I wrote this somewhere else. It's about the breathing stupidity of the Christian assholes in Idiot America.

Creationists go out of their way to know nothing about the science that makes them cry.

I have repeatedly asked these morons for Jeebus to look stuff up, but they refuse to educate themselves. They would rather spend their time showing off their breathtaking stupidity.

They don't know what a scientific theory is no matter how many times it's explained. Most Americans are fucking retards.

"Theory: In science, a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses. The contention that evolution should be taught as a "theory, not as a fact" confuses the common use of these words with the scientific use. In science, theories do not turn into facts through the accumulation of evidence. Rather, theories are the end points of science. They are understandings that develop from extensive observation, experimentation, and creative reflection. They incorporate a large body of scientific facts, laws, tested hypotheses, and logical inferences. In this sense, evolution is one of the strongest and most useful scientific theories we have."

-- National Academy of Sciences

Several tons of evidences for evolution - National Academy of Sciences

Evidence Supporting Biological Evolution

I wrote this for some stupid fucking assholes, aka know-nothing creationist morons.

You science deniers need to read this. A little education won't kill you. Don't be afraid.

"Theory: In science, a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses. The contention that evolution should be taught as a "theory, not as a fact" confuses the common use of these words with the scientific use. In science, theories do not turn into facts through the accumulation of evidence. Rather, theories are the end points of science. They are understandings that develop from extensive observation, experimentation, and creative reflection. They incorporate a large body of scientific facts, laws, tested hypotheses, and logical inferences. In this sense, evolution is one of the strongest and most useful scientific theories we have."
-- National Academy of Sciences

I was looking at some of the other answers. There are a lot of people here who are uneducated and too lazy to look things up. They're going to waste their entire pathetic lives being completely wrong about everything. There is no cure. These people will never grow up.

This is for the anti-science bible-thumping American morons who repeatedly say "Evolution is just a theory". The stupid, it burns.

Google Search: Scientific theory

A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can be repeatedly tested and verified in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results.

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

"Theory: In science, a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses. The contention that evolution should be taught as a "theory, not as a fact" confuses the common use of these words with the scientific use. In science, theories do not turn into facts through the accumulation of evidence. Rather, theories are the end points of science. They are understandings that develop from extensive observation, experimentation, and creative reflection. They incorporate a large body of scientific facts, laws, tested hypotheses, and logical inferences. In this sense, evolution is one of the strongest and most useful scientific theories we have."
-- National Academy of Sciences

If you're a creationist fucktard, get off my planet you fucking moron.

Creationists sometimes claim that scientists have a vested interest in the concept of biological evolution and are unwilling to consider other possibilities. But this claim, too, misrepresents science. Scientists continually test their ideas against observations and submit their work to their colleagues for critical peer review of ideas, evidence, and conclusions before a scientific paper is published in any respected scientific journal. Unexplained observations are eagerly pursued because they can be signs of important new science or problems with an existing hypothesis or theory. History is replete with scientists challenging accepted theory by offering new evidence and more comprehensive explanations to account for natural phenomena. Also, science has a competitive element as well as a cooperative one. If one scientist clings to particular ideas despite evidence to the contrary, another scientist will attempt to replicate relevant experiments and will not hesitate to publish conflicting evidence. If there were serious problems in evolutionary science, many scientists would be eager to win fame by being the first to provide a better testable alternative. That there are no viable alternatives to evolution in the scientific literature is not because of vested interests or censorship but because evolution has been and continues to be solidly supported by evidence.

-- National Academy of Sciences

I found some more "Idiot America Stupidity". I wrote a few comments for the uneducated moron. Millions of god-soaked American fucktards agree with this know-nothing asshole.

The asshole for Jeebus complained about evolution and human-caused global warming. He prefers magical creationism. He doesn't know what a scientific theory is. And he thinks scientific facts are political ideas.

"In creation science versus Darwinism debates"

Magical creationism is not science.

Evolution is called "evolution", not Darwinism.

There is no debate. Evolution has been accepted as fact for more than a hundred years.

"Yet anyone who dares suggest that creationism is as much a viable theory as Darwinism is slapped down as dumb, illiterate or worse."

Amazing stupidity. Magical creationism is childish religious fantasy and it's not science. Evolution is the strongest fact of science. The person who wrote this nonsense should be ashamed of himself.

"The truth is that Darwinism is simply a theory." The moron doesn't even know what a scientific theory is.

"Theory: In science, a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses. The contention that evolution should be taught as a "theory, not as a fact" confuses the common use of these words with the scientific use. In science, theories do not turn into facts through the accumulation of evidence. Rather, theories are the end points of science. They are understandings that develop from extensive observation, experimentation, and creative reflection. They incorporate a large body of scientific facts, laws, tested hypotheses, and logical inferences. In this sense, evolution is one of the strongest and most useful scientific theories we have." -- National Academy of Sciences

"That makes the story of Adam and Eve feasible." Image the stupidity required to write about science and then invoke the adam/eve fantasy.

The person who wrote this nonsense is a know-nothing science denier. Evolution (the strongest fact of science) makes him cry.

Human-caused global warming makes this moron cry.

I never met a Christian who wasn't a stupid fucking asshole.

This is what a stupid fucking Christian asshole wrote:

All of that, but yet you can't see the fact that science still calls it a theory because they still have no more proof that darwin did.

As a matter of fact the DNA science is actually putting the final nails in that evolution theory. I stand ready for your dinosaur DNA explanation please explain. Accept the Lord Jesus Christ as your personal Savior and He will forgive you all of your sins. That guilty heavy heart of yours will be lifted and freed.

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

This is what I wrote for the stupid fucking asshole:

You don't know what you're talking about. You don't even know what a scientific theory is. Read this several times to help you understand:

"Theory: In science, a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses. The contention that evolution should be taught as a "theory, not as a fact" confuses the common use of these words with the scientific use. In science, theories do not turn into facts through the accumulation of evidence. Rather, theories are the end points of science. They are understandings that develop from extensive observation, experimentation, and creative reflection. They incorporate a large body of scientific facts, laws, tested hypotheses, and logical inferences. In this sense, evolution is one of the strongest and most useful scientific theories we have." -- National Academy of Sciences

Thanks for wasting my time. Why don't you look things up instead of making a fool out of yourself. Ask a child how to use Google then search for "Wikipedia evidence for evolution" and when you get there, stay there and learn something. There's about 100 links to more information that you know nothing about. Study the whole thing, and work hard to understand it. It will take you the rest of your life so you should start right now. Or does thinking make you cry?

And please take your Magic Jeebus Man and shove it somewhere. You people are disgusting. We would still be living in the Dark Ages if everyone was like you.

In Idiot America our idiots like to say "Evolution is just a theory". They don't understand what a scientific theory is, no matter how many times it's explained. Christians are fucking morons.

RationalWiki - Scientific theory

A scientific theory is nothing like a religious ‘theory’

"Theory: In science, a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses. The contention that evolution should be taught as a "theory, not as a fact" confuses the common use of these words with the scientific use. In science, theories do not turn into facts through the accumulation of evidence. Rather, theories are the end points of science. They are understandings that develop from extensive observation, experimentation, and creative reflection. They incorporate a large body of scientific facts, laws, tested hypotheses, and logical inferences. In this sense, evolution is one of the strongest and most useful scientific theories we have."
-- National Academy of Sciences

I showed this to a Christian and the asshole said the National Academy of Sciences is wrong, as if the most brilliant scientists in the world don't know anything about science.

I never met a Christian who wasn't a stupid fucking asshole.

National Academy of Sciences - Evolution

National Academy of Sciences

Today I'm reading some very interesting stuff about evolution at the National Academy of Sciences.

Evolution and the Nature of Science

Unfortunately, the National Academy of Sciences has decided to be very dishonest about something and there is no excuse for it.

They wrote ridiculous bullshit:

"Acceptance of the evidence for evolution can be compatible with religious faith."

In other words "Science can be compatible with insane bullshit."

I have a name for the idiots who sell this bullshit: "Atheist wimps", also "Fucking liars".

The idea is to suck up to insane Christian assholes who like to stick their Magic Jeebus Man into science. The National Academy of Sciences has decided dishonestly is a good thing.

The correct thing to do when writing about science is to completely ignore supernatural magical bullshit. I have zero respect for liars. There is no excuse for being dishonest.

This copy & paste job is about Idiot America's never ending war against teaching evolution. I never met a Christian who wasn't a stupid fucking asshole.

Everything here is from the National Academy of Sciences.

Legal Issues in Evolution

Since the 1925 trial of John Scopes, which investigated the legality of a Tennessee law that forbade the teaching in public schools of "any theory that denies the story of the Divine Creation of man as taught in the Bible," a number of court cases have looked at laws involving the teaching of creationist ideas. Several court decisions, including the 1987 Supreme Court case Edwards v. Aguillard and, more recently, the 2005 federal district court case (in central Pennsylvania) of Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, have ruled that the various forms of creationism, including intelligent design creationism, are religion, not science, and that it is therefore unconstitutional to include them in public school science classes.

U.S. law does not forbid the mention or study of religion as an academic subject in public schools, and creationism might be discussed in, for example, a comparative religion class. But, as civil servants, public school teachers must be neutral with respect to religion, which means that they can neither promote nor inhibit its practice. If intelligent design creationism were to be discussed in public school, then Hindu, Islamic, Native American, and other non-Christian creationist views, as well as mainstream religious views that are compatible with science, also should be discussed. Because the Constitution of the United States forbids a governmental establishment of religion, it would be inappropriate to use public funds to teach the views of just one religion or one religious subgroup to all students. Moreover, even in such a class it would be improper to teach these viewpoints as though they were scientific.

Excerpts From Three of the Most Prominent Evolution Cases

Supreme Court of the United States, Epperson v. Arkansas, 1968
"Government in our democracy, state and national, must be neutral in matters of religious theory, doctrine, and practice. It may not be hostile to any religion or to the advocacy of non-religion, and it may not aid, foster, or promote one religion or religious theory against another or even against the militant opposite."

Supreme Court of the United States, Edwards v. Aguillard, 1987
"[The] primary purpose [of the Louisiana 'Creation Act,' which required the teaching of 'creation science' together with evolution in public schools] was to change the public school science curriculum to provide persuasive advantage to a particular religious doctrine that rejects the factual basis of evolution in its entirety. Thus, the Act is designed either to promote the theory of creation science that embodies a particular religious tenet or to prohibit the teaching of a scientific theory disfavored by certain religious sects. In either case, the Act violates the First Amendment."

District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 2005
"[W]e find that ID [intelligent design] is not science and cannot be adjudged a valid, accepted scientific theory, as it has failed to publish in peer-reviewed journals, engage in research and testing, and gain acceptance in the scientific community. ID, as noted, is grounded in theology, not science". Moreover, ID's backers have sought to avoid the scientific scrutiny which we have now determined that it cannot withstand by advocating that the controversy, but not ID itself, should be taught in science class. This tactic is at best disingenuous, and at worst a canard. The goal of the IDM [intelligent design movement] is not to encourage critical thought, but to foment a revolution which would supplant evolutionary theory with ID."

Creationism and the Law

The National Center for Science Education provides an online resource with details on seventeen key cases, from Scopes to Selman, that made a difference in the evolution vs. creationism debate. Click on the name of a case to get a thorough summary; a list of source documents (typically PDFs, arranged in chronological order); and to relevant NCSE news stories, timelines, and presentations; and a selection of links to other sources. This resource is free and aimed at journalists, lawyers, school administrators, school boards, and anyone interested in the legal history of evolution, creationism, and public school science education.

Evolution and Creationism in Schools

The pressure to downplay evolution or emphasize nonscientific alternatives in public schools compromises science education.

Despite the lack of scientific evidence for creationist positions, some advocates continue to demand that various forms of creationism be taught together with or in place of evolution in science classes. Many teachers are under considerable pressure from policy makers, school administrators, parents, and students to downplay or eliminate the teaching of evolution. As a result, many U.S. students lack access to information and ideas that are both integral to modern science and essential for making informed, evidence-based decisions about their own lives and our collective future.

Regardless of the careers that they ultimately select, to succeed in today's scientifically and technologically sophisticated world, all students need a sound education in science. Many of today's fast-growing and high-paying jobs require a familiarity with the core concepts, applications, and implications of science. To make informed decisions about public policies, people need to know how scientific evidence supports those policies and whether that evidence was gathered using well-established scientific practice and principles. Learning about evolution is an excellent way to help students understand the nature, processes, and limits of science in addition to concepts about this fundamentally important contribution to scientific knowledge.

Given the importance of science in all aspects of modern life, the science curriculum should not be undermined with nonscientific material. Teaching creationist ideas in science classes confuses what constitutes science and what does not. It compromises the objectives of public education and the goal of a high-quality science education.

You want to click "Your Inner Fish". The videos are very interesting and very well done. It explains the "350 million years of evolution to produce the amazing machine we call the human body".

Your Inner Fish

In the News: Your Inner Fish – A Scientific Adventure



National Academy of Sciences

Have you ever wondered why people look the way they do? Why our hands and feet have five digits instead of six? Why we stand on two legs instead of four? It took 350 million years of evolution to produce the amazing machine we call the human body and in Your Inner Fish, a three-part series based on the best-selling book of the same name, author and evolutionary biologist Dr. Neil Shubin looks into the past to answer these and other questions.

Follow that adventure now on PBS

Darwin's Insights Continue to Inspire the Academy's Work

The ideas of Charles Darwin and the concept of evolution by natural selection continue to have a profound influence on modern biology – they permeate almost every area of scientific exploration. The Academies have long been involved in educational activities and publications on many aspects of evolution. For example, in 2008 the Academies published Science, Evolution, and Creationism, to help people who are interested in evolution better understand its underlying principles and how evolution is an integral component of scientific research and thinking.

In 2009 the National Academy of Sciences joined many other organizations in the international scientific community to celebrate the 'Year of Science,' which commemorated Darwin’s 200th birthday and the 150th anniversary of the publication of his masterwork On the Origin of Species. Information about some of the events we hosted as part of this celebration can be accessed through our event archive.

In 2010, the National Academy of Sciences awarded its most prestigious award, the Public Welfare Medal, to Dr. Eugenie Scott, Director of the National Center for Science Education, for her distinguished work to "…improve public understanding of both the nature of science and the science of evolution” (from comments by Dr. Ralph Cicerone, President, National Academy of Sciences during the presentation of the Public Welfare Medal).

In 2011, the Academies organized a convocation to bring together people from the life sciences community to explore ways to infuse concepts of evolution into all areas of biology education. Thinking Evolutionarily: Evolution Education Across the Life Sciences (2012) explains the major themes that recurred throughout the convocation held in Washington, D.C. They include the structure and content of curricula, the processes of teaching and learning about evolution, the tensions that can arise in the classroom, and the target audiences for evolution education. Videos from plenary sessions, interviews with participants, and resources from the convocation that led to this report may be accessed here.

In 2012 the Academies also released the report A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas as a first step toward developing the next generation of K-12 science education standards. The study of evolution is one of the themes running throughout this report with section LS4 focusing specifically on biological evolution. The Next Generation Science Standards were published in April 2013.

Research about evolution also has served as the basis for technical reports and research conferences that have been hosted by the National Academy of Sciences in past years. They include:

2008

Biogeography, Changing Climates and Niche Evolution

In the Light of Evolution, Volume II: Biodiversity and Extinction

Origin and Evolution of Earth: Research Questions for a Changing Planet

2009

In the Light of Evolution: Two Centuries of Darwin

Evolution in Health and Medicine

In the Light of Evolution: The Human Condition

Microbial Evolution and Co-Adaptation: A Tribute to the Life and Scientific

Legacies of Joshua Lederberg

2010

Understanding Climate's Influence on Human Evolution

2011

In the Light of Evolution: Cooperation

2012

In the Light of Evolution: Brain and Behavior

The Social Biology of Microbial Communities: Workshop Summary

National Summit on Strategies to Manage Herbicide-Resistant Weeds: Proceedings of a Symposium

The Human Microbiome, Diet, and Health: Workshop Summary

2013

In the Light of Evolution: Human Mental Machinery


Have you ever wondered why the human body looks the way it does? Why our hands have five fingers instead of six? Why we walk on two legs instead of four?

It took more than 350 million years for the human body to take shape. How did it become the complicated, quirky, amazing machine it is today?

Your Inner Fish delves deep into the past to answer these questions. The three-part series, which premiered April 9. 2014, reveals a startling truth: Hidden within the human body is a story of life on Earth.

That's because the evolution of humans can be traced into the distant past, to the earliest forms of vertebrate life on land and even to the earliest forms of life on Earth. Each of us carries the genetic imprint of creatures that lived hundreds of millions of years ago. From them, we inherited our most remarkable features — as well as quirks like bad backs and hernias.

The series is full of revelations that will surprise many viewers. Among the key insights: Our hands evolved from the fins of prehistoric fish. Our skin, hair and teeth can be traced to early reptiles. And our remarkable color vision is a legacy from ancient primates.

Based on a best-selling book by paleobiologist Neil Shubin, this scientific adventure story takes viewers from Ethiopia to the Arctic Circle on a hunt for the many ways that our animal ancestors shaped our anatomical destiny. Shubin has spent much of his life studying our ancient ancestors — searching for the deep pedigree of Homo sapiens. Using both the fossil record and DNA evidence, he traces various parts of our body's structure to creatures that lived long, long ago. Along the way, he makes it clear that we can thank our fishy origins for many human characteristics.

Endowed not just with scientific expertise, but also with natural wit and a talent for storytelling, Shubin puts all these discoveries in context. He travels from fossil-hunting expeditions in the Arctic to the deserts of Ethiopia and to the high plains of South Africa. And he reveals insights from scientists who have identified genes that we still have in common with distant forebears. He weaves together this information from past and present to demonstrate that we humans have a lot more in common than you might think with monkeys, reptiles and even fish.

The series is both an epic saga and a modern-day detective story — by turns surprising, funny and deeply profound. Come face-to-face with your "inner fish" in this completely new take on the human body. After seeing the world through Neil Shubin's eyes, you'll never look at yourself in quite the same way again!

The National Academy of Sciences

There is no scientific doubt about the close evolutionary relationships between humans and all other primates. Using the same scientific methods and tools that have been employed to study the evolution of other species, researchers have compiled a large and increasing number of fossil discoveries and compelling new molecular evidence that clearly indicate that the same forces responsible for the evolution of all other life forms on Earth account for the biological evolution of human characteristics.

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Based on the strength of evidence from DNA comparisons, the common ancestor of humans and chimpanzees lived approximately 6 to 7 million years ago in Africa. The evolutionary tree leading from this ancestral species to modern humans contains a number of side branches, representing populations and species that eventually went extinct. At various times in the past, the planet appears to have been populated by several human-like species.

I asked some Christian creationists (aka know-nothing anti-science fucktards) why they are too dense to understand what a scientific theory is.

Why do Christian creationists repeatedly say evolution is just a theory? Why can't they understand what a scientific theory is?

"Theory: In science, a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses. The contention that evolution should be taught as a "theory, not as a fact" confuses the common use of these words with the scientific use. In science, theories do not turn into facts through the accumulation of evidence. Rather, theories are the end points of science. They are understandings that develop from extensive observation, experimentation, and creative reflection. They incorporate a large body of scientific facts, laws, tested hypotheses, and logical inferences. In this sense, evolution is one of the strongest and most useful scientific theories we have."
-- National Academy of Sciences

••••••••••••••••••••••••••

6 answers from the fucktards. The usual bullshit. They're too dense to understand anything.

What some normal people wrote:

"They dismiss science - when you explain it to them, they dismiss it even more! It's just the way they are, they can't change."

"Willful ignorance. They would rather believe in fiction than science fact. What amuses me is how creationists with play word games, pick holes where none exist; even stamp their feet and push their fingers in their ears at the slightest mention of evolution. Yet they will accept a book which is known to be full of errors and contradictions also obvious fictions as if it were fact."

"They deliberately confuse the two meanings of the word Theory in order to try and undermine evolution. They are of course failing and doing themselves a disservice by making themselves look ignorant and foolish. Every educated person knows the difference between the two. It is a battle they lost a long time ago. The evidence for is overwhelming."

Something I wrote about Christian creationist fucktards in October 2011.

Do you want to know whether or not evolution is true, but you're too lazy to study the evidence or you're too stupid to understand the evidence?

Christians have a lot of problems. For example they're lazy and they're stupid.

Their laziness and stupidity can be a big problem if and when they want to make decisions about the truth of scientific facts like evolution.

Actually they already made their decision. Anything that conflicts with the childish bullshit in Genesis is wrong. Period. No need to study any scientific evidence because the magic god fairy is always right, and the magic god fairy wrote Genesis.

But just in case you're a Christian who is willing to question the bullshit called magical creationism but you're too stupid to understand evidence or too lazy to study it, this post is for you.

You should never have to trust anyone to accept the science of evolution because the evidence should be enough to convince any sane person. But if you're a lazy idiot you might have to decide who to trust. Do you trust your Baptist preacher who knows nothing about science or do you trust the National Academy of Sciences?

At the bottom of this post is some information from Wikipedia about the National Academy of Sciences. Please notice that 200 members have won a Nobel Prize. These are the best scientists in the world. Do you know any Baptist preachers who have won a Nobel Prize? I didn't think so.

So what does the National Academy of Sciences say about evolution? They say a lot including this stuff:

But today there is no scientific doubt about the close evolutionary relationships between humans and all other primates. Using the same scientific methods and tools that have been employed to study the evolution of other species, researchers have compiled a large and increasing number of fossil discoveries and compelling new molecular evidence that clearly indicate that the same forces responsible for the evolution of all other life forms on Earth account for the biological evolution of human characteristics.

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Based on the strength of evidence from DNA comparisons, the common ancestor of humans and chimpanzees lived approximately 6 to 7 million years ago in Africa. The evolutionary tree leading from this ancestral species to modern humans contains a number of side branches, representing populations and species that eventually went extinct. At various times in the past, the planet appears to have been populated by several human-like species.

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Please see Some quotes from the National Academy of Sciences for the rest of it.

You also might want to read Evolution deniers trust the results from paternity testing in humans. The same method is used to determine evolutionary relationships.

Now that you know what the best and most experienced scientists in the world say about evolution (they call it a basic scientific fact), what about your Alabama preacher who says the world's scientists are wrong about science?

Preacher Man: If something looks complicated then god magically created it out of nothing.

OK Christian tard, what's your decision? Since you're too lazy to study scientific evidence and since you're too stupid to understand anything, you're going to have to decide who to trust, the science deniers or the scientists.

Since you're a Christian you're a coward so you're probably going to go with whatever makes you feel good, whether or not it has anything to do with reality. Most likely you will choose to trust the breathtaking stupidity of your preacher man because the heaven fantasy he preaches is exactly what a gullible coward like you needs to keep from becoming even more mentally disturbed than you already are. Since evolution, also known as reality, kills the heaven fantasy, you're going to have to trust your worthless preacher so you can continue to hide in the Dark Ages.

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

As of spring 2009, the National Academy of Sciences included about 2,100 members and 380 foreign associates.[4] It employed about 1,100 staff in 2005.[5] The current members annually elect new members for life. Election to membership is one of the highest honors that can be accorded to a scientist and recognizes scientists who have made distinguished and continuing achievements in original research. Nearly 200 members have won a Nobel Prize.[4]

What I wrote at the Wall Street Journal about Vice President Pence (aka bible thumping fucktard).

Wall Street Journal: With Evangelicals Behind Him, Vice President Mike Pence Takes Prominent Role in Foreign Policy

"When Pence was a congressman he gave a ridiculous speech about why evolution is wrong. Pence was attacking science to defend his childish magical creationism fantasy. Pence is a bible-thumping anti-science idiot. So of course Evangelical idiots like him."

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Here is Pence's speech. He's a typical know-nothing asshole for Jeebus. Science makes this fucking moron cry.

Congressional Record

Proceedings and debates of the United States Congress

July 11, 2002
107th Congress, 2nd Session
Issue: Vol. 148, No. 93 — Daily Edition

THEORY OF THE ORIGIN OF MAN The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Jeff Miller of Florida). Under a previous order of the House, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence) is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, I have always been interested in origins. Even though my training is in the law and in history, it has ever been an avocation of mine to contemplate and to study the origins of man and of life here on Earth.

Many theories of origins have been propounded throughout our Nation's history. In 1859, a sincere biologist returned from the Galapagos Islands and wrote a book entitled "The Origins of Species,'' in which Charles Darwin offered a theory of the origin of species which we have come to know as evolution. Charles Darwin never thought of evolution as anything other than a theory. He hoped that some day it would be proven by the fossil record but did not live to see that, nor have we.

In 1925 in the famous Scopes Monkey Trial, this theory made its way through litigation into the classrooms of America, and we have all seen the consequences over the last 77 years: evolution not taught as a sincere theory of a biologist, but rather, Mr. Speaker, taught as fact. Unless anyone listening in would doubt that, we can all see in our mind's eye that grade school classroom that we all grew up in with the linear depiction of evolution just above the chalkboard. There is the monkey crawling on the grass. There is the Neanderthal dragging his knuckles and then there is Mel Gibson standing in all of his glory.

It is what we have been taught, that man proceeded and evolved along linear lines. But now comes a new find by paleontologists. In the newspapers all across America, a new study in "Nature" magazine, 6- to 7-million-year-old skull has been unearthed, the Toumai skull and it suggests that human evolution was actually, according to a new theory, human evolution was taking place, and I am quoting now, "all across Africa and the Earth,'' and the Earth was once truly, and I quote, "a planet of the apes on which nature was experimenting with many human-like creatures.''

Paleontologists are excited about this, Mr. Speaker. But no one is pointing out that the textbooks will need to be changed because the old theory of evolution taught for 77 years in the classrooms of America as fact is suddenly replaced by a new theory, or I hasten to add, I am sure we will be told a new fact.

The truth is it always was a theory, Mr. Speaker. And now that we have recognized evolution as a theory, I would simply and humbly ask, can we teach it as such and can we also consider teaching other theories of the origin of species? Like the theory that was believed in by every signer of the Declaration of Independence. Every signer of the Declaration of Independence believed that men and women were created and were endowed by that same Creator with certain unalienable rights. The Bible tells us that God created man in his own image, male and female. He created them. And I believe that, Mr. Speaker.

I believe that God created the known universe, the Earth and everything in it, including man. And I also believe that someday scientists will come to see that only the theory of intelligent design provides even a remotely rationale explanation for the known universe. But until that day comes, and I have no fear of science, I believe that the more we study the science, the more the truth of faith will become apparent. I would just humbly ask as new theories of evolution find their ways into the newspapers and into the textbooks, let us demand that educators around America teach evolution not as fact, but as theory, and an interesting theory to boot. But let us also bring into the minds of all of our children all of the theories about the unknowable that some bright day in the future through science and perhaps through faith we will find the truth from whence we come.

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

"Theory: In science, a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses. The contention that evolution should be taught as a "theory, not as a fact" confuses the common use of these words with the scientific use. In science, theories do not turn into facts through the accumulation of evidence. Rather, theories are the end points of science. They are understandings that develop from extensive observation, experimentation, and creative reflection. They incorporate a large body of scientific facts, laws, tested hypotheses, and logical inferences. In this sense, evolution is one of the strongest and most useful scientific theories we have."
-- National Academy of Sciences

If Trump is impeached he will be replaced with the fucking retard who said this:

"I believe that God created the known universe, the Earth and everything in it, including man."

Let's throw out several centuries of scientific progress because the Magic Man did it.

What a stupid fucking asshole.

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

“Evolution Is Just A Theory” – Mike Pence Argues To Congress

In Idiot America our bible-thumpers think all scientists are liars. I'm not making this up. I never met a Christian who wasn't a stupid fucking asshole.

"Creationists sometimes claim that scientists have a vested interest in the concept of biological evolution and are unwilling to consider other possibilities. But this claim, too, misrepresents science. Scientists continually test their ideas against observations and submit their work to their colleagues for critical peer review of ideas, evidence, and conclusions before a scientific paper is published in any respected scientific journal. Unexplained observations are eagerly pursued because they can be signs of important new science or problems with an existing hypothesis or theory. History is replete with scientists challenging accepted theory by offering new evidence and more comprehensive explanations to account for natural phenomena. Also, science has a competitive element as well as a cooperative one. If one scientist clings to particular ideas despite evidence to the contrary, another scientist will attempt to replicate relevant experiments and will not hesitate to publish conflicting evidence. If there were serious problems in evolutionary science, many scientists would be eager to win fame by being the first to provide a better testable alternative. That there are no viable alternatives to evolution in the scientific literature is not because of vested interests or censorship but because evolution has been and continues to be solidly supported by evidence."

-- The National Academy of Sciences

Basic facts of science make Christians cry.

In Idiot America our Christian fucktards think there is some debate about the established truth of evolution. Just because they think there's a debate doesn't mean there's a debate. It only means Christians are uneducated morons.

"Scientists no longer question the basic facts of evolution. The concept has withstood extensive testing by tens of thousands of specialists in biology, medicine, anthropology, geology, chemistry, and other fields. Discoveries in different fields have reinforced one another, and evidence for evolution has continued to accumulate for 150 years."

-- National Academy of Sciences

One of the millions of idiots who infest Idiot America asked an idiotic question.

"Why do evolutionists act like a theory is a LAW? It's not a law until it's been proven to be a fact."

You have a few problems.

1. Biologists are called "biologists", not "evolutionists".

2. You don't know what a scientific theory is.

"Theory: In science, a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses. The contention that evolution should be taught as a "theory, not as a fact" confuses the common use of these words with the scientific use. In science, theories do not turn into facts through the accumulation of evidence. Rather, theories are the end points of science. They are understandings that develop from extensive observation, experimentation, and creative reflection. They incorporate a large body of scientific facts, laws, tested hypotheses, and logical inferences. In this sense, evolution is one of the strongest and most useful scientific theories we have."
-- National Academy of Sciences

3. You don't know what a scientific fact is.

"Scientists most often use the word 'fact' to describe an observation. But scientists can also use fact to mean something that has been tested or observed so many times that there is no longer a compelling reason to keep testing or looking for examples. The occurrence of evolution in this sense is a fact. Scientists no longer question whether descent with modification occurred because the evidence supporting the idea is so strong."
-- The National Academy of Sciences

One more thing:

Evolution is the strongest fact of science. If you ever in your life want to educate yourself instead of making a fool out of yourself, go here and study it: Google "wikipedia evidence for evolution". It would take you more than a lifetime to study the whole thing.

But you would rather be a know-nothing science denier. Nobody cares. It's your wasted life.

In closing, drop dead retard.

The National Academy of Sciences - 36 pages about the evidence for evolution and why the childish magical creationism fantasy is bullshit.

Science and Creationism, A View from the National Academy of Sciences