New trend in evolution deniers.

[Brian37]

Ms Perez banned me when I told her attacking science is not unique to Christianity and other religions do it too.

[abaris]

What do we have to say to counter that bullshit here.

Nothing. It's simply not worth the effort.

[Brian37]

What do we have to say to counter that bullshit here.

Nothing. It's simply not worth the effort.

YES it is, put a Ben Carson in the White House, he'd put evolution and climate change deniers in control of funding of science, education and on the Supreme Court. 

It most certainly is worth the effort.

[Thumpalumpacus]

The trend of evolution-deniers continually seeker stupider arguments is hardly new.

[Minimalist]

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

What Quantum said. Some arguments are so impressively stupid that they fall into the category of 'Not Even Wrong'.

Boru

[AFTT47]

Nothing. It's simply not worth the effort.

YES it is, put a Ben Carson in the White House, he'd put evolution and climate change deniers in control of funding of science, education and on the Supreme Court. 

It most certainly is worth the effort.

The only time any attention should be paid to evolution deniers is when they are actively trying to do something like influence a school board or any other kind of public policy. Even then, it is their action which should be opposed - there is no need to address their argument.

Arguing with somebody who is denying facts gives that person attention they don't deserve. Arguing with them validates that they have something worth arguing about when they do not. Evolution is not an opinion; it is fact. The question was settled long ago and that's the message we need to put out. There's nothing to debate. It's been settled.

[Brian37]

YES it is, put a Ben Carson in the White House, he'd put evolution and climate change deniers in control of funding of science, education and on the Supreme Court. 

It most certainly is worth the effort.

The only time any attention should be paid to evolution deniers is when they are actively trying to do something like influence a school board or any other kind of public policy. Even then, it is their action which should be opposed - there is no need to address their argument.

Arguing with somebody who is denying facts gives that person attention they don't deserve. Arguing with them validates that they have something worth arguing about when they do not. Evolution is not an opinion; it is fact. The question was settled long ago and that's the message we need to put out. There's nothing to debate. It's been settled.

That sounds nice, but those people who hold those offices would not be their if there was no support to put them in those positions. Not saying you will convert anyone, but a public argument will get lots of people to think about it and what they want. Liberal theists and theists who accept education and evolution need to see what they are dealing with.

[abaris]

That sounds nice, but those people who hold those offices would not be their if there was no support to put them in those positions.

And you think to be the one to turn them around, where the school system, science, media and society failed?

Aerosmight put it best: Dream On.

[Brian37]

That sounds nice, but those people who hold those offices would not be their if there was no support to put them in those positions.

And you think to be the one to turn them around, where the school system, science, media and society failed?

Aerosmight put it best: Dream On.

Oh geeze, never said I was a hero nor do I want to be an "atheist martyr" as if there is such a thing. I was merely pointing out like weeds, you cant ignore them. You cant get rid of them, but you also should not ignore them.