EVOLUTION is a figment of Chef Mike's imagination.

[BeardedOne]

i think they are kinda busy w/ their geico commercials and trying to get their series picked up so they may not be here commenting soon.

[rick_932]

why is there no historical, non-biblical evidence that Jesus existed?

[LOCpunks]

...

all he said was not to push your own beliefs on anyone including your children until theyre old and mature enough to think for themself

also note that christian ethics and christian religion are two seperate entities

I am aware of what he said, and I responded because I take issue with that viewpoint. Using words like "force" and "push" to make points seem more valid doesn't change the fact that people should have the right to teach their children their faith. Because if you're telling me that parents shouldn't be allowed to teach their children religion until, what...age 16? 18? Then you're out of your mind.

As for Christian ethics, many people would disagree. They may not be viewed as one and the same, but are certainly viewed by many as hand-in-hand. Just because some of you seem to view teaching Christianity to children as synonomous with fundamentalism doesn't make it so. Some would be wise to actually learn what fundamentalism is.

Don't get me wrong, I hate the idea of bible-belters and fundamentalists. But some of you take this anti-everything-that-isn't-ridiculously-liberal stance too far. As much as you would like to make religion in and of itself appear destructive, it isn't. It is simply political entities which abuse religion to make it so. Raising kids with religion isn't the problem.

[dc_guy_75]

Religiosity and education are negatively correlated.

I'd bet Armani never finished college.

[muhmuh]

I am aware of what he said, and I responded because I take issue with that viewpoint. Using words like "force" and "push" to make points seem more valid doesn't change the fact that people should have the right to teach their children their faith. Because if you're telling me that parents shouldn't be allowed to teach their children religion until, what...age 16? 18? Then you're out of your mind.

its a matter of presentation and false interpretation
the were right your wrong no matter what stance you often find in american born again christians and the vatican is the problem here

if you teach your children about your own religion as well as any other religion there is its a proper way of teaching them... if you give them a bible and simply tell them everything in there is the absolute truth and anything that disagrees with whats in there is wrong its bad parenting

Just because some of you seem to view teaching Christianity to children as synonomous with fundamentalism doesn't make it so. Some would be wise to actually learn what fundamentalism is.

Don't get me wrong, I hate the idea of bible-belters and fundamentalists. But some of you take this anti-everything-that-isn't-ridiculously-liberal stance too far. As much as you would like to make religion in and of itself appear destructive, it isn't. It is simply political entities which abuse religion to make it so. Raising kids with religion isn't the problem.

stop putting words in my mouth


edit:

The top 10 missing links:
http://www.livescience.com/health/to...nglinks-1.html

Homo erectus
According to one theory, males rammed each other with their thick skulls in order to win females.

1-2 million years later... nothing much has changed

[Rod la Rod]

I've watched and listened to your ramblings of "God" being a "made up" entity for a while.

While I am pressed for time, I thought I would quickly give you something to think about on CREATIONISM vs evolution.



Where are they Chef? Where are they? Are they under your bed? Are they at the gas station pissed off like the rest of us, pumping nearly four dollar gas. Perhaps a few are at McDonalds.....McNuggets are the shiznit huh? Oh....I know, surely they must be at their computers looking for online car insurance. Mabey they'll join us later and send us some new TS porn pics......I'm sure we'd all like that.


Who's "they" you ask? The proverbial caveman of course. The Missing link. The transitional man in between ape and Human.

Where are they Chef? Mabey some of the girls have seen em. I'm sure they make great customers. You got a couple stashed away? Well, even if you did, there should be LOTS others.

Ahh... but there's not is there Chef?

Bottom line, your claim of CREATIONISM being a hoax, I'm here to tell you your Evolutionary belief is no more functional.....LESS so in fact.


You have nothing sir.......nothing exept a FEW relic bones that show a few deformed humans where there should be THOUSANDS........HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS.


Chew on that for a while buddy.

Evolution is a hoax?

Please take a remedial biology class.

You don't believe in Darwin's "Natural Selection".

Do you believe in civilization's artificial selection? Do you believe in a French Poodle? How about a Thoroughbred racehorse? Were these species created by God? Did they occur in nature or were they created by man through careful breeding?

Do you believe in gravity? Is the earth flat?

You need to understand what evolution means. You are profoundly ignorant. Really it is not that difficult to understand. Evolution is settled. It is a fact. The mechanism for natural selection is very well established and understood. I am embarrassed for you. The USA is the only advanced country in the world where this kind of ignorance exists.

There really is no excuse for this kind of intellectual laziness. This is a shame.

















I have to go now, and fight some traffic........Those fuckin cavemen drive like shit.

[goldensamba]

I've watched and listened to your ramblings of "God" being a "made up" entity for a while.

While I am pressed for time, I thought I would quickly give you something to think about on CREATIONISM vs evolution.

Where are they Chef? Where are they?

They are the same place the "burning bush" proof and the "walking across water" proof is among other things. Please tell us you are not seriously calling out Evolution because it lacks enough proof.

If that's the case then the Bible is a book of magic and fairy tales. I am so tired of hearing religious people say it's this way because there is no proof. Since there is no proof for about 90% of the bible then it also must be untrue. You are undone by your own argument.

People with intellect have figured out that it is easily possible to believe in both things if you aren't a nutjob extremist on either side.

[trish]

The theory of evolution makes two main claims:
1. Species have some characteristics that are reliably inheritable, though they are subject to mutation. Darwin explained that many of the inheritable characteristics must somehow be encoded discretely in the genome, otherwise a characteristic that is underrepresented in a population would be quickly diluted and disappear, contrary to what biologists observe.

Today there is absolutely no controversy about the truth of claim 1. I believe everyone posting to this board knows about DNA and how it in essence digitally codes for the proteins that determine how we grow from a mere cell into a human being with brown eyes, black hair etc. Darwin’s prediction was nearly one-hundred years in advance of the actual discovery of the structure and function of DNA. That the code mutates is easily demonstrated with experiments geneticists have performed using fruit flies, bacteria, viruses, frogs etc. and also the experiments nature has performed on unfortunate human beings.

2. In some environments certain characteristics are beneficial and others are detrimental. If a population lives in a particular environment for generations, those genes responsible for detrimental characteristics will be selected against. Barring catastrophic accidents, those coding for beneficial characteristics will be selected for.

There’s nothing controversial here either. Put a population of alligators in northern Alaska and they’ll probably die out. Put a population of rabbits in Australia and they’ll probably thrive. Natural selection is just common sense. What’s not to believe.

Put the two claims together and it easily follows that populations will vary over time as their genetic codes mutate and natural selection acts on the resulting new sets of characteristics that arise. Since sexual compatibility is an inheritable characteristic, it can happen that two populations of the same species can diverge to the point where members of the one population are sexually incompatible with those of the other. In other words, now there are two species instead of one.

Now there are a number of questions to ask. Does it happen? Given the extent of geologic, time have populations varied? Yes. There are many examples within the fossil record. One can observe it happening on the Galapagos Islands. Unfortunately for us a non-sexual version of speciation demonstrably occurs yearly within the Asian populations of the influenza virus.

Next question, did humans evolve in this way from prior primate populations. The same DNA evidence that you use as a juror to send criminals to jail and acquit the innocent conclusively supports the affirmative answer; not to mention that fossil evidence that is never complete but seems to increase every year.

Next question, what does this have to do with religion? The answer is of course: nothing; it has nothing to do with religion. Isn’t that obvious? All this is just boring science. Most of us slept through it during high school and college. But what about the creation story in Genesis? Which one: the one where Eve was made from Adam’s rib or the other one? What about the story of the frost giant who was felled by Odin and became the Earth? Isn’t it clear none of those stories have anything to do with religion? What moral lessons are to be drawn from the story that the every thing was created in six days? How does that help you live your life? When the Bible, the Koran or the Tibetan Book of the Dead make physical claims it’s science…not religion. Often it’s bad science, often wrong science. But given the age of these texts, it’s forgivable science. So let’s forgive it and move on. There’s no need to support the physical, biological or geological claims of any religious text. There is a need to refute them only to the extent they continue to be unjustifiably supported. I think the moral here is: not every thing in the revered texts is religion. Sometimes the authors spoke about other things and sometimes they were wrong. So what? There’s plenty of religion in the good book that we can argue and that has nothing to do with science. But in the world of physical fact, modern science reigns.

[LOCpunks]

if you teach your children about your own religion as well as any other religion there is its a proper way of teaching them...

if you give them a bible and simply tell them everything in there is the absolute truth and anything that disagrees with whats in there is wrong its bad parenting

Don't put words in my mouth either haha. The latter is a textbook example of fundamentalism. What you're saying here is that there are extremely limited ways to teach your children religion - a) teach them about every religion (What are there, thousands? Several thousand, easy.) or b) beat them with a bible. That's just bullshit. That's the narrowmindedness that I take issue with in the first place.

And even regarding Christian fundamentalism in general terms...who are any of us to take issue with their religious customs? Because the child has a "civil right" to not be taught Christianity? I think the very people who are concerned about civil rights should be more concerned about the parents' "civil right" to raise their children as they see fit.

After all, this is America. What are you, a Nazi?

I kid, I kid. Well, sort of. It's just funny to see in the social and political forum (No, not THIS forum...generally speaking) so many "liberals" telling a group of people how to live their lives, and trying to break down the only institution holding together millions of families and their communites. It just reaks of hypocrisy.

[ARMANIXXX]

Ahhh.


It seems as if I've sparked a little debate here.
Some questioning my authority, experience, education, some even seemingly questioning with whom I'm speaking to.

Where shall I begin?


Tell you what. I'm gonna use the ol KISS method a professor once taught me in college.

I'll just say this:

I've had this arguement MANY times with many of my biological professors. Guess what....NONE of them can answer with certainty...NONE. EVOLUTION is NOT a fact, it is an ongoing, working THEORY.


I'll tell you what, since I've personally seen many primates of the Ape genology, and since I've NEVER seen the GEICO Caveman,

I'll direct this challenge to any and ALL of you:


YOU FIND ME A BREATING AND LIVING MISSING LINK, I WILL GET YOU YOUR OWN GANGBANG WITH ANY AND ALL TS GIRLS THAT YOU WANT AND LIKE.

I promise























Now....be off with you, and sin no more. lol