Why Evolution is a Crock

Day four he created snipers and they shot all the snipes, making them extinct. The telescopic sight he made out of rubble, so he decided to call it the Rubble Telescope.

Well, I still say that Alley oop riding his pet dinosaur makes for better historical accuracy than anything Darwin did or said.

The basic idea would be to create an ideological doctrine (evolution) so unfathomably stupid and so contrary to all available evidence, that no rational person could possibly feel sorry for anybody who bought off on it. In other words a sort of a very rough strainer which only need separate wheat from boulders more or less.

Give that man a cigar!

The proof against evolution is right here at A2K -- the serpent from Genesis is obviously about 6,000 years old and has hardly evolved at all, taking on a surname copied from Kipling and trying to get everyone to bite into an apple with a worm in it. Actually he's a big fat worm disguised as a Ford sports car hood ornament.

Finally, a thread that makes Gunga sound like a genius.

Salesmen sometimes do that in fact, i.e. deliberately tell a customer a lie so ridiculous that they couldn't feel sorry for them if they bought it.

I think gunga is going to keep me thinking straight, guys.

I don't believe the snake realizes this is satire, typical of a closed mind.

Satire. Isn't that one of those thingies from mythology?

I thought "Evilution" might have given it away but I guess that could be interpreted as a typo, like Unintelligible Design.

I'm with Pat Robertson who thinks the Evilutionary Church should be taxed as it hasn't filed as a religion.

This thread is satire?

Well, it's also "Praise Jesus" and there hasn't been enough of that. Mel Gibson sort of put the kibosh on that since he put everything in his movie except for "Braise Jesus."

Pope Edgar,

What about devolution? Will my grandkids be tadpole-ish? Should I dig a big frog pond just in case?

Chumley
Ain't them things gills growing next to your ears? I think you will have your answer soon enough.

Satire is a rhetorical device at the bottom end of the techniques of coercion and is effective in proportion to its station in that hierarchy. It is a form of punishment intended to coerce people into suppressing behaviour which the punisher, the controller, disapproves of. It is an attempt to reduce or eradicate freedom and dignity. It is not unlike the threat of hell-fire.

Why the behaviour is not approved of by the controller is a complex matter but in a debate satire is resorted to through criticism, ridicule, sarcasm and occasionally wit when the opponent is viewed as dangerous and, as such, a compliment to the opponent.

When the person at whom it is directed shows no sign of altering his behaviour after repeated ministrations of the punishment it is quite obvious that the effort is futile and comes to merely represent a need of the controller to exercise this skill, if it may be called a skill, for its own sake. Rather like some people take to bnging their head against a wall when their need to control is frustrated by the instransigence of the object they seek to direct.

There is nothing mythological about it. It has been well studied in modern behavioural science. And laughed at by students of irony all down the foggy ruins of time from which we have somehow found our way to the point we are now located.

(I use the word "now" to denote that passing moment when the word is read in this context.)

Yes, satire, as in holding up human vices and follies to ridicule or scorn, and trenchant wit, irony, or sarcasm used to expose and discredit the vices or follies of trolls and snakes.

As in "Animal Farm" by Orwell, " "Candide" by Voltaire and "Gulliver's Travels" by Jonathan Swift but you, of course, already knew that unlike the befuddled mind who can't help sticking his blunt little troll nose into everything.

The Democratic aministration in Washington has taken steps to allow for stem cell research. A clear example of how the rejecting of ID robs our moral compass, allowing for Frankenstein inspired experimentation with dead babies. They will want more and more murdered children to feed a cottage industry that produces nothing valuable in their cultlike pursuit of money and power.

It is considered on topic and relevant to comment on posts on a thread. The subject of satire was raised and explaining its behavioural motivations, even cursorily, is useful to readers here and one of the important functions of A2K.

The irony consists in the putative controllers using this cheapskate method of attempted coercion in order to displace levels of coercion and control they feel themselves subjected to. Which is of course, in the nature of the case, considerable.

It is well known that snotty-nosed, snivelling, sarcastic satirists, especially those who eschew wit of even the feeblest sort, probably have a nagging to put up with in their daily lives. So what better for an object of their attempted coercion that one who it has no effect upon as that enables them to displace their frustration, in the manner a heat sink does, for ever and ever.

It is necessary when holding up vices and follies to scorn to show that they are actually vices and follies rather than simply asserting that they are and defining them oneself and, what is far worse, gratuitously assuming that everyone is in agreement with such subjective and solipsistic definitions. If everyone was in agreement the exercise would have no point.

As modern behavioual science is far more difficult to understand than evolution theory, which any plonker can grasp after five minutes, it is to be expected that experts in the latter will have been avoiding studying it.

It probably scares them too.

I'm waiting for one of those stem cells to throw a small child into a lake.