Tom the Dancing Bug by Ruben Bolling

Tom the Dancing Bug

Comments (26) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. kapock

    kapock said, almost 3 years ago

    Forget that joker, kids, and come to Indiana, where Pi equals 3.2.

  2. hwwesq

    hwwesq GoComics PRO Member said, almost 3 years ago

    Faith-based economics, based on God’s math, will save the U.S., wiping out our national debt!

    Lower taxes, then lower them even more, increase corporate welfare and defense spending, and have a HUGE surplus to pay down everything!

  3. olddog1

    olddog1 said, almost 3 years ago


    That Bill never passed.

  4. Anthony 2816

    Anthony 2816 said, almost 3 years ago


    Only because of the intervention of a real mathematician.

  5. libsmasher

    libsmasher said, almost 3 years ago

    I wonder if this is where they got the math to believe that 0Care will somehow be magically funded, instead of raping the middle class as non-partisan economists are predicting. Now it all makes sense… if you like your low-information voters you can keep them!

  6. Anthony 2816

    Anthony 2816 said, almost 3 years ago

    I think this cartoon makes a lot of sense. We should teach both theories to our children, not just what the atheist mathematicians say. Just as we should teach both evolution and religious creationism* in our science classes.

    (*And by “creationism” I of course refer only to the Biblical interpretations of young earth fundie christian creationists, not any of the thousands of silly creation fables taught by other cultures.)

  7. MrsSnape

    MrsSnape said, almost 3 years ago

    GREAT strip today!!!!

  8. harry fan

    harry fan GoComics PRO Member said, almost 3 years ago

    This strip makes a good point but please remember that there are followers of Jesus with more sense than this.

  9. Dragonfox

    Dragonfox said, almost 3 years ago

    Christians are such an easy target. Bolling is just lazy sometimes.

  10. 3hourtour

    3hourtour GoComics PRO Member said, almost 3 years ago a Christian I accuse the cartoonist of fudging the Bible numbers almost as well as the Bible fudges them.For example,history is not current.The writings of thousands of years ago do not exactly translate correctly even when translated correctly.Ancient writings sometimes used larger numbers then real to emphasize importance(not that we ever do anything like that).Also,all didn’t always mean all of everything(just like it depends on what the defination of ‘is’ is).The Bible is a tool.I consider it the living breathing word of God.That being said,I don’t think that Bible should be taught as an alternative to science.The world of science is nothing but the acquisition of knowledge.In my opinion,being Christian doesn’t mean becoming stupidly blind to facts because the religious overlords tell us it is so.Just the opposite.We are supposed to seek knowledge.As things are now,both the scientists and the Christian right seem both to think the same thing:That science will somehow disprove the existence of God.I say,hold on.(This is me speaking,not necessarily you)I say,come on science,bring it on.Be all the science you can be.Be anti-reigion.Be for religion.Do blind taste tests.Show me how it all works.Teach science!Make science better.Make life better via science

    Because,in my opinion~as a Christian`maybe not in my lifetime,nor my great grand kid’s,I believe science will have no choice but to prove the existence of God….

  11. Anthony 2816

    Anthony 2816 said, almost 3 years ago


    And so libsmasher, recognizing his woeful inability to refute on the topic of the ’toon, instead tries the lamest of fables about how the sky is still falling on his miserable little planet.

  12. Anthony 2816

    Anthony 2816 said, almost 3 years ago

    Nice thoughtful reply, 3hourtour. However, I don’t think there are many scientists who are wasting their time trying to disprove your god. First, it’s difficult to prove a negative. Second, why bother? Is not like your god is the only one… man has invented thousands of gods, and if yours was disproven, there would be no shortage of others to take his place. Third, given that Christians believe their god is the only source of morality, it would be pretty foolhardy to take that away from them. Would you want to share a planet with all those people who no longer have any reason not to lie, steal, kill?

    I don’t think you have anything to worry about, even though it’s not for the reason you think.

  13. Anthony 2816

    Anthony 2816 said, almost 3 years ago


    Also, given that your god has been carefully defined so as to be unmeasureable and indeed, undetectable, I’m curious how you think any scientist could prove (or disprove) his existence? Especially since Christians have no hesitation in moving the goalposts. For instance, they placed their heaven up in the sky, thinking it a place where no man could go have a look-and-see. But once we did just that, and found no heaven sitting there, I never heard of any Christian saying "Oops; we were wrong. "

  14. steverino

    steverino said, almost 3 years ago


    While a godless atheist, I agree mostly with your points. I like the Bible as history; and no rational person will deny that hand-copying over millennia will not result in plenty of typos, if nothing else. And taking “pi” from the measurements of Solomon’s temple is stupid: any writer would use, say, “a yard” rather than “36.00 inches”. He’s telling a story, not writing a construction manual.
    Exaggerating numbers is explained as well in Barbara Tuchman’s “A Distant Mirror” much as a kid will say he ate a hundred hot dogs.
    Why is it so hard to say, “Look at this amazing world God created though science?” Plenty of scientists do. The problem is with people that take the Bible literally, no deviation allowed; when the words themselves depend on the translation and the source version— cf. Bart Ehrman.

  15. Anarcissie

    Anarcissie said, almost 3 years ago

    Science is open to god-theories, if they can be backed up by repeatable observation and reason. However, the god(s) science came up with might not be one’s favorite version. If there is evil in the world, for instance, and we posit an omnipotent creator, the only rational explanation is that the creator is at least partially evil. If, on the other hand, we try to get out of this problem by proposing a capital-G God who is beyond human understanding, as in the Book of Job, then we are by definition off scientific turf.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (11).