digg

Join DiggAbout

Introducing Digg Dialogg!
Check out the first Digg Dialogg with Nancy Pelosi. More guests to be announced soon!

Greetings From Idiot America

esquire.com — Creationism. Intelligent Design. Faith-based this. Trust-your-gut that. There's never been a better time to espouse, profit from, and believe in utter, unadulterated crap. And the crap is rising so high, it's getting dangerous.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • dinot, on 10/10/2007, -18/+113I don't know whether I should laugh, cry, or poop my pants in fear.
    • aliengoods, on 10/10/2007, -6/+41What you should do is rent Idoicracy. It's prophetic.
      • bitcloud, on 10/10/2007, -4/+8really bad, but prophetic...

        It could even be the first sign..
      • DavidBGie, on 10/10/2007, -8/+1They forgot about the idiot's that believe in global warming, the ones that believe in murdering babies is Ok, that Al Gore would have been a good president, that welfare is a good idea, that corporations are always evil, that Cuba has a great health system, that animals should have rights like people (and better than babies), that the church is evil, that morals are a joke, that higher taxes are better for the economy, that the government can do a any job better than the private sector and that the government should be involved in our lives like a nanny etc etc etc etc. Yes, we are in trouble!
        • rlbond86, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7Ah, proof of Idiot America surfaces on digg!
        • LukeSkope, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Wave hello to the idiot honey. These people are going to make smart people like us extinct.
          • DavidBGie, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1Liberal .... Smart? Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha!
        • tsf5000, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4You're obviously a complete idiot. Please refrain from speaking out loud or posting stupid comments on the internet. It's annoying to those of us that have brains.
        • tyywebb, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Go back to Alabama.
        • DavidBGie, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1Liberials ..... Brains ...... Smart ...... Ha Ha Ha HA Ha Ha Ha HA!
        • LukeSkope, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Who says I'm a liberal? Just because I believe in science and not a book of fairy tales known as the Old and New Testaments does not make me a liberal. I am generally socially liberal and fiscally conservative, but that is way to simple to describe the complexities inherent in the human brain. The labels liberal and conservative are bull ***** black and white divide and concur terms spoon fed to the apathetic and ignorant sheep who believe everything they are told and rarely research topics for themselves. You....are...a...enormous...douche bag
        • DavidBGie, on 10/10/2007, -5/+1I say you are a liberal. You don't have a "complex brain" because in the same comment you accused me of labeling you then you label me a douche bag. Liberals never debate politics they only call people names. That's because the facts never support liberal thinking.
        • LukeSkope, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2I was stating the FACT that humans have very complex brains, therefore labeling someone liberal or conservative achieves nothing. Those labels are not descriptive enough to account for the enormous amount of variation inherent in OUR (re:humans in general) brains.

          Labeling you a douche bag though seems quite appropriate though.
    • SuperWinner, on 10/10/2007, -20/+7I'm too dumb to read all that.. is there a short version?
      • mrASSMAN, on 10/10/2007, -4/+45"We're *****."
        • rompom7, on 10/10/2007, -5/+17I feel the urge to apologize on behalf of Australia: Sorry for allowing Ken Ham to bukakke Americans with stupid. We're not like that, honestly.
          • Dregga, on 10/10/2007, -2/+22Sorry about Rupert Murdoch, I think you mean.
          • mrASSMAN, on 10/10/2007, -2/+12Yes, I'm more angry about Murdoch.. but it's not your fault, I think everyone in the world wants to profit off our stupidity. In fact.. maybe I should start a new business taking advantage of it myself.. easy money.

            "SEND MONEY OR DIE. Limited offer, call now."
    • Rahodeb, on 10/10/2007, -7/+42The fact that it's widely considered idiocy to believe in creationism is a testament to how far we've come. If anything, I think that religion is playing an ever smaller part, and facing more boundaries in it's involvement with our daily lives, than ever before in American history. The reason that the utter stupidity of religious belief receives so much attention today is because there is so many opposing viewpoints.
      • skinjester, on 10/10/2007, -4/+9dugg up for wisdom: excellent point Rahodeb.
      • sinurgy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+19I think more of us need to become vocal on the subject. I wish it wasn't needed but if we don't speak up, the only voice out there is the very ignorant and very loud Creationism crowd.

        You know, if intelligent people just worked out more and dressed better, we wouldn't be in this damn mess! (I'm only half joking)
        • PaperMonkey, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I agree. My religion has no business in politics nor in schools. When I want to teach my daughter about creationism I will take her to Sunday School and Church. When I want to teach her about evolution I will take her to school and the Science Center.

          The separation of church and state are key to the proper functioning of either.... Yes, science and religion can exist in harmony with each other.. Some (I CANNOT stress the Some enough).. Some Churches have come a long way from the persecution of Galileo and his compatriots and respect the importance of science but there is still a long way to go..
      • Endemoniada, on 10/10/2007, -1/+26I don't care if you think God created earth. That's not idiocy, that's faith. Always has been, and always will be.

        The problem is when christians start thinking creationism is fact, science. Thinking God created earth because "the bible says so" isn't scientific in any way, shape or form. It never was, and will never be.

        You need to stop equating faith and science, they are very separate entities. In some people, they can coexist, in others they can't. That doesn't change the fact that they are two very different things.

        Read it aloud a couple of times:
        Creationism is not science. Evolution is not faith.
        Creationism is not science. Evolution is not faith.
        Creationism is not science. Evolution is not faith.
        • WernerCD, on 10/10/2007, -9/+2"Creationism is not science."
          Both sides can bend 'facts' to support their claims. I could easily play devils advocate for both sides using 'facts'. Science is neither creationism OR evolution... Science is dealing with facts. And the fact is I can prove creation no sooner than you can prove macro-evolution. Evolution exists... but the question is - Is it Evolution from a Puddle of Goo (or alien seeds or whatever) or is it Evolution from a Created Universe (Could a 'God' create a world and make it to where things adjust as needed? no wai!

          "Evolution is not faith."
          Can't prove there is a God because you can't see him... yet Micro-Evolution proves Macro-Evolution... How? I can point out tons of missing links, flaws in dating methods, other bits and pieces that can be spun pointing to a young universe just as quick as you can call me a dumb for being Christian (because religion some how lowers my IQ. Thats scientific). Until the proof is irrefutable, there requires a bit of faith that this world came from a 'big bang'. Faith is a strong belief in something without proof or evidence. Where is the UNDENIABLE!!! proof of macro-evolution/big bang?

          Creationism and big bang-macro evolution... Science and Faith... Two separate set of issues. You can be scientific and still have faith. And to say Evolution requires no faith hasn't looked at both sides of the argument with honest openess
          • ArmyOfFun, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Look up the scientific method, because that is what defines science. Science cannot be defined as "dealing with facts". Science does deal with facts and evidence, but that isn't all that it is.

            Creationism boils down to answering the question of how we got here by saying God did it. In order for creationism to be science, we have to have a way to validate or falsify this claim. As far as I know, there's no way to do this outside of building a time machine. If you can't test your hypothesis, or collect evidence to support or deny it, you've failed a basic criteria of science. This doesn't mean that the hypothesis "God did it" is wrong, it just means it's an unscientific position.

            "there requires a bit of faith that this world came from a 'big bang'"

            Only if you want to believe the big bang model is complete. Most scientists won't argue that it is. There are questions that remain to be answered (like why can't we see 70% of the energy that is should be out there?). Science isn't an answer, it's a process; largely one of refinement. We use the big bang as a model to explain the behavior of the universe (including how the Earth formed). We use macro-evolution as a model to explain the fossil record. As gaps get filled in, more evidence is collected and our knowledge expands, these models get refined and as a result they better explain how the universe behaves and they give us better predictions of what type of fossils we're likely to find in certain areas at certain depths. There is no undeniable proof of macro-evolution or the big bang or any other scientific theory or law. That's not how science works.
        • caferrell, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Christianity actually requires that adherents (the writer among them) believe in God because of faith and not because of proof.
          Ergo, there is no proof of the existence of God and never will be.
          These Evangelical idiots make all Christians look like morons. We aren't all morons.
          I wrote this for the idiot Creationists so that they can see that their stupid attack on science is actually a lack of faith in God
          Look at this http://reasontraditionandliberty.blogspot.com/2007/05/infallible-bible-and-modern-science.html
      • caferrell, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Europeans have actually died laughing at us.
        • Ufomies, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Yep, we got laughing with blood coming out of our eyes. Just started to think, after reading this article, that I wouldn't give a rat's ass, if you guys decided to abandon science and go back living in caves. Would be much better for the rest of us, in this silly world.
    • mtrip, on 10/10/2007, -5/+16Blatant comment abuse: Richard Dawkin's "Enemies of Reason" Full episode. Richard takes on New Age bs in this one, quite good.
      http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5636384407718655465&q=dawkins+enemies+reason&total=31&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0
    • Niallgriff, on 10/10/2007, -5/+4I did all 3....now theres an awful mess on my monitor...
    • donwilson2, on 10/10/2007, -22/+4I was wondering why I didn't read Esquire... Thanks for a reason.
      • manicleek, on 10/10/2007, -3/+11Because truth hurts?
        • chaosium, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4No, because he can't read.
          • Ufomies, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1No, because the article was too long and filled with strange words like "science".
      • caferrell, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Good idea Don, avoid anything that might make you think. If you consider yourself a fithful Christian, then you need to understand that God wants you to believe because of His love for you, and not because of proofs. If He had wanted us to believe via proofs, there wouldn't be any debates about the proof.
        The only proof is what we feel and know in our soul it is in the way that God can turn me into a good person, something which I could never do by myself.
        Show that you hav faith in God and open your mind to the beautiful universe that is around you
    • xSEED, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1all of the above
    • blackmage439, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2I second all mentioned actions... It sometimes makes me sad to be part of the human race...
    • Snaieke, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2i say go with your gut.
    • GliTCH82, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1We are entering an era of information overload. Everybody is going to have their own version of things, and my suggestion to everyone is, even though you might be sure that other people are wrong, if they are stubborn and don't really want to hear your version of things, don't force it on them. To each his own. I mean you may think this is silly but they really believe it, so who gives a *****, everyone can believe what they want. Associate with and work with people that share similar ideas and thoughts to your own. Yes it's a shame that they're teaching their kids something different from what you believe, but then that would just make your kids smarter, in your own world view.
      • HYPEractive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6People care because it's harmful. I believe that once people stop believing and trusting in the scientific method, people will stop thinking and questioning. The only answer required will be, "because God said so..."
        • benfraley, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0you believe that all science is all there is? science can only tell us about what we see, what about what is unseen? how can you apply science to God?
          • KriLL3.2™, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Science requires evidence, usually from easily repeatable experiments. Give me an experiment that proves the existence of god.
            Until you do science is quite clear on god: A fictional character.
        • GliTCH82, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1People won't stop believing in the scientific method. We believe in it, and the majority of people on Digg believe in it. But you can't force people to see things your way. That makes you no different from the people you're up against.
      • chaosium, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3"that would just make your kids smarter, in your own world view"

        No, these idiots want to teach our children and develop policy based on their idiocy.
      • bonedead, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Ahmed is a doo-doo head.
    • mydigga, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8This is the type of ***** that happens when you let adults beleive in imaginary friends.
  • FickyFicky, on 10/10/2007, -15/+195Long, long read by Digg's standards, but worth every word.
    This article eloquently states what's on a lot of our minds.
    • miriclaire, on 10/10/2007, -8/+36Best damned article I have read in a while! ESPECIALLY on this topic.
    • mikasaur, on 10/10/2007, -1/+12A liittttle bit too long, but a damn fine article. I've never been able to put into words what I've felt about "Idiot America," but this writer hit the nail on the head. If only more people would realize that the Gut and faith-based thinking is no way to make important decisions and understand the world around us.
      • LukeSkope, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I think this kind of comment displays an insane amount of idiocy. You can't explain everything in 2 paragraphs and 30 second sound bites. Do you people even read books anymore.
    • misssue, on 10/10/2007, -28/+5He manages to lump all Christian segments into the same messy category. I don't believe in a literal seven day creation. I believe that science and religion are complementary if everyone could stop sneering long enough to listen. I put both Steven Hawkings and Ken Ham into the same loony category. Are they that different? No, they just hold different stances. Both are dogmatic in their way of thinking and presented with evidence to the contrary of their respectively clung to like a baby's blanket opinions, they will turn a deaf ear. That is not intellectual. Intellectuals seek out others who don't share their opinions because by hearing something different you will get something to think about. You don't have to accept it, just understand it.

      I will turn a deaf ear when I read or hear something that is insulting to the other party, has some haughty tone, or is not well thought out ("Because that is now I feel...no i have no clue how I came to that conclusion, it is just what I feel). I deal in reason and intellect. Save your feelings and assumptions for someone who cares.

      This article is boring. Way too long, winding on about nothing. Nothing about it is new. This argument (if you want to call it that), is nothing new. I am going to save my energy and time for something worth while.
      • Dregga, on 10/10/2007, -2/+19Sounds to me more like you are unwilling to concede that science is an objective thing and is backed up by evidence, unlike religious superstition. To compare Ken Ham and Stephen Hawking is a very facile argument indeed.
      • nebion, on 10/10/2007, -0/+15Please specify where you have seen Stephen Hawking insulting religion.

        To the best of my knowledge, he has never done so; it seems that you're lumping scientists and anti-religious advocates into one category, and aren't actually aware of what a particular scientist has said (you can't even spell his name correctly, so you probably haven't read much by him).
      • Hecks, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4missue - did you mean Hawking or Dawkins?
      • hellbender, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6"I am going to save my energy and time for something worth while."

        So that's why you spent how long writing three paragraphs on it?
      • parabiosis, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5You Ma'am, are an idiot
      • ScrumFritter, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9The thing no one understands, that this article underlines, is that Creationism and Evolution are not two opposing theories that are 'battling it out' - Evolution is a solid theory that was developed by Charles Darwin from the facts that he observed, and it has been refined more and more over the last two hundred years from further facts - adapting (or evolving, but do we really need that pun?) over time. Intelligent Design, on the other hand, deals with taking a conclusion, Creationism - one that religious people had reached long ago - and working backwards from that to find facts to support it - but never once adapting it. This is a horribly backwards way of doing things, and it is incredibly biased, something science should definitely NOT be.

        Evolutionary scientists have nothing to gain from supporting Evolution (unlike the Creationists, who will get a lot of money from the church and the government if they win in the end - which thank God will never happen). If they are even halfway decent scientists, and a fact that clearly flies in the face of what they believe presents itself, they will either adapt the theory to accommodate it, or scrap it all together, if the new information is radical enough. This is their job as scientists. This is how all theories evolve, and anybody with even a slight understanding of science knows this. When something is so absurdly wrong - like the 'facts' used to support Intelligent Design - there is absolutely no problem acting 'haughty' about it, because if you don't, then a group of poorly educated, 'Christian' soccer moms in the PTA will get this ***** pushed through INTO THE CLASSROOM, where bias and superstition should be left out, under the pretense of presenting both sides of an argument (one that doesn't even exist in the scientific community) fairly - because they have no understanding that this isn't about being fair (unless you mean being fair on the poor kids who might get affected by this nonsense), it's about being right, and factual.

        This article is right, because it points out that not everyone's ***** opinions are equal, no matter how inoffensive you wish life was, and all Creationism is is an opinion, with no basis in the scientific process whatsoever.

        The whole idea that religion and science are complementary is absolute nonsense, and if you say that, then you have no idea what those words represent.

        Religion was what we used, long before science and reason were about, to explain the universe. It was how we decided things were, how we got here, and where we were going once we died. But then we grew up, and no longer needed superstition to fill the void of ignorance, because we were understanding more and more about the world around us, and used a thing called scientific process to slowly but surely unravel the mysteries of the universe. Did it give us a complete picture? No, but that's okay, because if the proof of how we got here exists, in ANY form, science will eventually encompass it, by its very nature, and we will have a theory for that too. And that will be refined eventually as well. (I once read (in a book!) that there was no such thing as the supernatural - the natural was everything we have observed, and thus science has observed and tried to explain. The supernatural was merely something we, and science, hadn't yet experienced, and when we did (and it was proven to have happened, because you know, people lie about the things they 'see' :p), it would become the natural.)

        The problem arises when people of the old system of explaining things don't yield to the new system that actually answers more questions with fact rather than our opinions (which was all we had to go on, way back, mind).

        This article is about the conflict between our biased opinions (Creationism) and our observable, understandable facts (Evolution), and anybody with any basic common sense and reasoning capability can see which one is the true winner in that conflict.
        • meetthescott, on 10/10/2007, -4/+0WALL OF TEXT
        • masterkenobi, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1@meetthescott: Carraige returns do not work in replies. Blame the Digg developers for that one. It's also ultimately impossible to find comments you wrote after you come back to a page. Why can't there be a way to go directly to what you wrote? FYI, I probably will have trouble finding this comment again so not sure if I'll be dugg up or down for this.
      • dk911, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0ScrumFritter, that is a well written argument. I guess what is so painful is that because I do believe in a God that I am treated, no actually just termed an idiot. I don't go around saying that scientists are idiots, or that people whom I don't agree with are idiots, unless they provoke such a reaction from me. I just want to go on believing without the non-believers constantly trying to "make me understand my stupidity" or "show me that religion is just *****". I want to be left alone to my own beliefs. My beliefs are very widespread, including (among other things) that the world is older than 6,000 (or however many) years old, and that people may have evolved from apes but more likely evolved from a species similar to an ape but still just another form of a person. I believe that our universe started with a big bang, but I question what was there before this bang? What caused the bang? And, where did the material involved in this bang come from? If matter can neither be created nor destroyed, it can't have been created or just popped into existence -- but how do we explain that. To me, the explanation (until science can explain it for me) is God. Once science is able to show how something came about, or how something works, I move it from one ring to another ring. One ring is my belief in a higher power, the other is my understanding of science. The issue that I have is that by just believing in God, I am deemed an idiot. "How could I believe in something so stupid!? You may as well believe in a flying spaghetti monster, you idiot!" Why the personal attacks? Why do people who don't believe feel the need to attack my beliefs and try to show me how I am wrong, in their eyes? I, personally, don't go around trying to make people believe in God (even though the bible says I should) so why should their "non-religion" be pushed upon me? Why should I have to give up my beliefs, just because they arrogantly claim that I am a moron for believing such a thing? So, in summary, there are many like me who just want to continue to believe, and whether anyone believes we're wrong for doing so, is just the opposite of arrogant religious nuts. Instead of always trying to point to how religion is wrong, why not spend their energies in proving how science is right? I'm on the science bandwagon -- I just don't want to have to give up my religion to be a part of the club.
        • bemenaker, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3You don't have to give up your religion to join the club. All you have to do, is look at these people and like the rest of us say, "WTF?" It is totally possible to believe in God, be a christian, and still believe in science and evolution. The pope says there is no conflict between Catholicism and evolution.

          I would say be a little less defensive about your personal beliefs ,and your problems go away.
      • nonchai, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2"I put both Steven Hawkings and Ken Ham into the same loony category. Are they that different? "

        Now EVEN if i assume you meat Dawkins instead of Hawking, you are plain irrational and wrong. In fact out of the two me there is actualy a huge amount of factual experimental evidence for the science of Dawkins. Hawking - brilliant though he is - operates in the field of theoretical cosmology and physics - for which a large part is purely mathematical and wating for suitable experiments to confirm or reject the many theories.

        Ken Ham is not worthy to be even mentioned in the same arena as these two scientific pioneers.
    • WaterDragon, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3OK OK I'll read it...but from the comments, it sounds like the same ground that was covered in the movie 'Idiocracy'....the basic truth!
    • Zackypooh, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1thanks, now I know I don't have to read it.
    • Monolith4, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1lol @ an article entitled "Idiot America" being called eloquent.
    • Cornea, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6The fact that you all think it is a long read - kind of proves the title.
    • SimmaDownNow, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0I read this in its entirety mainly because of your post. Incidentally, I notice similar behavior here on Digg. Or am I the only one who, just about every day, wonders to myself, "How the hell did this or that make the front page?" As a side note, Keith Olbermann already says most of what is in this article.
  • Punk27, on 10/10/2007, -29/+6"Hello...I'm Mr...Snrub. How about we invest that $2,000,000 in the nuclear power plant!"
  • Bajeda, on 10/10/2007, -4/+126"there is so much information that fact is now defined as something that so many people believe that television notices it, and truth is defined by how fervently they believe it"

    All too ***** true. I thought it was just going to be an Intelligent Design bash based on the introduction, but it turned out to be much better than that. Great article.
    • wendelgee2, on 10/10/2007, -23/+5We definitely lack a trusted "center" when it comes to truth. In the old days it was the fatherly news anchors who told us what was going on, and we trusted in their objectivity. Now, everything is undermined; the truth is called "spin" even when it's demonstrably true, spin is adopted as conventional wisdom even if it's demonstrably false. History is written by liberal college professors. Science is written by godless heathens. There is nothing for afix ourselves to...we are entirely adrift.
      • wendelgee2, on 10/10/2007, -5/+2...to afix ourselves to...
      • kingraoul3, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6"Twisting turning in the widening gyre.."
        ?
    • otakushark, on 10/10/2007, -1/+20"Science is written by godless heathens."

      Isn't it amazing how many religious types believe this, yet cheerfully make use of the hard work these "heavens" do to advance man's knowledge and improve our quality of life?
      • ICSU, on 10/10/2007, -0/+15That's just one of the religious hypocritical acts.

        It's like that bitch in Jesus Camp saying "science is nothing" while wearing glasses and driving a car.
        • Akaji, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5God made the glasses and the car, duh.
    • Vicujozobenaxod, on 10/10/2007, -9/+0Let's see...

      Majority of content devoted to bashing creationists and intelligent design: CHECK.

      Throwing the Bush administration under the bus for x, y, and z reasons identical to leftists: CHECK.

      Using only conservative people in examples to make points: CHECK.

      Did he SERIOUSLY equate embryos to Hitler and Pol Pot?!?!

      "You don't need to be credible on television," explains Keith Olbermann, the erudite host of his own show on MSNBC. "You don't need to be authoritative. You don't need to be informed. You don't need to be honest.

      Too true Keith, YOU ARE NONE OF THOSE THINGS.

      Biggest pile of biased complaining I've ever seen put into words. He should plant himself on this website, he could write a book on useful idiots that propagate his opinions.
      • kirbyrocks, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6When he's talking about embryos, he's saying that EVERYONE comes from them. Good and bad. Your wife's next baby could as much be the next Hitler as the next Einstein.
  • Bajeda, on 10/10/2007, -7/+146That this article is two years old and is only MORE relevant today is rather scary.
    • Kinkistyle, on 10/10/2007, -1/+11The thing is, this article could have been written during the Renaissance and it would still apply today. Thats just the way its always been -- some people just have no INTEREST in being educated. They'd rather believe in crazy, messed-up sh*t that makes them feel good than search for the most logical, reasoned answers to the Universe's questions. A lot like the "Shadows in the Cave" allegory postulated many centuries ago, some people prefer to go on believing that the world outside of their boundary of knowledge are just the shadows on a wall, rather accept answers that might contradict with their deep seated beliefs... or make them THINK too hard.

      Since the beginning of Human history its always been about a small privileged proportion of the human population, controlling the larger, under-educated, under-privileged proportion. But given that, I'd say the odds are better for the "unwashed masses" now than they were 200 years ago thanks to modern technology, but the pace of improvement is achingly slow
      • Akaji, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3'"Shadows in the Cave" allegory postulated many centuries ago'

        Try millennia. That analogy (not allegory) was thought up by Plato c. 500 B.C. Which brings up another saying... 'the more things change, the more they stay the same.'

        Weird, Firefox doesn't know that 'millennia' is a word.
        • Akaji, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Okay, so it is an allegory. I never was too great at the whole allegory/analogy subject back in English class...
    • teebird, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8The article cited Hofstader's study of anti-intellectualism in the US. I read some of his work in the '60s, when I was in high school. I understood what he was writing about, but the evidence has been made more clear by the proliferation of mass media in the decades since then.

      Maybe it's just my imagination, but it seems the level of public discourse has degenerated noticeably even in the past decade. I don't even bother to get into discussions of anything in the news with most people I know because all they seem capable of doing is parroting the cheap sloganeering that passes for commentary on talk radio and some 24-hour TV "new" stations. Anyone who wants to my call me an "elitist" but I think we can and must do better than that.

  • Cheesehead3557, on 10/10/2007, -9/+27A while back pics of the museum made it on digg courtesy of flickr:
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/n1c0star/sets/72157600335006271/
  • ThinkBox, on 10/10/2007, -29/+15"There's never been a better time to espouse, profit from, and believe in utter, unadulterated crap. And the crap is rising so high, it's getting dangerous."

    Yeah, have you seen the ***** that hits the front page lately?

    But, seriously, this is alarmism. You think they taught Intelligent Design more 50 years ago? This isnt rising to a head, it's less than ever before... but the press is how most people see the world around them, a shame, so they think that

    People pretend the middle/Dark Ages never happened? This is a time of enlightenment with information... or is it the time when people sit back and vegetate and think that they are enlightened...?
    • meetthescott, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I don't see why people are digging you down. The issue today is not that the "crap" is higher, but that there are more people espousing more progressive ideas that clash with the "crap," which in turn causes more conflict. Using the obvious example, Christianity 50 years ago was utterly dominant relative to today, and my impression (from admittedly limited knowledge) is that there was much less religious-based conflict. Today, however, the growth of non-religious viewpoints has generated more conflict because it clashes with the Christians.

      Another analogy that Diggers might find particularly salient (and that is, again, based on limited knowledge of the subject, as I'm no history buff) is that Nazism was generally accepted in pre-WW2 Germany not because of or despite its ethical ramifications but rather because there wasn't really any considerable opposition, but if you threw Nazism into the modern-day political arena it would look like the apocalypse was nigh.
  • Piedramente, on 10/10/2007, -69/+8foreach $user (@users) {
    if ($user =~ / liberal scum /) {
    $digg_count{$user}--;
    }
    }
    • Jambi, on 10/10/2007, -5/+34From your rather witty remark above, I assume that you believe that the earth is some 6,000 years old, and that scientists are just arrogant asses who won't listen to God?
      • Virak, on 10/10/2007, -2/+22Worse yet, he uses Perl.
        • kingraoul3, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7A great evil perpetrated by malevloent professionals.
    • Hayaemsay, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8The men in white coats will be with you shortly.
    • SheilaNoya, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3You're exactly the kind of idiot the article was talking about. If you want to wallow in your own ignorance, please feel free to do so. However, you should be aware that it's morons like YOU who are dragging this country backwards.
  • LordSkywalker, on 10/10/2007, -17/+74"You can just as easily have a faith-based, or ideologically driven, policy," he says today. "You start with the presumption that you already know the conclusion prior to asking the question. When information surfaces that contradicts your firmly entrenched views, you dismantle the institution that brought you the information."

    Sounds like most Christians.
    • leogodin217, on 10/10/2007, -54/+12funny sounds like most atheists to me. Actually, sounds like me back when I was an atheist
      • AnteChronos, on 10/10/2007, -8/+42Then you weren't a very good atheist.
      • Jambi, on 10/10/2007, -7/+38Not quite. After all, Christians are asserting that something exists, without proof to back it up. Atheists are responding that it does not exists, precisely because the Christians have presented no proof. The burden of proof is upon the party making the assertion. If it was a matter of having to disprove every hare-brained idea that comes around, society would be a mess. After all, I can't disprove that the Flying Spaghetti Monster exists, nor leprechauns.
        • agentx216, on 10/10/2007, -10/+2Don't some scientists use a process of falsification though and do the same thing. They have a hypothesis which you could call an unproven conclusion and then they try and prove or disprove it. If they didn't do this step there'd be no way for any meaningful experiments to be undertaken.
          • hfactor, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Scientific hypotheses usually are universal statements (For all x it holds that y). Therefore, they can be easily falsified by finding a single example x where the hypothesis does not hold. Existential hypotheses (There is an x for which it holds that y), on the other hand, can only be falsified by checking the entire set of x´s, which is usually impossible and the hypothesis therefore worthless. Now, if the whole set of x´s is invented...
          • Endemoniada, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1wrong reply.
        • misssue, on 10/10/2007, -13/+3You are asserting that a Christian can prove God exists. You can't prove God exists any more than you can prove a Fairy Monster exists. We have evidence that God exists. That is what alot of atheists fail to understand. God has chosen to reveal Himself in certain ways and not to in other ways. Prove to me that He doesn't exists. Essentially, you can't do that. I understand and accept that.
          • agentx216, on 10/10/2007, -9/+0I am asserting that telling Christians they can't start out with a conclusion is like telling a scientist he can't make a hypothesis. A scientist who really wants to believe in his hypothesis will do anything he can to try and prove his theory. I don't find it any different.
          • luther70, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9You are asserting that a Christian can prove (insert imaginary creator here) exists. You can't prove (insert imaginary creator here) exists any more than you can prove a Fairy Monster exists. We have evidence that (insert imaginary creator here) exists. That is what alot of atheists fail to understand. (insert imaginary creator here) has chosen to reveal Himself in certain ways and not to in other ways. Prove to me that He doesn't exists. Essentially, you can't do that. I understand and accept that.

            Hopefully you get the point.
          • fpp2002, on 10/10/2007, -1/+12Prove to me that the Flying Spagetti Monster doesn't exist. I dare you.

            You're an idiot.
          • bemenaker, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Agent216 the difference is, that a scientist tries to prove his theory. When there is no proof to back it, the theory goes into the garbage can where it belongs. Religious types, nope, they just make a BS excuse, like "we can't interpret God, but he is all around us"
        • LittleDas, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Atheists, or whoever else may wish to disprove the existence of a god, cannot, and this is irrefutable. However, the reason they cannot is not because of a failure of evidence but rather because it is a logical impossibility, one cannot disprove what has not been proved to exist. Now you combat this by saying there is hard, sound evidence of a god existing. You are among a small minority in this case, few among even the most evangelical and fanatical christians, muslims, jews or what have you. I would suggest examining the standard to which you hold this evidence and see how it compares to the standard you hold other evidence. I suspect that if you were truly honest you would see you are a *little* lenient.

          /walloftext
          • Endemoniada, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Wrong. There are plenty of ways to disprove things that haven't yet been proven. It's called a hypothesis, and most can be either proven or disproven regardless of what they are.

            Or look at it this way: If it has been PROVEN to exist, you can no longer disprove it. Likewise, if it has been DISPROVEN, you can't prove it does exist. All a scientist can do is continue to amass evidence to both sides, and hopefully someday come to a conclusion that is accepted by his peers.
      • bemenaker, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Holy WTF? Just how are you defining being an atheist then? If you have questioned religion enough to become an atheist, then you have to have moved well beyond the point you describe. I call BS.
    • doyadigg, on 10/10/2007, -11/+1Sounds like liberals, global warming alarmists, and atheists. No matter how much you convince a liberal that communism won't work, they'll keep trying no matter how many millions starve. No matter how much evidence you give a global warming alarmist that sky is not gonna fall in a week, he'll claim you hate the environment because Al Gore said so. No matter how much you convince an atheist that there exists the possibility of something beyond humans, he'll plug his ears and quote a bible nut to back him up that you must be crazy.
      • Thefatheroftime, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Im a liberal, global warming "believer", and athiest.
        Communism does not work. I know that.
        I don't believe the sky will fall in a week. Gloabal warming is not the apocolypse. Science shows proof of a general global warming that will effect the world adversly.
        Why would I believe the possibilty of something beyond humans? I don't believe in God or aliens.
        Exactly WHAT "liberals" are you talking about? The strawmen you've created in your own head??
        • Classico, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Win.
        • doyadigg, on 10/10/2007, -5/+0I did not say all liberals are also global warming alarmists and atheists. If you see these words in a sentence and assume I'm talking about you, then that's your problem.
      • shhaz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0doya,,, your thinking exemplifies the gooble de goog that passes for intelligence in some areas of the world, today. You lump together science that you don't understand with myth god worship and come up with some conclusion. Try to uncludder your thinking and maybe you will have something worthwhile to say.
  • nonchai, on 10/10/2007, -5/+48what a joy to read an article that so aptly sums up the sad state of affairs these days in the US.
    Sadly such idiocies are spreading to elsewhere. Here in the UK, enrolments and exam passes for the "hard" sciences are down significantly. Everyone wants to do a "media studies" course, peple take huge interest in the lives of pretty airheads with no talent whose only fame is due to the luck of being born with good looks, or married to a footballer.
    • wendelgee2, on 10/10/2007, -4/+11uh...media studies is where you learn exactly the sort of analytic thinking that will pull us out of this mess. science, love science, but being able to critically analyze the media is not fluff...the heart of this problem is that people DON'T analyze the media critically.
      • Hecks, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4No - media studies is an ill defined discipline of little academic or practical merit which is used (in the UK) as just one route to give young people worthless degrees in the name of Tony Blair's vacuous policy of inclusion. Meanwhile we have hard sciences, maths and comp sci struggling for students because they are regarded as 'too difficult'.
  • Alegoo92, on 10/10/2007, -66/+11This is pure hate speech. Sure, some may be misguided, you don't need to be so offensive and mocking. Get a life.
    • wendelgee2, on 10/10/2007, -4/+17poor baby.
    • Dregga, on 10/10/2007, -5/+5Oh, grow a thicker skin.
    • OneHine, on 10/10/2007, -0/+29Alegoo92 demonstrates perfectly how Idiot America works. Say whatever silly, unsupported things you want and then when knowledgeable people criticize you, call it hate-speech instead of responding substantively.
    • Tzombo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Yes, they do need to be this hateful. Crap like this should be ridiculed, especially when it makes the mainstream.
    • berj, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2what the ***** is "hate speech?" sounds like something some idiot made up to counter intelligence.
  • cheddarbek, on 10/10/2007, -25/+3TL;DR
    • swrlyhrly, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4what the ***** is that?
      • gingerbreadcat, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5According to the article, it means we should worry about cheddarbek procreating.
    • Dracker, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1"Too long; didn't read" is what it stands for.
      I find it amusing that an internet abbreviation uses a semicolon.
  • phenry50BMG, on 10/10/2007, -60/+26Ah yes, another digg article that confronts and attempts to ridicule a religious belief. I guess there aren't more important things in the world happening right now? Watching the dollar tank. Watching the NYSE tank.

    Is religion that much of a hot button topic with people? Do people really get all worked up over this sort of thing?

    The question you have to ask yourself is this: are you willing to die for your beliefs? Do you feel strongly enough about your religion or your stance against it to die for it? I'm guessing not. It's easier to post smarmy ***** on digg and then head back to your pathetic excuse for an existence.

    The only religion I have seen that attempts to win us over by force is Islam. Funny thing is that I don't hear too much bitching about that religion. Apparently it isn't PC to do so these days. I've read the Bible (both the 'holy' one and the 'satanic' one) as well as the Koran. Amazingly the Koran is the only one that indicates to kill people who don't agree with it.

    Bitch all you want about Christians but none of them want to kill you for your disbelief. Bitch all you want about Satanists but none of them want to kill you for your disbelief. Bitch about Muslims and they'd be happy to kill you and start a riot just for posting a goofy cartoon about their beloved child molesting prophet.

    I love seeing the anti-christian posts on here. It's like people are so against it they can't see the forest for the trees. Do a search on christian terrorists, satanic terrorists and muslim terrorists. After doing so, please post your findings for everyone to enjoy. I'm pretty confident regarding which religion is going to be the one to garner the spotlight.
    • mpn401, on 10/10/2007, -7/+29"The only religion I have seen that attempts to win us over by force is Islam. Funny thing is that I don't hear too much bitching about that religion. Apparently it isn't PC to do so these days."

      Are you kidding me? Islam is insulted day in and day out. Those people are called 'towelheads', 'islamofascists', basically anything you can think of. And only like, 1% of the people in the religion are actually terroristic.
      • TJATL, on 10/10/2007, -8/+1they are fascists and practice islam, so that isn't an insult when talking about the extremists.
        • luther70, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Yeah but the term was coined by a real nutjob, used by people to bash all Muslims and is it really fascism in its classical definition? Muslimist maybe Sharai-archist.
        • cyberdork, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3You obviously don't understand what fascism is and how it works.

          Yours sincerely,
          a German guy.
      • meetthescott, on 10/10/2007, -0/+01% of the between 0.9 and 1.4 billion muslims in the world (wikipedia) would be a whole hell of a lot of terrorists.
    • luther70, on 10/10/2007, -9/+32If it will make you feel better. Islam is a retarded religion. Then again most atheist feel that way about all religions. Christian have the most influence over my government and my country so they receive the bulk of the animosity. If you read the bible you damn well know your god advocates genocide, rape, incest and killing of people for disobeying there parents, being homosexual or working on the sabbath. Why aren't these traditions followed today? Because society changed. It became more moderate not because of Christianity but in spite of it. Thats why we no longer have witch burnings, inquisitions and crusades. You want a Christian terrorist look up Timothy McVeigh and look up bombings of abortion clinics.
      • DFrag, on 10/10/2007, -14/+6You fail at reading comprehension if you read the Bible and came away with that.
        • luther70, on 10/10/2007, -1/+12Its all in there. Some of the worse stuff is in Leviticus but you can find lots this stuff through out the "Good Book" Go ahead crack it open some time.
        • bonjovisucks, on 10/10/2007, -6/+2Old Testament, my friend. Try reading some New Testament.
        • luther70, on 10/10/2007, -2/+11Oh we should stick to the new testament where we get introduced to burning in hell for all eternity if we don't accept Jesus as our savior. Have a lustful thought and don't ask for forgiveness off to hell with you. Kill a few million jews just ask for forgiveness and the pearly gates will open up for you. Live a good honest life by most Christian standards and you're still going to hell if you don't accept JC.
    • Dregga, on 10/10/2007, -5/+25People target Christianity because that is the most influential religion in America. Turning a blind eye to Christian hysteria and jingoism because the Muslims are worse doesn't do anyone any good.
      • kingraoul3, on 10/10/2007, -1/+12Exactly. If we were progressive thinkers in a predominantly Muslim country, then it would be our duty to reject THAT mysticism.
        Or we are part of a world-wide assault on Jesus, take your pick.
        • TJATL, on 10/10/2007, -6/+3you wouldn't have to chance to reject that "mysticism" because they would kill you once you tried.
          • kingraoul3, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Then it would take more courage to speak to truth.
          • luther70, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Thank god for Thomas Jefferson!
        • lajaw, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1You know, I don't get this idea of "progressive". You "progressives" are nothing but communists. Call yourselves what you are. I'm not a conservative, but a constitutionalist. That's what I really am. Why don't you say what you really are. Don't you want the government to be in control of your life? But only if a "progressive" is in charge..................
    • zigspective, on 10/10/2007, -1/+43Wow did you read the Children's Read With Me Bible version?

      Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12)

      Whoever sacrifices to any god, except the Lord alone, shall be doomed. (Exodus 22:19)

      If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kill him. Your hand shall be the first raised to slay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to death, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slavery. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such evil as this in your midst. (Deuteronomy 13:7)

      Want a religion that doesn't have a holy book telling you to kill others who don't follow you ways. Try Buddhism, they lack a holy book.
      • rezist, on 10/10/2007, -1/+12thank you
      • misssue, on 10/10/2007, -13/+2Wow, you have done something that I can't stand out of my own camp much less out of someone who is not. Do not take verses out of context, historically and otherwise. And before you started digging around the Old Testament, try reading the New. But then again, all the love your neighbor stuff might be too much for you
        • gingerbreadcat, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10The loudest "Christians" seem to miss the love your neighbor stuff.
        • DaSuHouSe, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9Sounds to me like your picking and choosing what passages you wish to follow. Both the Old and New Testaments are recognized by Christians as describing the teachings of the same God they worship; therefore, you are taught to love your neighbor, unless he doesn't believe in God, in which case you should kill him.
        • hfactor, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Any arguments concerning these passages, misssue?
        • knde, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6You do realize that the very tired argument of "That's in the Old Testament not New Testament" is utter rubbish?

          If modern day Christians ONLY follow the New Testament, then be rid of the Old Testament. Print new versions of the bible that only include the New Testament, stop quoting verses from the Old Testament, use the book that you so fervently uphold and discard of that which you don't.

          It irritates me to no end that people such as yourself will harp on about others who "cherry-pick" from the Old Testament, when you lot are just as guilty of the same!
      • TheElusiveTool, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4I love it when Christians say "But that's from the Old Testament!" If you ignore the ***** from the Old Testament then we wouldn't have a problem with creationism.
    • bobzibub, on 10/10/2007, -0/+17Well, those non-terrorist Christians just must not be devout enough then! = )

      "Then I heard the LORD say to the other men, "Follow him through the city and kill everyone whose forehead is not marked. Show no mercy; have no pity! Kill them all – old and young, girls and women and little children. But do not touch anyone with the mark. Begin your task right here at the Temple." So they began by killing the seventy leaders. "Defile the Temple!" the LORD commanded. "Fill its courtyards with the bodies of those you kill! Go!" So they went throughout the city and did as they were told." (Ezekiel 9:5-7 NLT)
      • TheMidnight, on 10/10/2007, -7/+2Yeah since that applies to Christians today and not in the context of an ancient nation that was trying to survive in the desert.
        • DaSuHouSe, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6The point is the Christian God advocates the killing of women and children that don't accept Him as their God.
        • Tzombo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Hey, let's shift the goalposts, why don't we?
    • kingraoul3, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4What happened when the Crusaders took Jerusalem?
      What happened when Saladin took Jerusalem?
      Prove this guy wrong and do some research.
      What you'll find is that every religion *in practice* is wholly guided by the economics conditions which prevail among it's adherents.
    • skinjester, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4>>The question you have to ask yourself is this: are you willing to die for your beliefs?
      Actually, in practice that question is often stated as "are you willing to kill for your beliefs"

      >>Funny thing is that I don't hear too much bitching about that religion. (Islam)
      jaw drops!
    • Dolphtesla, on 10/10/2007, -1/+15Hey idiot! This is not about knocking religious beliefs! It is about censoring actual SCIENCE! Laws can be repeated time and time again and there is evidence to support such laws. A belief is NOTHING but a hypothesis.
      What? It must be true because it is written. Oh please. Keep you ***** religion, but stay the hell away from the classroom and progress.
      On another note. Go do some research on past gods before your son of god. you will find he is merely the god of sun.

      Good day.
    • iamausername, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8I think people get pissed with christians and Intelligent Design, because it directly affects their life. If it starts changing the society people live in directly, like teaching it to kids in schools, people start getting annoyed.

      if you can't change the channel, flip over the newspaper page, or shut the door, it directly affects your life.
    • Nodaki, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10Christian bashing is easy because the majority of Digg users (American, white/black, middle class, educated/tech saavy) grew up with it or around it. Christianity is ubiquitous in the United States there is at least one Christian church every square mile of populated space in my town...some areas are like church stripmalls. So when we bash it we typically are bashing the religion that was taught to us.

      Bashing Islam is more difficult, due to the fact the vast majority of Americans don't know anything about Islam, other than they get pissed off easy, and seem to like to blow ***** up. That and to bash a minority of any sort for whatever reason is completely taboo in the U.S.

      Back to the article: Too long in the middle...good start and ending.
    • suprawes, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10I am not against religion, I am against parents teaching their kids lies about how the world works.
    • the6thReplicant, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5I bet an atheistic is willing to die for your right to belief in anything you want, but I doubt a Christian is willing to die for my right not to believe in God or to believe in anything other than their god.
    • berj, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1DUDE THE ARTICLE ISN'T ABOUT RELIGION!!! ITS ABOUT HOW PEOPLE ARE NOT TAKING RESPONSIBILITY TO THINK FOR THEMSELVES!! oh, wait... then it IS about religion!
  • Sauwan, on 10/10/2007, -20/+5Damnit, I'm interested and got about 5 minutes into it, but my attention span is short. Hell if I'm reading all that. /grumpy
    • ozydingo, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4And that is exactly the root of the problem.
  • dildoolielly, on 10/10/2007, -22/+94America is a land of Idiots.

    These Idiots NEED their oversized offroad vehicles to get their pimply, fat asses up over the curb into the Walmart parking lot to sneak into the last handicap parking spot before some wounded Vet takes it. Then they beep their custom made "Proud to be an American" airhorn until an elderly, cat food eating, greeter brings them out a courtesy mobility scooter so that they can flop their soggy butts into it. Then they ride around the store screaming at kids while shopping for more Chinese-made, fat-people "sport" clothes and BUY MAGNETS to put on their SUV's to pretend to care about the troops

    I have seriously given up on the notion that this country will ever be something that I can be proud of. Our government is run by a bunch of corrupt morons and it is supported by a bigger bunch of bigger morons who have no decent sense of right and wrong, but instead think "morality" is all about trying to legislate who people have intercourse with rather than about honesty or how people should treat one another.

    The only way to approach this country and all of the backwoods idiots in it is to use their own stupid policies against them to get richer and richer so that you have enough money that you never have to be in the same room as any of them and you don't have to send your kids to school with any of them, and when the time comes, you can move to Canada or Europe when things get even more crappy here.

    Bye bye hillbilly, bible-thumping freaks!! Enjoy your speudo-patriot-act-restricted-"freedom" in your illiterate, poverty stricken counties! Hope your 'prayer in schools' makes you feel better about how bad your lives suck!!! Hope you enjoy licking the bottoms of the Bush family's shoes while you wear your size extra-large Walmart outfits and eat hamburger helper for dinner for the rest of your pathetic lives!!!
    • mikefitz2, on 10/10/2007, -43/+9wow, that professor really enlightened you during your first year in college huh?

      can't wait to hear your next speech about those evil corporations!

      you dont like america you can GEEEEEEET out!
      • rezist, on 10/10/2007, -2/+11why would we leave? dildoolielly clearly stated the goal, take advantage of you and thousands like you, bank, and then segregate. Did you go to a private school? Did you go to an ivy league university? The American Dream.
      • gingerbreadcat, on 10/10/2007, -4/+16If you don't like America the way it is, with other people having freedom and all that, maybe it's you who doesn't belong here? Maybe you should start a Christian-only nation somewhere. Like on an island way, way out in the middle of the ocean, where we don't have to look at it.
      • shahadar, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7GEEEEEET out? No. I'll try summon the strength to change things.
      • dildoolielly, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Look, another 26%-er telling an American to leave his own country.

        Go figure.
      • Namco, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1America is based on the idea that you can protest and try to change things. So if you tell people that they should geeeeet out of america if they disagree and want to make change, then you should be geeeeeeeting out yourself. It is unamerican to sit around and accept the way things are and NOT try and make change for the better.
    • PamalaLauren, on 10/10/2007, -21/+10If it's so horribly bad why haven't you left? I mean you imply that you want to leave, I'd think since it bothers you so much that'd you'd have done it by now?

      I don't get it, you encounter religious fundamentalism in many countries (although I can say Canada might be the best one of all for not having these problems). Each government has it's issues.

      We vote these people into office and offending everyone that you don't agree with won't fix what's happening. Many people want to live and be left alone. We don't give a damn what you do in your homes, with your children, with your body or any of that crap, yet we get beat up constantly for being religious.

      Now I liked the article because it shows what the flaws of fundamentalism. I happen to believe that God has provided us with some great scientists and educators for a reason, and that sure as hell isn't to reject them and saying they're influenced by the devil.

      But people have the right to believe that I guess and it's my duty to VOTE and make sure these fools don't get into office. You want to fix it, get out and do something about it damnit! Get involved. Vote! Put up flyers. Start a club. Do a protest. But sitting on your ass bitching and moaning online isn't going to change anything. Write a damn letter to a senator. I do it all the damn time.
    • Cyberen, on 10/10/2007, -7/+9You're entitled to your opinion, however I think it might be helpful to adopt a more optimistic view of humanity as a whole if you plan on staying on their homeworld.
    • sinurgy, on 10/10/2007, -10/+5At best you sound like a big baby but more than likely you're just an *****, so I have feeling we're all better off with out you anyway!

      There are many problems abound in America today and no doubt they need fixing. I for one will go down swinging to do my part to get this country back where it belongs. Not leech off of it for my own selfish needs and then abandon it!
    • it5five, on 10/10/2007, -4/+23I'm right there with you. ***** this country.

      Canada '08.
      • mikefitz2, on 10/10/2007, -16/+3Then get the ***** out. We really don't want/need you.
    • Misanthrope, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5"Enjoy your *speudo*-patriot-act-restricted-"freedom" in your *illiterate*, poverty stricken counties!"

      I laughed.
    • denairco, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3I think you've got a lot of good points, but maybe you should consider stating them without all the insults and swearwords if you actually want the kind of people who disagree with you to read through it and actually listen to what you're saying. It always hurts me when someone says things i agree with in a way that makes me feel ashamed of agreeing with them.

      On the other hand, this is only digg, so you can do whatever you want :-)
    • crapman, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Amen Brother!
    • EvilGeniusTodd, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10I'm way ahead of you.
      I moved to Finland in 2004. Transparent government, tax surpluses, universal health care, universal free education, and all the blond hotties you could ever want. I feel like the last rat off the Titanic. "if you don't like America get the hell out" o.k. Me and my computer admin skills will be in the nordic region if you need us. Not that I would come back for anything short of a winning lottery ticket.
      • tonage, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1Wow, without your computer admin skills, how will the nation survive? People like you cannot take care of themselves and have to depend on a government to baby you your entire life. That is why you run like a little coward instead of doing something to inspire change.
      • zip000, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Can I come too?!

        ...hoping to move to Canada in the near future...too bad it is so cold :-
    • Setter, on 10/10/2007, -5/+0WOW! It must be tough to be so superior!
    • Snyz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Hey!... I like Hamburger Helper...
  • TJATL, on 10/10/2007, -40/+5Things we can gather from this article and apply in everyday life....

    1) There is extremism in every religion and/or belief (This does not solely apply to Christianity)
    2) The left is tolerant only when something or someone is not Christian or conservative, but will deny or revert to name calling if you call them on it.
    3) The left hates whatever they disagree with, but doesn't consider their actions or words to be hate.
    4) The left are elitists at heart and believe in everyone conforming to their beliefs.
    5) If you do not conform to the beliefs of the left, you are dumb, racists, fascists, or a greedy capitalistic pig.
    6) Like a woman, the Left is always "right".
    7) The mob > The individual
    • siszam, on 10/10/2007, -5/+14I'm "left and a Christian. Not all Christians divide the world into right and left. The "Right" has made sincere, Christ like Christians ashamed to be associated with with it. It has made people think we are all like Bush and the fakes who support him. Grow up. And not all atheists are as intolerant, hate filled and bigoted as those on Digg.
      • wendelgee2, on 10/10/2007, -1/+13Actually, most of the digg atheists are striking out against christianity precisely because of the right wing associations, namely that there is a correlation between the willingness to follow a movement only based on faith, and the mindless devotion of the 22% of America that STILL supports Bush. Essentially, the party has become a church and these people follow it with unquestioning faith. And with that comes allllll manner of *****. My point is, if faith wasn't a tool of political domination, you wouldn't catch any of this *****. Heck, my parents are christian, but they're the quiet personal type, not the obnoxious political type.
        • MadScientist68, on 10/10/2007, -7/+2I disagree. I believe that they have plenty of other reason's to strike out at Christians. To say that Christian devotion is largely mindless is quite an ignorant, and biggoted statement. I challenge you to read some of the excellent apologetic literature out there before suggesting that we are mindless. I will go toe-to-toe intellectually with any atheist, evolutionist, etc. I have done so on physorg.com. Faith is used by both sides by the way not just the republicans. Regardless, non-faith is used as a tool for domination also. So, it isnt the belief system which is at fault per say. It's mankind in general.
          • skinjester, on 10/10/2007, -1/+11what's an evolutionist? Oh I get it, you're pretending scientific thought and religious thought are on equal footing. uh... here's a hint - disprovability is a virtue. The kind of rhetoric you engage in when you go "toe-to-toe" with atheists and "evolutionists" on physorg doesn't mean a whole lot when you're running an experiment, or computing a formula, or solving a proof, or writing software, etc... In fact you sound a whole lot like some kind of middle-manager. Or maybe you work in the marketing department somewhere? Deluded enough to think that by talking about solutions to problems, you're actually solving problems.
          • Dregga, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9Faith means nothing but "belief without evidence". So yes, I would argue that is a little mindless.
          • luther70, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Oh your like one of those people that studies lord of the rings to point of being able to talk elvish. You then use this knowledges to put yourself on equal footing as people in the real world.
      • TJATL, on 10/10/2007, -7/+1Sorry, I should have said the intolerant left or extreme left wing sect of the democratic party that now has control.
        • luther70, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4If the extreme left has control how come we are still in Iraq?
        • DaSuHouSe, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3TJATL how have you not realized that Democrats and Republicans today are in many aspects the same party? By claiming the left this and the right that you betray your ignorance by dividing America into two types of people when it quite clear that even on digg many people don't support either the Democrats or the Republicans.
      • agentx216, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0One thing I don't understand is that when people say Christians only follow their religion based on blind faith and then when Christians attempt to use logic or science to back up their claims they're told they can't do that because science and religion are two twains that shall not meet.
        • Osjpr, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2"Christians attempt to use logic or science to back up their claims"
          "science and religion are two twains that shall not meet."
          "Christians attempt to use logic or science to back up their claims"
          "science and religion are two twains that shall not meet."

          You answered your own question by describing a paradox that can't exist....and WTF is a twain?? >
          • agentx216, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1A twain is one piece of a rope that must be tied off so that it doesn't unravel. It was an old saying.

            And my point is exactly what you just said. It's a paradox...that's what I was claiming people do to Christians. It would be like me telling you to explain how my computer came into being using only naturalistic explanation.

            You'd say that it was created by a guy in Japan and I would tell you that you can't use that explanation because it doesn't fit my criteria. That's what scientists do to Christians who want to back up their faith with logic and science...they tell them to not go on blind faith and grow a brain. Yet when Christians attempt to use science and logic they aren't allowed either of those explanations either because the controlling philosophy says they can't. It almost sounds like a reverse controlling party dark ages to me.
        • luther70, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4If you start with a conclusion (God created the world in 6 days) and then go look for the evidence to back it up are you really doing science?
      • Tzombo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Haha, this extreme left crap keeps cracking me up.

        There is no left and right anymore anyway. Tony Blair is supposedly a lefty, from a Socialist party no less, yet he was one of the most fervent supporters of Bush' illegal war.
        There is however still an extreme right and it is in power in the US.
    • Dregga, on 10/10/2007, -2/+11Cool, thanks for telling me what I think.
      • TJATL, on 10/10/2007, -8/+1No I'm not telling you how to think, I'm making general statements based on the past and present. Just look at the comments on this article and you can see how most of these are spot on.
    • PunkRampant, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3Sweeping generalizations FTL
      • TJATL, on 10/10/2007, -5/+2yes they are sweeping generalizations, but when is the last time you have seen someone from the left call someone on one of their intolerances listed above? You don't because it's for the most part an accepted practice either by agreement or fear of going against the mob.
        • Dregga, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6"Like a woman, the Left is always "right"."

          What the hell is that supposed to mean?
    • pineutrino, on 10/10/2007, -2/+14The article isn't "left", whatever that may be, it's common sense. The result of thinking on a regular basis.
    • TJATL, on 10/10/2007, -10/+1Take a look at the comments people have left about this article and see I'm not far off from the sweeping generalizations made about the intolerant left.
      • Dregga, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9You see only what you want to see.
      • OneHine, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10I read the comments and saw that you're extremely far off. Your comments weren't generalizations, they were outright lies. Instead of rationally disproving the article's claims, you instead starting screaming and whining about the "intolerant left" (you know, the guys who are so bigoted they don't even hate gays!). You demonstrate perfectly why this article is so relevant.
    • kinseyincanada, on 10/10/2007, -5/+3the exact same can be said about far right people, far left people are idiots and far right people are idiots.
      • TJATL, on 10/10/2007, -9/+1but who has the most idiots? when is the last time you see extreme right wing stuff on digg? i've rarely seen extreme right wing idiots post comments on digg as well compared to the infinite idiots from the left that have the biggest voice. Not to mention, the extreme right wing don't fit in every category above.
        • DaSuHouSe, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1"Right wing idiots" save their material for FOX. But seriously isn't it obvious that your so called "right wingers" are very rare among Internet communities? As for fitting every category above, although it makes no sense clump an entire political affiliation into generalizations like these, I'll indulge you:

          1) There is extremism in every religion and/or belief (This does not solely apply to Christianity)
          2) The right is tolerant only when something or someone is not atheist or liberal, but will deny or revert to name calling if you call them on it.
          3) The right hates whatever they disagree with, but doesn't consider their actions or words to be hate.
          4) The right are elitists at heart and believe in everyone conforming to their beliefs.
          5) If you do not conform to the beliefs of the right, you are unpatriotic, cowardly, heretical, or a know-it-all communist.
          6) Like a woman, the Right is always "right".
          7) The mob > The individual
          • Mothrog, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Speaking of sweeping generalizations...

            "2) The right is tolerant only when something or someone is not atheist or liberal, but will deny or revert to name calling if you call them on it."

            How many Republicans do you know? Not all of us believe anything that comes out of Pat Robertsons' mouth. Oh, and you may want to look in to who actually supported things like integration and the Civil Rights Act. It wasn't the Democrats. Nor, quite frankly, are modern Democrats terribly enlightened when it comes to race relations. They've just moved the plantation to welfare and "equal" opportunity. Don't even get me started on what the left thinks of, say, gun owners or Southerners.

            "3) The right hates whatever they disagree with, but doesn't consider their actions or words to be hate."

            As compared to the left, that constantly labels anyone who doesn't agree with hand out programs as a heartless bastard and anyone on the right a mouth breathing redneck idiot? But hey, that's not hate at all.

            "4) The right are elitists at heart and believe in everyone conforming to their beliefs. "

            Really? So, what should I make of the liberals out there that want to control advertising of certain food products and cigarettes? Funny, but I've never had a problem seeing advertisers' ***** as *****, yet the left seems to think we're all addle-brained idiots that believe everything that comes out their mouths? I don't know about you, but I'd call that elitist.

            "5) If you do not conform to the beliefs of the right, you are unpatriotic, cowardly, heretical, or a know-it-all communist."

            And if you don't conform to the beliefs of the left, you are a moronic, conformist, heartless, moronic redneck who wants to destroy the planet.



      • luther70, on 10/10/2007, -5/+1Extreme Left - We should negotiate with our enemies.
        Extreme Right - We should bomb the F' out of Mecca to show them we mean business.
    • Nick22, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Left, Right, who gives a *****. Am I the only one sick and tired of hearing people say stuff like "Those from the left..." Those far-right so-and-sos" etc. (you get what I mean)
      • emoj0388, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Clowns to the left to me, Jokers to the right. Here I am, stuck in the middle with you...
        Can't we all just get along, cut each other's ears off and call it a day?
    • TJATL, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1to all those naysayers and the bury brigade, I present to you the SF witch hunt of Michael Savage

      http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57170
    • fwib, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2TJATL - did you read the article?
    • DreKor, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Again, you're one of those people equating facts with beliefs. You don't need to believe in science, science simply is. You can see it, you can touch it, you can prove it, and you can disprove it. Beliefs are exactly the opposite and, therefore, not equal.
  • CletusJones, on 10/10/2007, -18/+10I think the religious are just as dumb as anyone, but I am getting tired of reading about this *****. I am going to start treating them like the retarded kid at the mall...I'm not going to point and laugh, I'm just going to ignore them.
    • DFrag, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6You will be doing them a huge favor. I'm sure they will be relieved.
    • candre23, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5It's safe to ignore the retarded kid at the mall because he doesn't get to send the army into unnecessary war, repeal parts of the constitution, spy on citizens without judicial oversight, or generally run the economy into the ground. The retarded man in the white house, on the other hand, gets to do all of it.
    • Tzombo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1It would be a bit easier if they weren't in power.
  • PiGuy, on 10/10/2007, -14/+35Everyone's ideas are wrong but mine!
    • Computer_Kid, on 10/10/2007, -1/+17I reject your reality and substitute my own
    • bromac, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5Just grasping conflict?

      You guys must be new here...by the way the cups are for the Kool-Aid.
    • alex.will, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Unlike men, all ideas are not created equal.
    • Immij, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I agree with your ideas. /paradox
  • GaiaAP, on 10/10/2007, -12/+35Brilliant piece of writing. Dugg.
  • Allenx1, on 10/10/2007, -6/+45No one ever made money overestimating the intelligence of the American people.
    • dyuhas, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1"Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public." - H L Mencken
  • bluezinc, on 10/10/2007, -5/+16What about during the turn of the century when weed was said to make people go insane and there were those horse and buggy salesmen selling earthquake repellant? That was a pretty stupid time. I think we're doing pretty well now that people are starting to see that this religious craziness is out of control and bogus.
    • agentx216, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Hey I saw Refer Madness and the govt told me it does...and they would never lie about something so serious!
    • zip000, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The problem is that at that time, people still seemed to elect intelligent leaders - they had the concept of respecting people that were better (i.e. smarter or more skilled) than they were, now we just elect ridiculous puppets of corporate interests.
    • zip000, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The problem is that at that time, people still seemed to elect intelligent leaders - they had the concept of respecting people that were better (i.e. smarter or more skilled) than they were, now we just elect ridiculous puppets of corporate interests.
  • wiachy, on 10/10/2007, -32/+5dugg down due to title.
    • HotDogBun, on 10/10/2007, -1/+12dugg down comment due to comment
    • Niallgriff, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Title is a reference to a Green Day song...
  • postal21, on 10/10/2007, -8/+93Yep, if we arent idiots... we sure as hell are selfish facists like my father.

    He argued with me in the car today that every other country in the world is jealous of what we have, and in order for us to have what we have, we must subdue, control, and kill them at any cost.

    He even told me that he would rather see me die in Iraq fighting for lower gas prices, because it was my civic duty and it would make him proud.

    My dad is real conservative winner.
    • CatsAreGods, on 10/10/2007, -3/+46That's not true conservatism...that's just plain sick.
    • DFrag, on 10/10/2007, -13/+7You're confusing Christians with warmongers. The world is bigger than you think.
      • Godlike, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Well then get your damn warmongers under control. If there are six or eight of you that aren't the bozo's that I know around the Midwest, then shut them the hell up! They make you all look like morons because they are loud like a toddler throwing a temper tantrum. Give them the pacifier or the stick, but shut them up!
    • bromac, on 10/10/2007, -2/+17True Scotsman fallacy.

      I'm sorry folks, but on the far right of the political spectrum is Fascism. It's almost as if they farther right you get, the less you're concerned about the well being of others....
      • mtrip, on 10/10/2007, -6/+3At the fringes of the left you have totalitarianism and on the right, fascism.
    • doublethrow, on 10/10/2007, -17/+2All you spoiled bitches have no idea what you have. Please get on a ***** plane and visit a country that is run by a pussy president. Ignorant *****.
      • Billions, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9No need to leave the good ol' USA for that, my friend
      • Piedramente, on 10/10/2007, -9/+1You hit it right on the head my friend. 90% of these commenters have no idea what they are talking about, lacking context on what they are saying.
      • maffiou, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Why do you assume we're all from the US ?
      • PJ1967, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I have. Been to some real ***** holes, but also been to some real nice countries, too. Believe it or not, my favorite was Germany...the folks were politely aloof (left you alone) and seemed quite happy and content (despite not having huge homes or SUVs). I could also sit in the park and drink a stein of hefe weizen (no open container ***** laws) while watching some old guys play chess.
    • darnit, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9Sorry to hear your dad is so sick. :(

      Here's to a speedy recovery.
    • Rooster99, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5If my dad told me he would like to see me die for lower fuel prices, I would tell him to gear up and do his "civic duty" for my future. Then you will see where the priorities are.
    • diggbot7, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Remember - you don't choose your parents. But you can sure as hell choose whether or not to be around them.
    • nonchai, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5sad to see a divide between father and son, but at least you were brought up in a manner that has permitted you to end up thinking for yourself.

      This common US myth that the rest of the world is jealous is just plain wrong. Its something mostly held by the ignorant who have never set foot outside the US and know no better. Europe is a fantastic place to live. Most of our countries take care of the unfortunate in far better ways than the US.

      Americans should never forget that the mere fact that the USA has a huge english speaking population with a common government currency is enough to achieve the things the US has. Americans are no more "moral" or good people than the great "unwashed" in Europe and elsewhere.

      Its a numbers thing, pure and simple. And America is now squandering all of its hard won "assets"
    • SenorCardgage74, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Your last name wouldnt happen to be "Santini" would t?
  • xienze, on 10/10/2007, -25/+14I'm not a religious person at all, but I don't feel the need to be a smug ***** about it either. Just leave these people and their "Creationism Museum" alone. It's not hurting you, and no matter how much you think science is going to fall by the wayside in favor of religious teachings it's not going to happen. The problem is most of you don't have a frame of reference and fail to see how this country has become far less religious than it was in the not-too-distant past.
    • GorfTron, on 10/10/2007, -5/+22Creationism is not a small problem. They are attacking science in many ways. The same people think climate change is not a concern because Jesus controls the thermostat. They think the news is just prophesy being fulfilled. You name the issue and the religious kooks have a kooky agenda.
      • incpen, on 10/10/2007, -13/+1LOL.

        "Climate Change" is science.

        LOL!!
        • GorfTron, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9I did not say Global Warming, MR. LOLCAT. Climate Change is a big issue in science, dumbass.
      • agentx216, on 10/10/2007, -5/+1If science has nothing to fear or is unwilling to be attacked then what IS the big deal?
        • Dregga, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7Because science is frequently misrepresented or misconstrued. There must be honesty for a legitimate scientific debate to occur.
          • agentx216, on 10/10/2007, -3/+0But any attempt to let intelligent design people into the scientific debate is suppressed.
          • DaSuHouSe, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4@agentx216: Because no self-respecting scientist argues for intelligent design why else. Science requires proof and the possibility of being disproved; whereas, intelligent design has no evidence as support and uses the argument but.. but.. God made it that way, which clearly cannot be disproved. As for the intelligent design claim that the complexity and diversity of life cannot be explained by evolution; that's just obviously false.
        • GorfTron, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5There is a difference between challenging theory and spreading falsehood.
        • GorfTron, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7There is a difference between challenging theory and spreading falsehood.
        • gingerbreadcat, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6The big deal is that while you want to shut down scientific inquiry, we're trying our best to reverse the damage you've done to the environment and to our education system. One of the most important things we need to do is to make sure that all children are capable of understanding scientific methods, logic, and critical thinking.

          There is NOTHING wrong with being both a Christian and a critical thinker. Try sojo.net. And pick up something by C.S. Lewis.
        • BrewBeau, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Science has nothing to fear from truth and reason. It's the ignorance is bliss type people who are more convinced by someone screaming that they have all the answers and they're right here in this 2000 year old book than they are of a whole body of experts who's work is constantly challenged and reviewed in the search for real truths. The scientific process is what makes science great, but it is also what makes science an easy target for those who "know all the answers".
    • PunkRampant, on 10/10/2007, -4/+7Very well said. It's good to hear there are some reasonable people here.

      Sitting at the computer, reading about things on the internet, is a great way to lose your frame of reference and get worked up over nothing. Today I visited a church that preached tolerance and equality, and allowed members to come to their own spiritual conclusions. Unfortunately you don't hear about them on the internet, and instead we are led to believe that America is going down the ***** now that science is "under attack" from Christianity. Get outside and see how things really are, then make your judgment.
      • BrewBeau, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1That's nice that your church teaches tolerance and equality, but assuming it's a Christian church, not everyone is equal. Unless your church is teaching that I, an agnostic and a decent, law-abiding person, will be joining you in heaven even though I haven't accepted Jesus as my personal savior and God.
    • skinjester, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6actually it is hurting us xienze. I could mention many examples, but its a significant misstep that research into stem-cells is effectively banned in this country due to archaic definitions of life. Economically that puts our country at a disadvantage compared to a country where no restrictions exist. Ah.. why am I even bothering.
    • swrlyhrly, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8No they believe that Jesus is going to come back and whisk them all away to heaven while all non-christian's are going to die a long and painful death and spend all eternity in hell just before we ever have to worry about global warming or any kind of man made apocalypse scenario.

      i think of it as the Y2K scare.
    • mikasaur, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Actually, they are hurting us. A large portion of the American population are sure that Jesus will return in their lifetime during the Rapture, and that event will proceed some catastrophic event. So if Los Angeles were to be suddenly engolfed in flame, these people would think the best thing ever would be about to occur.* Plus these people stop stem cell research based on 1st century morality, care more about who people have sex with than what's going on in the world, and warp our understanding of the natural world. These people are very much hurting us.

      * Pretty much stolen from Sam Harris lectures.
  • Bob042, on 10/10/2007, -6/+61"We've been attacked," he says, "by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture."

    Truly scary. Are there really people out there that think "those smart people" are the enemies?
    • NickMilne, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12But intelligent, educated people really are the enemies of idiocy; he's not wrong. He just hasn't teased out the implications of the dichotomy he's creating, i.e. he is neither intelligent nor educated.
    • TheElusiveTool, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9True story: My sister's boyfriend's mother HATES our family because we are "scientist types" and not Christians. I heard these words from her lips. It is incredibly frightening how dumb a lot of these people are and believe me... they really are out there.
    • catalysis, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Calling them idiots doesn't really bring people together. Just thought I would point that out.
      • BrewBeau, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Nothing will either. When you are taught that science and thinking are an affront to you and your god, then you are being strong and willful by not even considering anything that comes out of a thinking person's mouth. I have family members that consider me to be "lost" and wishy-washy because I've changed my mind on things throughout my life. But I find it sad and irresponsible that they haven't even considered challenging their beliefs to see if they hold up. What gets me so frustrated is that they are bright people. They're like the kid who just never figured out where the presents under the X-mas tree came from.
  • scuro, on 10/10/2007, -4/+5If I hear the word "debunk" one more time I'm gonna puke.
    • ADVIZR, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5Debunk.
    • Nick22, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3ya...the word debunk is mentioned nowhere in the title, description, or even in the incredibly long article.
    • masterkenobi, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Regardless, I wonder if scuro puked in his keyboard by now?
  • luskin,