Matt Davies for September 08, 2011

the artist ignores facts that the Bible information came from the God who Created earth and the Universe and then the Father of the Human Race….but “Science” is the fallible and changeable opinions of mere men, who are mentally like ants compared to a Paul Bunyan omniscient Creator-God.

the GOP is correct that all humans have Adam’s DNA…and that the unproven theory of “climate change” is truly “suspect” in view of known facts that have been skewed by “scientists” with an agenda…..to create a “crisis” and use it to get Government control over mankind’s way of living on earth.

Matt, while I applaud your on-going ability to raise the blood pressure of the right I don’t see a conflict in the two panels. The GOP believes what it is told to believe and declares their belief to be fact.

dt- if we are “made in God’s image” and given brains to create societies, civilizations, great inventions, and “science” to USE our “big brains”- why do you refuse?

no knowledgeable jesuit or rabbi claims the bible was written by god.

only deluded religious zealot followers.

Panel 1: DumbPanel 2: Dumber

Flat earthers

The big picture here:No-one can know everything. That’s a given. No-one has time to become an expert in every subject. So one test of general competence is, what do you do on those subjects where you, yourself, are not an expert? Do you:a) listen to the people who spend their lives studying that subject, who base their conclusions on physical evidence, even though you may find those conclusions personally disagreeable?b) decide what is true on the basis of the ideology you believe in, and insist that physical evidence must conform to this (and if it doesn’t, then the world must be lying!!)Science is the best methodology we have of subjecting our conclusions to continuous assessment in light of physical evidence. So these two issues stand as a litmus test of candidates — will they follow science, or ideology? And, if they follow ideology rather than evidence, and blind belief rather than real expertise, in these fields then how or why would they be expected to do any different in any other field — like the economy? Or international relations? And, if they follow ideology, why exactly would we expect it to work any better than it has worked over the last 13 years?In light of this, the current Republican field — and the fact that there are enough ideologically-motivated voters to support even having to take them seriously, as opposed to laugh them off the stage — is pretty terrifying.

Harley, as the commentary on here has shown, the first panel isn’t just a “paranoid view of a 2000 year old religion” but an accurate reflection of how people continue to use it.On the “religion” of climate change, pesticides we used in Florida shows up in penguin eggs in the Antarctic. Gas we put in spray cans blew holes in the ozone layer. We polluted lakes and rivers so much they caught fire. Why is it so hard to think that human activity could affect the weather?

The increasing amount of CO2 in the atmosphere from pre-industrial times to the present is simple fact, not model. The isotopic identity of CO2 which identifies it as coming from burning fossil fuels is simple physical fact, not model. The physical and chemical properties of CO2 which means that it absorbs IR-spectrum energy on certain wavelengths is simple, demonstrable, physical fact, not model. The increasing heat content of the global atmosphere as a whole (“global warming”) as instrumentally measured both at the surface and from satellites, is a simple physical fact, and well replicated through multiple systems — not models. The changing patterns of formerly stable climatic conditions which had previously persisted through the last 6,000 years is simply observational, not model. The disappearing polar ice is simply observed, physical fact, not model. The fact that over 85% of all land glaciers began disappearing within the last 50 years is simple observable, physical fact, not model.…Models show people where to look to find unexpected effects, or to find certain feedback loops or inputs that are hard to separate out in the real world. However, the usefulness of a model relies on how well it replicates the conditions found in the real world. And these are the conditions found in the real world. And the models replicate it increasingly well (frighteningly so, in many cases).I think you do not understand the difference between “religion” and “evidence.” That is a problem you should probably try to fix.

ZING!!

What they hey, I like joining new clubs, anyway. :)

You don’t need to worry about disgustedtaxpayer giving Republicans as bad name. The rest of you have done a very good job of besmirching the Party of Lincoln.

Genetics can prove that human origins cannot have sprung from a pool of only two individuals.

“s” worships at the alter of GW- Bush.

Winning!

Re evolution: “PRIMATE CHANGE IS A HOAX!”

(Credit to runar, 8/12/11)

KIm- as “Adam” was actually a small black lady in northeastern Africa- the bible did miss a couple points so that Old Testament Jews could kill whoever they wanted and “feel good” about it ’cause “God” was on their side.

Cognitive disconnect has no effect on these right wing imbeciles.

Can you guys believe righties say MUSLIMS are the retarded ones?