Civility is a buzzword often thrown around a lot to dissuade people from trying to achieve meaningful change; in order to exact such change one must be confrontational. Nonviolent protesting does NOT mean nonconfrontational protesting. Calls for “civility” are thrown around to imply “both sides” are equally at fault for the unequal power disparity between the two groups, it’s a bullshit argument, nothing more than a smokescreen designed to allow the people benefiting from the status quo to continue reaping the fruits of their ill-gotten gains.
They know that “civility” does not enact meaningful change, that’s why they call for people to be “civil,” because nothing will be done about the oppressed group’s grievances without confrontation. So-called “moderates” are really anything but, the moderate position would be to call for the wrongdoers to be brought to justice and for the victims to receive justice. Therefore so-called “moderates” are actually people who stand to benefit from the system as it is, rather than the people actually suffering at the bottom.
One of the moderate’s favorite pets is Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, note how during the riots of the Black Lives Matter movement you had pundits saying “what would Dr King think of this?” Dr King would join them, he was no moderate, he was nonviolent yes, but he wasn’t nonconfrontational. King himself went to jail dozens of times for nonviolently, but confrontationally, protesting the injustices of Jim Crow. Furthermore, King was a socialist, but don’t expect these clowns to tell you that. By the end of King’s life he was becoming even more radical, as he saw that no meaningful change was being enacted, and the gains the Civil Rights Movement have made have been rolled back over the following half-century since the heyday of the Civil Rights Movement.
I’ve had to deal with this particular piece of creationist claptrap so many times I’ve decided to write this refutation once and for all and be done with it. Abiogenesis is not evolution, it never was, it never will be. Evolution only deals with how living beings change over time, note that in order to qualify as “living,” one has to be alive. The theory of evolution does not concern itself with abiogenesis, that’s a completely different field of study not even belonging to biology, abiogenesis is properly chemistry, not biology.
If one happens to feel the need to make believe that a god created life on earth but allowed life to evolve after that, go ahead, evolution does not conflict with such a belief because it only deals with what happens after life has originated, not before it. One final thing, cars are irrelevant and bringing up how cars need to be intelligently designed and how they don’t evolve is a strawman, cars aren’t living beings that reproduce, metabolize, and possess a genetic code. Piss off.
The stupidity of my fellow humans never ceases to amaze me. Vaccines, the bulwark of our key defenses against such terrible diseases that have plagued humanity for eons such as measles, are now the victim of their own success. People forget what it was like in the era before vaccinations were around, your grand parents can tell you, assuming they are Boomers or Silent gen in reference to, say, fucking POLIO. Look, the supposed “link” between vaccines and autism is complete and utter horseshit refuted as soon as the claims by that charlatan Andrew Wakefield were released.
I`m going to say this outright, people who don’t vaccinate their kids should lose custody of their children. They’re committing child abuse, as well as endangering the people around them, by enabling these unvaccinated kids to contract measles and other dangerous diseases. There are obvious civil liberties issues that comes with this of course, but at some point you gotta draw the line between the common good and individual rights. In cases like this, with measles, once declared eradicated throughout the US and Canada, having returned due to dipshits not vaccinating themselves and their children, we should honestly collectively say “to hell with this” and do something about it.
Your religious beliefs aren’t as important as your child’s fucking life. Vaccinate your FUCKING kids, or else.
I`m a little late to the party but I’ve seen some hogwash going around about how the new black hole photo taken recently is a “hoax,” citing the fact that the photo is blurry to claim it’s “photoshopped.” Of course the damn photo’s gonna be blurry, it’s a picture of an object over fifty three MILLION light years away, be amazed we even managed to take the photo in the first place. Idiots, I swear. Why would they hoax something as amazing as this? Wouldn’t it be a far greater accomplishment to, you know, *take the damn photo in the first place*?
This reeks of the bullshit about the supposed Apollo Moon landings “hoax” and the same principle applies here as it does there, it would be an infinitely greater achievement to actually land on the Moon as oppose to faking it, sometimes the path of least resistance isn’t always the way to go. People are too pessimistic and paranoid, well there’s my two cents. Make of it what you will.
Woo practitioners like to appropriate concepts from actual science in a rather pathetic attempt to give their bunk some veneer of faux-legitimacy, and by “concepts” I mean use random technobabble to make your woo sound more scientific than it actually is. One such case is by appropriating jargon from quantum mechanics such as the word “quantum” itself.
These idiots rely on the fact that quantum states remain in flux until observed, when, according to the Copenhagen interpretation, they collapse into one of those many states. No one really understands quantum mechanics, I sure don’t, but we do know certain things about the nature of the quantum world. Before we go any further let me make it clear, just because we don’t know the metaphysical consequences of quantum mechanics doesn’t mean they know it either.
Whenever before in history something previously assumed to be of supernatural in character was tested, it always turned out to be totally natural in character, so I see no reason for us to assume differently for quantum decoherence. Another thing that should be pointed out that the Copenhagen interpretation is only one interpretation of many, we don’t know enough about the quantum world to be certain, but it is likely that quantum effects become so improbable on larger scales to be effectively diluted to the point that it is practically impossible for them to occur because gravity counteracts their effects, so sorry, quantum mechanics isn’t going to allow you to start wielding the Force anytime soon.
Also being an observer doesn’t mean that anything has to be conscious in order to observe something, an unthinking machine taking measurements still counts as an observer, so quantum consciousness is bullshit either way.
The Lewis Trilemma is an infamous Christian apologetics argument brought forth by famed Christian apologist and writer of The Chronicles of Narnia series, CS Lewis. A basic formulaton of his Trilemma goes like this: “If Jesus was or wasn’t the Messiah, then there are three possibilities. Jesus was either a Liar, Lunatic, or Lord.”
The most fundamental problem with Lewis’ Trilemma is the fallacy of false equivocation, in formulating this fallacious argument Lewis has ignored other possibilities, for his Trilemma is based off of the presupposition that the Gospels are historically accurate as records of Jesus’ Ministry, when we know that not to be the case at all. For one, the Gospels read more like novels of the period than they do works of history. There are things present in the Gospel that no man could’ve have possibly witnessed, like the temptation of Christ by Satan on the Mount, not to mention numerous other problems with the assumption that the Gospels are historically accurate, such as Jesus being born in Bethlehem, when Bethlehem didn’t even exist at the time of Jesus’ supposed birth.
Clearly Lewis hadn’t thought this through, and if this is the best they’ve got, then they ain’t got shit. I challenge any Christian reader of this to come up with something better than the Lewis Trilemma, and to do it without resorting to fallacious means of argumentation. Is anyone up to it, or are you chickenshit? We’ll see…
I can’t believe I have to write something about this, I really can’t. Some idiot on Usenet is now spouting flat-earther nonsense, so therefore I feel compelled to dispel this nonsense, one way or the other. The Earth is NOT Flat. If the Earth were flat, we’d be able to see across the horizon, far beyond ten miles, theoretically we’d be able to see everything on earth depending on the scale of the objects in question, but we can’t. It should go without saying (“should” doesn’t necessarily correlate with “would,” as I have unfortunately learned over the years) that the reason this is is because the curvature of the earth prevents you from seeing anything beyond ~10 miles in either direction.
The curvature of the earth is why, if one observes a boat on the horizon, the sail would seem to disappear before the actual ship would. The curvature of the earth is why we have time zones, because we derive our time from the sun, and the sun’s rays don’t hit earth all at the same time, one side of the earth is in night, the other is bathing in daylight, and this is true no matter what time of the year it is.
The curvature of the earth is why the Antarctic and Arctic circles possess at least a day of complete darkness and complete daylight, and the amount of time spent in either complete darkness or complete daylight depends on how distant one is from the poles, wherein “night” is six months long, and the period where sunlight bathes the poles is also six months long.
The fact that people still believe this crap is astonishing, it’s not that hard to figure out. If you’re a flat earther, then you should be ashamed of yourself for being so willfully stupid. It’s mind-boggling, it really is.