Today’s Teabagger News: Only 41% of Texans know humans did not live with dinosaurs

[Timshel]

There is no evidence the story of Adam and Eve is the first account of humans on Earth.

The bible says that it is.

Religious people may take exception with this statement, but the Bible doesn't say Adam and Eve were the first humans, only the first to be "created in God's image." It doesn't say there were no other humans before this. Just an independent observation.

Uhh, what happened to these earlier humans?

 

[/MSG/]

Ah Cypress being intellectually dishonest again.

You keep harping on the 41% that agree with you and lump the next largest group (the unsure/don't know) in with those who don't agree with you.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

The bible says that it is.

No, I'm sorry, it doesn't say that. In fact, the very wording in Genesis suggests Adam and Eve were NOT the first humans on Earth. God instructs them to "Go forth and replenish the Earth!" Replenish means to make full or complete again.

Uhh, what happened to these earlier humans?

Uhh... I don't know, perhaps their fossil remains are beneath that great impact crater off the Yucatan peninsula? Maybe the evidence is beneath 5000 kilometers of lava at La Garita Caldera? Or possibly at the bottom of the ocean, where man has never explored?

The lack of human fossil remains, doesn't automatically mean there weren't any humans. I would venture to say, if there were humans, they weren't mingling with the dinosaurs, so we wouldn't expect to find evidence of humans where we find evidence of dinosaurs.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

Concur. But ya gotta admit, it’s almost worth the moments of pure comedy gold, provided by PMP and Yurt, et.al.

Just wait! Dixie hasn't posted yet.

Finally. After wading through reams of teabagger nonsense and hilarity, an island of sanity and an intelligent contribution.


No offense, but I'd like to see some real world, actual examples of what you're asserting about modern science.

No doubt the Nazi's hijacked science for political purposes. And I would submit that the subservience of science and engineering to the military industrial complex constitutes a warped and political-driven hijacking of science. But your assertion, more broadly, would be a massive conspiracy, on a global scale, that I'd like to see a preponderance of evidence for. It sounds very fantastical, frankly too fantastical to be boiled down to an unsubstantiated slogan on a message board.

But, in terms of all the great purely academic scientific theories of the last century, where are these real-world examples of science being hijacked by liberals and socialists for political ends? Science is practiced all over the world, in thousands of research universities. I would like to see some real world examples of science, on a global basis, somehow being hijacked by nefarious liberals using the tools of the state to do their bidding.

I can't think of one single major scientific theory advanced this century by acamedicians, that amounts to a cabal of liberal politization. The theory of realativity, black holes, plate tectonics, genetics. Even the environmental sciences......science spent decades studying the effects of cigarrete smoke on human health, or the effects of chemical carcinogens. And you know what happened? The "liberal" scientists were right all along. It was the pawns of corporate profit who fought with every fiber of their being, to keep the scientific facts from getting out, or being considered in the realm of public policy. The same sh*t is going on today with climate science. The corruption of science, or the roadblocks being thrown in the way of legitimate academic scientific investigation is largely, like it always has, come from reactionary elements; e.g., the church, the money men, the corporations, and other vested interests of financial power.

That's debatable. Not one of Adams better posts. As I said, his comments were conspiracy theory.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

And you KNOW humans didn't live with dinosaurs because you were here then, and you explored the entire Earth, every cave and crevasse, and you didn't see any humans?

I'm sorry, but I'm with Yurt on this one, and you can hurl any juvenile name you like at me, I just don't see where you have PROVEN man didn't (or couldn't have) roamed the Earth with the dinosaurs. Yes, I know it's impossible to prove a negative, which is why you can't argue that this has been proven!

As if on cue......

 

[Mott the Hoople]

Mission Accomplished!!!

My work here is done……



Poll: Only 41% of Texans Agree That Man did Not Coexist with Dinosaurs

.

See...I told you dinosaurs still exist.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Ah Cypress being intellectually dishonest again.

You keep harping on the 41% that agree with you and lump the next largest group (the unsure/don't know) in with those who don't agree with you.

i'm in the unsure/don't know group

 

[Timshel]

No, I'm sorry, it doesn't say that. In fact, the very wording in Genesis suggests Adam and Eve were NOT the first humans on Earth. God instructs them to "Go forth and replenish the Earth!" Replenish means to make full or complete again.

Nowhere in the creation story is there any mention of earlier humans. Further, they could not have been much earlier since it states all land animals were created on the sixth day.

You show yourself to be a complete idiot by splitting hairs over one word that has been translated through several languages.

Uhh... I don't know, perhaps their fossil remains are beneath that great impact crater off the Yucatan peninsula? Maybe the evidence is beneath 5000 kilometers of lava at La Garita Caldera? Or possibly at the bottom of the ocean, where man has never explored?

So you are saying they became extinct before Adam? Why would you believe that fairy tale and not the fact that dinos died out before?

The lack of human fossil remains, doesn't automatically mean there weren't any humans. I would venture to say, if there were humans, they weren't mingling with the dinosaurs, so we wouldn't expect to find evidence of humans where we find evidence of dinosaurs.

People rarely hang out with lions but we find their remains together.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Ahhh, like a gated community.

God help us.

you'll need to get on the right side of the gate......

 

[PostmodernProphet]

No doubt. I've never met a Quaker or Unitarian that thought the greeks and romans were dueling with tyranosaurus rex. And my experience with the catholic church, limited though it may be, appears to suggest that Catholic doctrine widely accepts that the earth is billions of years old, and that man evolved from earlier forms of primates.

But this is Texas we're talking about. Liberal churches, and mainstream progressive protestant churches I don't think are the majority. The biblical literalist strain of religion dominate the bible belt and many parts of rural america.

you see, it's things like this that demonstrate to me that liberals are idiots..... a comment about the Garden of Eden and immediately they jump to comments about Jesus riding dinosaurs and the Greeks dueling tyrannosaurs.....you ridicule us while demonstrating your own foolishness....

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Mission Accomplished!!!

My work here is done……

ah, was your mission to appear dogmatic?.....

 

[PostmodernProphet]

For the religious, if man coexisted with dinosaurs then why is there no real mention of them in the bible? I think a big part of Adam and Eve's lives would have been filled with dodging dinosaurs.

the Bible doesn't outline all the parts of anyone's lives.....for simple example, you can read all four gospels aloud in just a few hours, but it describes at the very least a three year period of Jesus' life....

the purpose of the bible is not to tell you what happened in everyone's lives, but to tell you what God wanted you to know about salvation......

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Nowhere in the creation story is there any mention of earlier humans. Further, they could not have been much earlier since it states all land animals were created on the sixth day.

You show yourself to be a complete idiot by splitting hairs over one word that has been translated through several languages.

I'm not "splitting hairs" to argue that the Bible doesn't say Adam and Eve were the first humans to inhabit the planet. It's jut not there, no hair is being split. Genesis does give an account of the 7 days of creation, but 1.) we don't know how long a "day" is to God, and 2.) we don't have a direct reference to how much time passed between the 7 days and creation of Adam and Eve.

Not that the Bible is scientific proof of anything, but it is indicative of how your pinhead minds operate... because something isn't believed to be a certain way, it is therefore impossible for it to be that way! Like I said, you pinheads would have been chucking and chortling at Louis Pasteur when he proposed the Germ Theory! It contradicted everything science said at that point in time, and they nearly ran him out of France because of his ideas. What a fool! To think that some tiny invisible microbe was killing people! For years, he was a laughing stock, not taken seriously by the other scientists of the day, because what he believed didn't coincide with what the rest of the scientific community believed.

I often refer to this as the arrogance of man. We tend to want to think that we know everything there is to know at any given point in time, and there is no other knowledge to be gained out there! That's what we are seeing on full display with this debate, an arrogant belief that we have answered all questions pertaining to the origin of man, because someone THINKS we evolved from a simpler primate, much later in history. We don't KNOW this, we THINK this, it's based on a THEORY, not on a FACT we can prove! Yet, you are all laughing at the idea that someone would even question your 'consensus' theory.

 

[Kamala Trump]

I'm not "splitting hairs" to argue that the Bible doesn't say Adam and Eve were the first humans to inhabit the planet. It's jut not there, no hair is being split. Genesis does give an account of the 7 days of creation, but 1.) we don't know how long a "day" is to God, and 2.) we don't have a direct reference to how much time passed between the 7 days and creation of Adam and Eve.

Not that the Bible is scientific proof of anything, but it is indicative of how your pinhead minds operate... because something isn't believed to be a certain way, it is therefore impossible for it to be that way! Like I said, you pinheads would have been chucking and chortling at Louis Pasteur when he proposed the Germ Theory! It contradicted everything science said at that point in time, and they nearly ran him out of France because of his ideas. What a fool! To think that some tiny invisible microbe was killing people! For years, he was a laughing stock, not taken seriously by the other scientists of the day, because what he believed didn't coincide with what the rest of the scientific community believed.

I often refer to this as the arrogance of man. We tend to want to think that we know everything there is to know at any given point in time, and there is no other knowledge to be gained out there! That's what we are seeing on full display with this debate, an arrogant belief that we have answered all questions pertaining to the origin of man, because someone THINKS we evolved from a simpler primate, much later in history. We don't KNOW this, we THINK this, it's based on a THEORY, not on a FACT we can prove! Yet, you are all laughing at the idea that someone would even question your 'consensus' theory.

So we're supposed to believe that some activities of god were left out, like sub beings creating on the 4 1/2th day or something. You're an idiot. The creation story leaves no room this. Stop being a retarded waste of brain.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

So you are saying they became extinct before Adam? Why would you believe that fairy tale and not the fact that dinos died out before?

I didn't say I "believed" any theory! I am on the side which says WE DON'T KNOW! Can you possibly grasp that concept? Is it fathomable in your pinhead mind, that man may possibly NOT know the answers? I mean, I fully understand why you want to make your theories into facts, because that would relieve you from the burden of having to rely on FAITH. But what I don't understand, is how people who claim they are believers in science, can so easily discard the scientific method and fundamental premise of science itself. Science doesn't "prove" or "disprove" anything, ever!

People rarely hang out with lions but we find their remains together.

Yeah, but most dinosaurs would have eaten lions as appetizers. I think, if man were around during the time of dinosaurs, even with the small undeveloped brains, they would have had enough instinctual sense to stay the hell away from them. Just my opinion.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

So we're supposed to believe that some activities of god were left out, like sub beings creating on the 4 1/2th day or something. You're an idiot. The creation story leaves no room this. Stop being a retarded waste of brain.

You can believe whatever you want to believe, I am not saying you are supposed to believe anything, really. In fact, I am saying just about the complete opposite of that... you should question everything. Stop trying to make the Bible say things it doesn't say, and turning theory into fact to support your beliefs. It's much better to say you don't know the answer and keep an open mind. That's really all I have done here, nothing more.

 

[Onceler]

This was the statement presented, to agree or disagree with:

""The earliest humans lived at the same time as the dinosaurs."

This isn't a bunch of people who are saying "we can't be 100% sure." This is a bunch of people rejecting science, and believing in a young earth, despite the fossil record, radiometric dating and adding 1 + 1.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

This was the statement presented, to agree or disagree with:

""The earliest humans lived at the same time as the dinosaurs."

This isn't a bunch of people who are saying "we can't be 100% sure." This is a bunch of people rejecting science, and believing in a young earth, despite the fossil record, radiometric dating and adding 1 + 1.

3 in 10 is NOT a "bunch" of people. It is a vast minority of people... a FEW people. There is NO rejection of science, because science has NOT concluded that man didn't walk the earth with the dinosaurs. It's a rejection of YOUR FAITH that lack of scientific evidence means something isn't possible. It's important to note, 60% of the respondents didn't agree with you, and don't consider your theory to be a fact.

 

[Cypress]

No, I'm sorry, it doesn't say that. In fact, the very wording in Genesis suggests Adam and Eve were NOT the first humans on Earth. God instructs them to "Go forth and replenish the Earth!" Replenish means to make full or complete again.

Uhh... I don't know, perhaps their fossil remains are beneath that great impact crater off the Yucatan peninsula? Maybe the evidence is beneath 5000 kilometers of lava at La Garita Caldera? Or possibly at the bottom of the ocean, where man has never explored?

Yurt: whats truly funny is that you have NO SOLID PROOF one way or the other, but you come in here prancing a theory around as if it is fact. lmao, you're stupid cypress.


PostModernProphet: Personally I believe humans and dinosaurs did coexist.....

Dixie: I'm sorry, but I'm with Yurt on this one, and you can hurl any juvenile name you like at me, I just don't see where you have PROVEN man didn't (or couldn't have) roamed the Earth with the dinosaurs.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

No doubt the Nazi's hijacked science for political purposes. And I would submit that the subservience of science and engineering to the military industrial complex constitutes a warped and political-driven hijacking of science. But your assertion, more broadly, would be a massive conspiracy, on a global scale, that I'd like to see a preponderance of evidence for. It sounds very fantastical, frankly too fantastical to be boiled down to an unsubstantiated slogan on a message board.

But, in terms of all the great purely academic scientific theories of the last century, where are these real-world examples of science being hijacked by liberals and socialists for political ends? Science is practiced all over the world, in thousands of research universities. I would like to see some real world examples of science, on a global basis, somehow being hijacked by nefarious liberals using the tools of the state to do their bidding.

I can't think of one single major scientific theory advanced this century by acamedicians, that amounts to a cabal of liberal politization. The theory of realativity, black holes, plate tectonics, genetics. Even the environmental sciences......science spent decades studying the effects of cigarrete smoke on human health, or the effects of chemical carcinogens.

Does anyone have the heart to tell poor little Cypress about the hi-jacking of science by the global warming fear mongers? Should we point out yet again how they misled the public with their fear mongering? Should we point out yet again how the power grab by the politicians hijacked the science behind the studies? How the suppression of opposing views, the demand that a 'consensus' had been reached and that the 'debate was over', how the data was unassailable.... only to find out....

1) No significant warming for 15 years (from the mouth of one of the leading fear mongers)

2) NO conclusion on whether the medieval warming period was warmer than now due to lack of data.

3) IPCC pushed propaganda and proclaimed it was 'science'... now we find one error after another.

Why? What could be the motivation that the flat earth global warming fear mongers have for doing so? Could it be the power the government agencies would then have over the corporate world and the citizens? Could it be the potential for BILLIONS more in funding that the 'scientists' would get? Nah... that couldn't be it.

Just ask Cypress.... he will STILL tell you it is a settled debate... he will still try to equate those who question the AGW theory with Holocaust denialists... because that makes them sound 'evilzzz'. He will now also try to pretend that only right wing blogs are reporting on the errors or quoting Jones. He will still pretend that there is no doubt. He will still mock the idiots who proclaim that the current east coast snow storms are proof that AGW is wrong, while at the same time ignoring all the idiots that have used severe weather incidents as proof of AGW.

But yeah Cypress.... the liberal side has NEVER hijacked Science.