there are people in the world who demand a bit more reasoning with book learnin'.

As a degreed Electrical Engineer, I've had plenty of 'book learnin'' as you so cleverly put it.

I guess the differnce is a merciful God gave me a brain, rescued me, , and privided a wonderfull book called the "Holy Bible" in which to evaluate what I read from the "evolution Science" texts.

In case you haven't heard, science books, (sometimes written by ordinary men with anti-God bias), often contain errors. The examples of these "errors" are to numerous to list.

Sure, a Christian excepts things by faith, for without faith it is impossible to please God. But, it sure is nice that my faith can be backed up by what I see on a daily basis.

[Diplomat]

"Uniformly filled" is absolutely a requirement in his paradox. He bases his calculation on number of stars in a given shell. He defines as a shell to contain enough stars such that is offsets the luminosity loss because of distance. He says they are uniformly distributed. But stars are not uniformly distributed. His equation is flux = L / (4 pi D**2 ), with L being a constant Luminosity assigned to every star. This is where the static part comes in. For sake of discussion, I'll assume each star to have a static Luminosity on L. I do not accept the premise that his shell is uniformly distributed with stars, which is what allows him to wipe out the 4 pi D**2 part of the equation.

Remember, I proposed universe clusters, seperated by distances so great that its combined luminority is not great enough to overcome the vast distances between our observable universe and another unobservable universe. Or in someone elses words "We live inside a spherical shell of "Observable Universe" which has radius equal to the lifetime of the Universe. Objects more than about 15 thousand million years old are too far away for their light ever to reach us."

Thank you for asking btw.

[HalfFull]

I said: "Scientists become atheists because they rebel against God."

Huh? Are you even remotely aware that there are actually non christians in this world? There are entire continents of predominantly non-christian populations.

Perhaps I should have said that ANY atheist rebels against God.

[whattajoke]

Science texts present the best known facts at the time of printing. Science is such that it can be corrected through science. That's the way it works, as surely you know. No scientist purports to have all the answers. They are constantly improving upon prevailing thought. That's their job, that's what peer-review is, and again... that's science. 2 clowns skip the peer review process, trumpet their cold fusion nonsense, make the cover of Time, then get lambasted when is was shown that there were no repeatable tests.

The bible says woman was created from Adam's rib by divine intervention, they had 2 sons, a snake talked to them, they ate some fruit (apples don't grow indigenously in the Holy Land), and living things die because of this. (?) Uah? They went on to have 2 sons, 25% of earth's population committed a capital felony (doesn't say much for god's perfect creation... oh wait, Adam ate that fruit the talking snake tempted him with, sorry), and somehow more people appeared on earth (only to be annihilated some years later in a massive flood, decimating the gene pool, but Noah was proactive enough to collect all the animals, including the dinosaurs of course, thank goodness).

And you call yourself an engineer?

[Doctor Stochastic]

If you reject uniformly filled, then you must have preferred directions. Which directions are preferred? The preferred directions then should be infinitely bright which is not observed.

How do you get luminosities "not great enough to overcome the distances"? In an eternal amount of time, the light will always reach us.

You have to either give up eternity, infinite spatial expanse, or at least have preferred directions (and no dust to isotropize the light by scattering.)

[usastandsunited]

And I'm still waiting for someone to tell me the algorithm of evolution. With millions of years of evidence, that is sufficient to find one. What will "humans" as we know them, appear like physically & mentally 1 million years from now?

[IvanT]

But who's to say God isn't responsible for evolutioin in creating us?

[hunyb]

DUH!

[whattajoke]

What will "humans" as we know them, appear like physically & mentally 1 million years from now?

I have no idea. perhaps you can pray tonight and get the answer.

[Diplomat]

The directions and the math behind it is up to someone else with superior ability than I to discover.

With regard to the uniformity argument, am I mis-interpreting the math? His flux calculation degrades as defined L/(4 pi D**2), assuming a static lumosity for all stars in an observable universe, which neither of us probably agree with, but we'll assume for simplicities sake. What I am saying is that the distance between most/all other observable universes is so great that we cannot detect their flux because their combined luminosity cannot overcome the degredation caused by the division of D**2.

200 years ago we thought everything in the night sky was stars and planets. Now we know much of what we thought to be stars are actually galaxies. My hope is that eventually someone in the field will determine that some of these stars that we see are/were universe clusters that are close enough for it's light to be detectd. That'll blow everything away, similar to Hawking slamming down the big bang under our current understanding of physics.

Speaking of the big bang, is their a site I can go to that states "here is where to look in the western night sky if you want to see the center of the universe"? I would assume that this is defined somewhere.

[f.Christian]

There go I but for the grace of God !