On 13/04/2011 3:26 PM, Invisible wrote:

>
> I honestly can't decide whether this is deadpan spoof or perfectly serious.
>

I think the answer is serious and I hope the question is a spoof. I 
thought that the questioner was a child until I saw that he signs 
himself Dr. L.B., U.S.

> (Isn't there a law of the Internet about this effect?)

You're right it is Hitler's fault. ;-)


-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

You won't get an argument from me.
Although to be perfectly honest, I've never met one of these wackos in 
the flesh. I'm sure that if I did then I would "make my excuses and leave".

Either that or tell them to go forth and multiply. If you know what I mean.

Post a reply to this message

On 12/04/2011 10:06 PM, Warp wrote:
>    Following this from abroad, I don't know if this should be amusing or
> frightening...

And apparently the results are conclusive:

http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/pdf/2005-11.pdf

America is the most religious first-world country, and it also has the 
highest rates of crime, poor health, etc.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> America is the most religious first-world country, and it also has the 
> highest rates of crime, poor health, etc.

  Ironically the USA is one of the few *secular* western governments.
(Well, at least on paper.)

  Still ironically, most European governments are by definition not secular
(because most of them have official state churches), yet the governments and
churches are usually kept very separate (at least in lawmaking and
political discourse). For example the Finnish constitution has no section
that states that the government must not endorse any religion, and Finland
has an official state church (which gets all kinds of governmental
privileges that no other denominations get). Yet Finland is extremely
secular, both politically and culturally (significantly more than the US).
The same is true for many other European countries.

  Many people have wondered if there's a causality link.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On 4/13/2011 7:01, Stephen wrote:
> Be afraid be very, very afraid that there are people in the educated world
> that can ask those types of questions and those that will answer them.

The guy asking the questions was asking them in order to show the guy 
answering them that the guy answering had no actual answers. The guy asking 
if they were white meat or dark meat is basically mocking the fundamentalist.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Coding without comments is like
    driving without turn signals."

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 13 Apr 2011 01:55:41 -0700, Patrick Elliott wrote:

> True enough. But, the question is where is the tipping point. Where do
> people stop accepting, as a general whole, obvious lies, simply because
> a lot of people say they believe them?

There's a bit of herd mentality that takes place when it comes to 
believing crazy stuff.  I do wonder (as Bill Maher once postulated) if 
people were raised believing in magic beans and beanstalks if they'd 
defend it to the death when they grew up.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 13 Apr 2011 14:27:59 +0100, Invisible wrote:

> http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2007/08/31/feedback-t-rex-and-
humans
> 
> I literally can't decide whether this is serious or not.

They are serious - it does look a lot like someone's having a joke, but 
young-Earth creationists really do believe in the literal truth of the 
bible as a historic record of how the Earth and humanity came into 
existence, and anything to the contrary is rejected because it isn't 
consistent with the bible.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On 4/13/2011 8:57, Warp wrote:
>    Many people have wondered if there's a causality link.

Well, I think the US was originally colonized by people who wanted their own 
religion rather than the state religion, so that sort of makes sense. The 
laws say "the state can't force me to change my religion", and it's 
*because* the people coming here were sufficiently religious that they'd 
spend three months crossing an ocean and leaving everything they knew behind 
in order to be able to do their own religion exactly as they liked.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Coding without comments is like
    driving without turn signals."

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 13 Apr 2011 15:45:08 +0100, Stephen wrote:

> Either that or tell them to go forth and multiply. If you know what I
> mean.

But they can't math. ;)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Well, I think the US was originally colonized by people who wanted their own 
> religion rather than the state religion, so that sort of makes sense. The 
> laws say "the state can't force me to change my religion", and it's 
> *because* the people coming here were sufficiently religious that they'd 
> spend three months crossing an ocean and leaving everything they knew behind 
> in order to be able to do their own religion exactly as they liked.

  I find it implausible that all, or even the majority of, or even a
significant portion of, the people who moved to the US did so for religious
reasons. I have always understood that the main motivation was economic
(most people who moved there were poor, who were after a better life and
better opportunities).

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message