A revolution in thought

[davidm]

Will the Bashing Ever End?
Only When Science Steps In and Takes These Claims Seriously, New Study Shows

FREETHOUGHT-FORUM (Internet News Service) – The bashing will never end unless science steps in and takes these claims seriously, informed sources reported on Saturday.

“Unless science steps in and takes seriously claims about light and sight that scientists have known to be false for hundreds of years precisely because of science, then the bashing will never end,” observed the message board analyst E. Mota Kahn of the RAND Corporation.

Not only will the bashing continue, experts agreed, but the whipping at the post and the nailing to a cross will both continue as well.

There will also be continuous mob actions, lemming-like behavior, and a variety of posters will continue to spoil it for everyone.

In other news, the species of intellectual work known as “Lessans” has for the first time been placed within a clade on a phylogenetic tree. Dr. Zoe Ology of the University of Toronto explained that Lessans and related species evolved in an “intellectually arid zone” which introduced strong selective pressures for stupidity.

Lessans, Dr. Ology added, is most closely related to the intellectual species lackwit, with other close relatives consisting of fucksticks, asshats, slackjaws, daffydoodles and dumdums. Dr. Ology noted that it was unfortunate that Lessans had been introduced into the Freethought-Forum intellectual niche, because there “It’s maladaptive.”

[LadyShea]

It's plain to see that until science steps in and takes these claims seriously, this bashing will never end

What on Earth makes you think "science" has the responsibility to "step in" at all?

It's your responsibility to demonstrate the scientific validity of any claims that you wish to have a scientific stamp of approval on. It's your responsibility to present the claims in such a way that there is reason to believe they should be taken seriously by "science"

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I've done exactly what people have asked me to do...

No you haven't. We've asked you to honestly and directly answer questions and address the evidence against Lessans. All you ever do in response is evade, weasel, and flat out lie to both us and yourself. Get help, Peacegirl. Every moment you spend here is completely wasted. You are your father's and your own worst enemy.

[Stephen Maturin]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I have explained his ideas systematically and logically,

You don't know what those words mean.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

and also in my own words.

lol bullshit. On multiple occasions you've straight up refused to explain anything in your own words, claiming that only the unvarnished Lessantonian gibberish set forth in the Sacred Text can properly impart Daddy Dumbfuck's meaning. Such pronouncements were invariably followed by a heapin' helpin' of copypasta.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I have explained very clearly why man's will is not free.

Your muddling around with free will and determinism is a foray into subject matter you can never hope to understand, and the results are "clear" only within the badly damages recesses of your own alcohol-addled brain.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

We have no free will (compatibilst or libertarian)

You've proven over and over that you have no idea what those words mean.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

and Lessans has proven this beyond a shadow of doubt.

Your inability to distinguish pontification from proof is sad, but at the same time more than a little lulzy.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

It's plain to see that until science steps in and takes these claims seriously, this bashing will never end.

So do your job. Fulfill the Great Commission. Ol' Shitnozzle wrote that the first step toward the Great Transition is presenting his discoveries () to scientists. So what are you waiting for? Spend some of that money you're stealing from taxpayers on getting the word out to the scientific community. Be sure to report back on the results of your efforts.

[davidm]

Science (AKA Mistress Amazonia) Steps In on Lessans' Claims -- and It Hurts so Good!



Science, aka Mistress Amazonia, demonstrates her technique of "stepping in" on a rather flabby and pathetic scientific hypothesis that subsequently, alas, failed to rise to the status of a proper theory.

FREETHOUGHT-FORUM.COM (Internet News Service) -- Science unexpectedly stepped in on Seymour Lessans' claims about light and sight on Saturday, sending shock waves through the Freethought-Forum message (massage?) board.

Most of the shock was reserved for the fact that Science, who heretofore had never been seen in public, stepped in wearing stiletto heels. That's because Science is a 25-year-old S&M dominatrix from San Francisco named Mistress Amazonia. By contrast, scientists (as opposed to Science) are usually nerd types with thick glasses and deficient social skills.

"What can I say?" Science (Mistress Amazonia) said with a shrug. "Science doesn't pay well in America, where half the populace believes that a sociopathic Bronze Age war god created the universe in six days 6,000 years ago. So I moonlight at the local sex dungeon." She flicked her whip.

"OK," Mistress Amazonia added, "Let's have a look at Lessans' … equipment, shall we?"

Science checked it out.

"Hm-hmm. Hm-hmm. Hm-hmm."

"Yep, it's complete shit," Science confirmed. "And it makes me really, really angry."

At press time, Science was whipping a naked and bound Seymour Lessans, who was sprawled over a dinner table next to a plate of spaghetti and meatballs. She told Lessans that she really loved his genitals, though.

[Angakuk]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

The claim regarding the eyes did not come directly from these fields? It came indirectly...

Of course it came indirectly. That is pretty much the only way he could have gotten it so thoroughly wrong.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

It's funny that you think I'm the one with the problem. There is no convincing any of you to even consider that maybe, just maybe, you're the ones that have it all wrong and you're taking it out on me because you don't want to be wrong. The more invested you all have been in this thread, the more aggressive you have become. But it does not prove that your logic is correct, nor does it prove that what you think is happening in the brain is foolproof. The fact that you can't even consider the possibility that Lessans may have been right indicates to me that you cannot deal with the fact that science may have gotten it wrong and that his observations of efferent vision are absolutely plausible but you don't see it because you are coming from the vantage point of afferent vision, whether you see this or not.

This right here is a perfect example of how someone can look at a set of facts and still arrive at completly erroneous conclusions.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I believe Lessans was right when he described how the brain works in relation to words (which led him to this finding), just like I believe Lessans was right when he described how conscience works. These observations were not based on the scientific method of empirical testing, which can be misleading.

Meanwhile, Lessans' "astute observations" are, for some unknown reason, incapable of being misleading.

[Angakuk]

Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger

Well, golly. Which is more likely?

Option One: Absolutely everything we thought we understood about cosmology, optics, special relativity, neurophysiology, the physics of light, the anatomy of vision, etc., etc., is flat-out wrong -- and every single experiment performed in these fields for the past 400 years has somehow produced incorrect results, even though no one in the scientific community has noticed. And even though everything we thought we knew in these fields is flat-out wrong, our spacecraft continue to reach distant planets, even though they shouldn't; LIDAR works, even though it shouldn't; bionic eyes work, even though they shouldn't; etc., etc. All of this despite the fact that the entire point of scientific research is to challenge our assumptions, and that if anyone in the field of science could disprove what we thought we understood about these fields, then (s)he would be guaranteed fame and (most likely) fortune.

Option Two: Some guy who knew exactly nothing about any of these fields, and conducted exactly zero experiments in any of these fields, yet insists that virtually every bit of scientific data that has been accumulated over the past 400 years is flat-out wrong -- is correct. Somehow. Even though he has provided exactly zero evidence for his claims, and expects us to accept that he's correct purely on faith that he made (conveniently unspecified and completely undocumented) "astute observations."


Golly. Let me think ...

Why do you have to ask such hard questions? Now I am going to have to go away and devote a considerable amount of my valuable time to figuring out the right answer. Thanks alot TLR! It's not like I am busy or anything.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

What on Earth makes you think "science" has the responsibility to "step in" at all?

It's your responsibility to demonstrate the scientific validity of any claims that you wish to have a scientific stamp of approval on. It's your responsibility to present the claims in such a way that there is reason to believe they should be taken seriously by "science"

His observations and rationale as to why he came to certain conclusions, along with his demonstration as to why will is not free and why the eyes are not a sense organ, is enough. It has epistemological value, even though he didn't find his discovery through a hunch or hypothesis. There is enough information for scientists to test or they could start with his demonstration (which is enough knowledge to go from that point forward) as a foundation for further inquiry. Whether or not they find this knowledge compelling, the universe is not depending on these people alone. There will be other ways to bring this knowledge to light and no one will be able to stop it, not even the "scientists" or this little forum with all their bullying and sarcasm.

[ceptimus]

How do you suggest scientists should go about testing the claims?

You have rejected the obvious methods we have suggested (testing whether we really do see distant objects in real time; examining eyes to see if they have afferent nerve endings). What do you think scientists should test next?

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by Angakuk

Meanwhile, Lessans' "astute observations" are, for some unknown reason, incapable of being misleading.

These 'astute observations' are much like My 'Invisible Pink Unicorns', no-one can see them, and no-one else can verify them, So it is virtually impossible for them to be misleading. How could anyone possibly be mislead bu something they can't see or examine, and most likely does not exist, except in someone's imagination.

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by ceptimus

How do you suggest scientists should go about testing the claims?

You have rejected the obvious methods we have suggested (testing whether we really do see distant objects in real time; examining eyes to see if they have afferent nerve endings). What do you think scientists should test next?

These scientists could test by photographing the unfair words that the eyes are projecting onto the screen of undeniable substance. All they need is the right filter on the camera, preferably one with the particular word printed onto the lens. That way they just need to line up the camera and the object with the word projected on it, and they get the necessary proof that Peacegirl would accept and embrace. She would probably place prints on her fathers grave. Now that would be a party!

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by davidm

Will the Bashing Ever End?
Only When Science Steps In and Takes These Claims Seriously, New Study Shows

FREETHOUGHT-FORUM (Internet News Service) – The bashing will never end unless science steps in and takes these claims seriously, informed sources reported on Saturday.

“Unless science steps in and takes seriously claims about light and sight that scientists have known to be false for hundreds of years precisely because of science, then the bashing will never end,” observed the message board analyst E. Mota Kahn of the RAND Corporation.

Not only will the bashing continue, experts agreed, but the whipping at the post and the nailing to a cross will both continue as well.

There will also be continuous mob actions, lemming-like behavior, and a variety of posters will continue to spoil it for everyone.

In other news, the species of intellectual work known as “Lessans” has for the first time been placed within a clade on a phylogenetic tree. Dr. Zoe Ology of the University of Toronto explained that Lessans and related species evolved in an “intellectually arid zone” which introduced strong selective pressures for stupidity.

Lessans, Dr. Ology added, is most closely related to the intellectual species lackwit, with other close relatives consisting of fucksticks, asshats, slackjaws, daffydoodles and dumdums. Dr. Ology noted that it was unfortunate that Lessans had been introduced into the Freethought-Forum intellectual niche, because there “It’s maladaptive.”

If left up to you, the bashing will never end. Why are you here all the time David? You left to write your own book, so has that failed? Is that why you're back here trying to compensate for your failure to get any readers? What's the problem David? Seriously, you could be anywhere on the internet, but you choose to be here. That says something about the threat that you feel, doesn't it? Why else would you be here every single day to try to counteract my simplest responses with anger and malice and sarcasm?

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by ceptimus

How do you suggest scientists should go about testing the claims?

You have rejected the obvious methods we have suggested (testing whether we really do see distant objects in real time; examining eyes to see if they have afferent nerve endings). What do you think scientists should test next?

Ceptimus, thank you for being back to your old self. At least you are asking pertinent questions instead of jumping on the anti-Lessans bandwagaon which holds no clout whatsoever. To answer your question, I do not know what should be tested. The observations speak for themselves. The only proof that scientists will be happy with (which does not mean the proof doesn't exist with Lessans' demonstration) is when this knowledge is instituted on a global scale. That being said, there are other ways to prove that Lessans was right. I am so sick and tired of the backlash of the claim of efferent vision, which completely has taken over the proof of why man's will is not free, that it has become lop-sided. I'm not into this at all, as this group is stuck on this claim and trying to prove it wrong at the expense of the more important finding of how the knowledge of determinism can help our world.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Cynthia of Syracuse

Which amply demonstrates the fact that you lie to yourself as much as you lie to everyone else.

People don't "take for granted that [your] allegiance to [your] father's claim is all faith based". They couldn't, because you tried to keep that information under wraps for as long as you could get away with it, remember? You did it here, you did it at IIDB, and IIRC you did it at Graveyard and Project Reason as well. People you discuss this with come to the conclusion that you "believe based on faith" rather than "understand based on reason" because you can't/won't explain Lessan's ideas systematically and logically (or even in your own words), you can't/won't respond to challenges without handwaving, cherrypicking and/or fit-pitching, and you can't/won't produce even a sliver of evidence to counter the centuries of observation and resultant useful technology that indicate that he was, quite simply, wrong.

In life, your father was his own worst enemy. Since his death, you are.

I am not sure how long you've been in this forum, but I have explained his ideas systematically and logically, and also in my own words. I have explained very clearly why man's will is not free. We have no free will (compatibilst or libertarian) and Lessans has proven this beyond a shadow of doubt. I have also explained in my own words Lessans' observations regarding the senses, and why the eyes do not function like the other four. We can become conditioned by words in relation to the eyes, but we cannot become conditioned by words in relation to the other senses. Because we never understood a projecting function of the brain, words developed that allowed us to see, as on a screen, that half the human race is an inferior physiognomic production. This knowledge will change our entire vocabulary by removing words that are not symbolic of reality, and hurt people in the process. This has nothing to do with the advances in technology because the knowledge of the eyes does not interfere with the progress that has been made using light. I've done exactly what people have asked me to do, but they come back with comments like: "this is an assertion", "this is a modal fallacy", "this is a tautology", "this defies the laws of physics", etc. I've been called every name in the book for no good reason. It's plain to see that until science steps in and takes these claims seriously, this bashing will never end.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by davidm

Science (AKA Mistress Amazonia) Steps In on Lessans' Claims -- and It Hurts so Good!



Science, aka Mistress Amazonia, demonstrates her technique of "stepping in" on a rather flabby and pathetic scientific hypothesis that subsequently, alas, failed to rise to the status of a proper theory.

FREETHOUGHT-FORUM.COM (Internet News Service) -- Science unexpectedly stepped in on Seymour Lessans' claims about light and sight on Saturday, sending shock waves through the Freethought-Forum message (massage?) board.

Most of the shock was reserved for the fact that Science, who heretofore had never been seen in public, stepped in wearing stiletto heels. That's because Science is a 25-year-old S&M dominatrix from San Francisco named Mistress Amazonia. By contrast, scientists (as opposed to Science) are usually nerd types with thick glasses and deficient social skills.

"What can I say?" Science (Mistress Amazonia) said with a shrug. "Science doesn't pay well in America, where half the populace believes that a sociopathic Bronze Age war god created the universe in six days 6,000 years ago. So I moonlight at the local sex dungeon." She flicked her whip.

"OK," Mistress Amazonia added, "Let's have a look at Lessans' … equipment, shall we?"

Science checked it out.

"Hm-hmm. Hm-hmm. Hm-hmm."

"Yep, it's complete shit," Science confirmed. "And it makes me really, really angry."

At press time, Science was whipping a naked and bound Seymour Lessans, who was sprawled over a dinner table next to a plate of spaghetti and meatballs. She told Lessans that she really loved his genitals, though.

This is no different than the days of blasphemy when those who had discoveries or insights were tarred and feathered for the only reason that they did not conform to the thinking of the day. David, you are part and parcel of the times. You are so threatened by these observations (because it proves your worldview wrong) that you cannot even entertain the idea that Lessans' observations may have been right. Unfortunately, your responses are indicative of your insecurity, nothing more than that. Now go ahead and create more spoofs. I admit they are entertaining and I'm getting a kick out of how hard you're working (and you are working) to come up with new and funny snippets.

[Stephen Maturin]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

To answer your question, I do not know what should be tested.

Of course you don't. So when you say stuff like this ...

That being said, there are other ways to prove that Lessans was right.

... you're clearly talking out of your ass.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

The only proof that scientists will be happy with (which does not mean the proof doesn't exist with Lessans' demonstration) is when this knowledge is instituted on a global scale.

Unsurprisingly, you've gotten it all wrong. Lessans said that the first step is getting scientists to accept it, then it'll be taught in schools, and THEN it'll be instituted globally. You want to discuss this stuff, but you clearly haven't read the book.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I'm not into this at all, ...

Predictably untrue. The fact that you can't stay away from this thread indicates that you're only into this.

You left to promote the book, so has that failed? Is that why you're back here trying to compensate for your failure to get any readers? What's the problem peacegirl? Seriously, you could be anywhere on the internet, but you choose to be here. That says something about the threat that you feel, doesn't it?

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Angakuk

Of course it came indirectly. That is pretty much the only way he could have gotten it so thoroughly wrong.

According to who Angakuk, you? You don't like the idea that man's will is not free because it goes against the very foundation of religion. So how can your argument have any legitimacy at all other than your turning back to the free will belief, which is circular. You have no proof. You just trust what has been given to you. That being said, I love Christianity. There is much good in it. I listen to Joyce Meyer almost everyday.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

It's funny that you think I'm the one with the problem. There is no convincing any of you to even consider that maybe, just maybe, you're the ones that have it all wrong and you're taking it out on me because you don't want to be wrong. The more invested you all have been in this thread, the more aggressive you have become. But it does not prove that your logic is correct, nor does it prove that what you think is happening in the brain is foolproof. The fact that you can't even consider the possibility that Lessans may have been right indicates to me that you cannot deal with the fact that science may have gotten it wrong and that his observations of efferent vision are absolutely plausible but you don't see it because you are coming from the vantage point of afferent vision, whether you see this or not.

Originally Posted by Angakuk

This right here is a perfect example of how someone can look at a set of facts and still arrive at completly erroneous conclusions.

And you think this is a qualified answer?

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I believe Lessans was right when he described how the brain works in relation to words (which led him to this finding), just like I believe Lessans was right when he described how conscience works. These observations were not based on the scientific method of empirical testing, which can be misleading.

Originally Posted by Angakuk

Meanwhile, Lessans' "astute observations" are, for some unknown reason, incapable of being misleading.

Another boring response. Totally circular, and totally uninterested in finding out the truth. Rather, you are more interested in defending your position of free will with all your peers backing you. And you people consider this a free thought forum? Anyone who would dare to defy the likes of Maturin or David know what they're up against. They would be crucified and they won't utter a word. I am not afraid of you people, and for that reason you come back with a vengence. Does that prove that Lessans was wrong? No it doesn't. It's laughable that you all think you can scare me away because of your wrath and malice. You are like the man behind the curtain. When people see the cowardice behind the curtain, that little man who is totally impotent but who comes off as a fierce opponent like in the Wizard of Oz, they will realize that you are all a bunch of hot air that will shrink and disappear just like the Witch of the West when enough opposition proves you wrong.

[Stephen Maturin]

No. 35,700:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I am not sure how long you've been in this forum, but I have explained his ideas systematically and logically, and also in my own words. I have explained very clearly why man's will is not free. We have no free will (compatibilst or libertarian) and Lessans has proven this beyond a shadow of doubt. I have also explained in my own words Lessans' observations regarding the senses, and why the eyes do not function like the other four. We can become conditioned by words in relation to the eyes, but we cannot become conditioned by words in relation to the other senses. Because we never understood a projecting function of the brain, words developed that allowed us to see, as on a screen, that half the human race is an inferior physiognomic production. This knowledge will change our entire vocabulary by removing words that are not symbolic of reality, and hurt people in the process. This has nothing to do with the advances in technology because the knowledge of the eyes does not interfere with the progress that has been made using light. I've done exactly what people have asked me to do, but they come back with comments like: "this is an assertion", "this is a modal fallacy", "this is a tautology", "this is defies the laws of physics", etc. I've been called every name in the book for no good reason. It's plain to see that until science steps in and takes these claims seriously, this bashing will never end.

No. 35714:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I am not sure how long you've been in this forum, but I have explained his ideas systematically and logically, and also in my own words. I have explained very clearly why man's will is not free. We have no free will (compatibilst or libertarian) and Lessans has proven this beyond a shadow of doubt. I have also explained in my own words Lessans' observations regarding the senses, and why the eyes do not function like the other four. We can become conditioned by words in relation to the eyes, but we cannot become conditioned by words in relation to the other senses. Because we never understood a projecting function of the brain, words developed that allowed us to see, as on a screen, that half the human race is an inferior physiognomic production. This knowledge will change our entire vocabulary by removing words that are not symbolic of reality, and hurt people in the process. This has nothing to do with the advances in technology because the knowledge of the eyes does not interfere with the progress that has been made using light. I've done exactly what people have asked me to do, but they come back with comments like: "this is an assertion", "this is a modal fallacy", "this is a tautology", "this defies the laws of physics", etc. I've been called every name in the book for no good reason. It's plain to see that until science steps in and takes these claims seriously, this bashing will never end.

[Stephen Maturin]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Anyone who would dare to defy the likes of Maturin or David know what they're up against. They would be crucified and they won't utter a word.

Yep, it's true. davidm and I are the Uday and Qusay Hussein of . Everyone else is secretly glad you're here to end our reign of terror. You are a savior, more awesome than the United States Army and Jesus combined!

[Spacemonkey]

Good thing you're not here to restart the conversation, Peacegirl.

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

If left up to you, the bashing will never end. Why are you here all the time David? You left to write your own book, so has that failed? Is that why you're back here trying to compensate for your failure to get any readers? What's the problem David? Seriously, you could be anywhere on the internet, but you choose to be here. That says something about the threat that you feel, doesn't it? Why else would you be here every single day to try to counteract my simplest responses with anger and malice and sarcasm?

LOL, you get ugly like this, then still try to play victim. You are a piece of work.

Seriously, the bashing here will not end until you no longer post here. Why do you continue to come here?

[LadyShea]

Maturin won't dare crucify me, I know what his dogs look like and where they live

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger

Well, golly. Which is more likely?

Option One: Absolutely everything we thought we understood about cosmology, optics, special relativity, neurophysiology, the physics of light, the anatomy of vision, etc., etc., is flat-out wrong -- and every single experiment performed in these fields for the past 400 years has somehow produced incorrect results, even though no one in the scientific community has noticed. And even though everything we thought we knew in these fields is flat-out wrong, our spacecraft continue to reach distant planets, even though they shouldn't; LIDAR works, even though it shouldn't; bionic eyes work, even though they shouldn't; etc., etc. All of this despite the fact that the entire point of scientific research is to challenge our assumptions, and that if anyone in the field of science could disprove what we thought we understood about these fields, then (s)he would be guaranteed fame and (most likely) fortune.

Frankly, everything you thought you understood about these branches of science does not have to be wrong if efferent vision is right. We could still reach distant planets even though you dispute this; LIDAR still can work, bionic eyes could still work because they are replacing a part that is nonfunctional. Special relativity is a questionable theory (even though it originated from Einstein) in that there is no real proof that time slows down depending on one's inertial frame of reference; that time bends, or that we live in a four dimensional universe such that we can theoretically move back and forth into the past or future on an imaginary timeline. It's interesting to note that the only sense that is continually being tested are the eyes. We don't test a dog's ability to smell, or taste, or feel, or hear, only see because what they interpret through sight is not completely clear.

Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger

Option Two: Some guy who knew exactly nothing about any of these fields, and conducted exactly zero experiments in any of these fields, yet insists that virtually every bit of scientific data that has been accumulated over the past 400 years is flat-out wrong -- is correct. Somehow. Even though he has provided exactly zero evidence for his claims, and expects us to accept that he's correct purely on faith that he made (conveniently unspecified and completely undocumented) "astute observations."


Golly. Let me think ...

He never implied that the accumulated knowledge of these fields is flat-out wrong. He never disputed the finite speed of light or lasers or any information that can be found through these sources. His evidence has been spelled out and demonstrated. Whether you think his observations are meaningless is a moot point. The point is he gave his explanation and rationale as to why he believed the eyes function differently.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

LOL, you get ugly like this, then still try to play victim. You are a piece of work.

Seriously, the bashing here will not end until you no longer post here. Why do you continue to come here?

I'm bored, is all. I have nothing planned today and I'm in a feisty mood. It's as simple as that. Why do you constantly read into my motives? And why do you keep coming back, as if to say I need to leave in order for you to stay away?

And your comment "you get ugly like this": ugly like what? I shouldn't respond in a civil fashion to David's uncivil posts? Come on LadyShea, stop protecting your cronies who are displaying infantile behavior. You are losing all objectivity.

[davidm]

TRENDS IN SCIENCE AND CULTURE
Charles Darwin a Bit Perturbed That Seymour Lessans Failed to Explicitly Renounce Theory of Evolution


'OMGUS,' Charles Darwin says of Seymour Lessans


Seymour Lessans 'reading' a book. Unfortunately, he is holding the book upside down.

FREETHOUGHT-FORUM (Internet News Service) -- In an e-mail sent from the pit of Hell, where he was consigned for all eternity for the sin of poisoning the public mind against Jesus, Charles Darwin, the evil father of evolutionary theory, wrote that he was "somewhat concerned" that Seymour Lessans did not straightforwardly attack the theory of evolution in his groundbreaking and pudpulling book, "Decline and Fall of All Evil."

"Hell is painful -- the all-loving Jesus makes sure we are clothed 24/7 in fire (He calls it "tough love") -- but somehow it's even more painful to note that Lessans failed to explicitly renounce evolution in his book," Darwin wrote. "I mean, srsly, WTF? He's all like, 'physics is completely wrong,' but he writes nothing at all about how descent with modification is a Big Lie? What's up with that?"

"OMGUS!" Darwin added angrily, speaking of Lessans.

"Don't get me wrong" Darwin went on in his message. "I understand that his stupid ideas about eyes are completely contrary to evolutionary theory, and I note that he did write some fuckwitted stuff about germinal substance and living again and again as different people even though we die, an incoherent idea that has no support in evolutionary biology or even elementary logic. And he wrote some dumb crap about the alleged evils of homosexuality and how it will fade away in his New World Odor. I mean, I'll grant him all that. But would it have been so fucking hard for him to just come right out and say specifically that evolutionary theory is false? As it stands now, his failure to specifically disown evolution automatically makes evolution suspect in the eyes of every educated person, and that's a damned shame."