Details

June 9
Link

Statistics

Replies: 160

So, a US representative does not believe in science, and she reflects her constituents.

:iconreptilliansp2011:
ReptillianSP2011 Featured By Owner Edited Jun 9, 2021  Student General Artist
As of recent, she "who must be not be named" has admitted to believing that evolution is a lie and she had been voted by her district in Georgia. All admitted on tape. And I won't share those sources as I am not interested into peddling her bullshit. That being said, what do you make of this. If you want to search for a video, she gotten the majority of the votes in Georgia district 14, and type that, then type in evolution. Another hint would her initials is of a famous card game.
Reply

Devious Comments (Add yours)

:iconjustalittleamerican:
JustALittleAmerican Featured By Owner 6 days ago  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
I have no idea what your talking about at all, you really need to add some links. 
Also I wanted to mention that I myself actually don't believe in evolution. I mean, monkeys and humans exist at the same time lol.
What I mean is, animals that have been around as long as us haven't changed at all, and scientists just keep pushing back how long it's been more and more, it's getting weird tired some.
Reply
:icondoctorv23:
DoctorV23 Featured By Owner Jun 10, 2021
One word: qualifications?
Reply
:iconreptilliansp2011:
ReptillianSP2011 Featured By Owner Edited Jun 10, 2021  Student General Artist
Qualifications would be great. But as US as it is now: You can ask Bureau of Land Management to move the moon and still get voted in. See the dumbest congressman in America. He has (R-TX) next to his name, no need to say more.
Reply
:icondoctorv23:
DoctorV23 Featured By Owner 6 days ago
Yeah, saw that too, :lol: !
Reply
:iconsaeter:
Saeter Featured By Owner 6 days ago
Didn't he also claim that a certain bill would force people into Hobbit Holes? Or am I thinking of a different republican moron?
Reply
:icondumbledoreaskedcalm:
DumbledoreAskedCalm Featured By Owner 6 days ago
I want to live like Bilbo though!
Reply
:iconiamaclaesandihateit:
IAmAClaesAndIhateIt Featured By Owner Jun 10, 2021
Truly a foundation for a prospering society.
Reply
:iconthe-venturers:
The-Venturers Featured By Owner Jun 10, 2021
How is it anti-science when there are Christian scientists who aren't afraid to learn outside of the box?  
Reply
:iconhobby-crafts:
Hobby-Crafts Featured By Owner 6 days ago  Hobbyist General Artist
Depends on what kind of science. A lot of general scientists like physicists become interested in mysticism or mystics and social scientists become religious or priests.

On a higher level, religion is not at odds with science, you could call it a meta-science if you will. There are dimensions that happen that cannot be explained away with the intellect. Dimensions what other people feel and experience that are beyond the physical and the ordinary. 

The scientifically minded are of a particular mindset and intellect. But that is not the only way reality can be perceived. 
Reply
:iconthe-venturers:
The-Venturers Featured By Owner 6 days ago
The phrase "according to its kind" occurs repeatedly, stressing the reproductive integrity of each kind of animal and plant. Today we understand that this occurs because all these reproductive systems are programmed by their genetic codes. But to explain a helix curve to someone before the science caught up to the lesson would not have been really possible.

The great biological truth concerning the importance of blood in our body's mechanism has been fully comprehended only in recent years. Up until 120 years ago, sick people were "bled," and many died because blood carries an incredible amount of information about the health of the flesh. The Book of Leviticus, written 1400 B.C., declared that blood is the source of life: "For the life of the flesh is in the blood" (17:11). The blood carries water and nourishment to every cell, maintains the the body's temperature, and removes the waste material of the body's cells. it also carries oxygen from the lungs throughout the body. In 1616, William Harvey discovered that blood circulation s the key factor in physical life--confirming what the Bible revealed 3,000 years earlier.
Blood is far more complex and has far more to do with life than science ever imagined. About 55% of the blood is composed of plasma. The rest is made of 3 major types of cells: red blood cells (erythrocytes), white blood cells (leukocytes), and platelets (thrombocytes). Plasma consists predominantly of water and salts. the kidneys carefully maintain the salt concentration will cause cells in the body to function improperly. In extreme conditions this can result in death.
Look at how the blood affects the flesh: Antibodies in the blood neutralize or help destroy infectious organisms. Each antibody is designed to target one specific invading organism. For example, chicken pox antibody will target chicken pox virus, but will leave the influenza virus unharmed.  There is no better way o describe the function of blood in relation to the human body that to say, "The life of the flesh is in the blood." Given the times.
Reply
:iconhobby-crafts:
Hobby-Crafts Featured By Owner 4 days ago  Hobbyist General Artist
Yeah but religious language is off putting and intimating, it needs to update and get with the times :( ..
Other than that, can't really argue with you..
Reply
:iconouroboroscobra:
OuroborosCobra Featured By Owner 6 days ago
There are far, far, faaaaaaaar more scientists identifying as Christian who follow the data and evidence that support the fact that evolution is real than there are scientists identifying as Christian who stick their fingers in their ears real loud while shouting "THERE IS NO EVOLUTION," or "thinking outside the box," as you called it.
Reply
:iconreptilliansp2011:
ReptillianSP2011 Featured By Owner Jun 10, 2021  Student General Artist
Evolution has been confirmed to be valid, and valid to the point where it is basically a law at this point. No evidence against it has been found.
Reply
:iconthe-venturers:
Just because man makes something into law, doesn't make it right, do you agree?

What is the evidence for it? 
Reply
:iconrawanxiety:
RawAnxiety Featured By Owner 6 days ago  New Deviant
Just as something isn't right just because it's in an old book. 
Reply
:iconthe-venturers:
The-Venturers Featured By Owner 6 days ago
Yet many respected colleges still teach the words recorded of ancient history and philosophers...even courses in the bible. 

"Those Who Do Not Learn History Are Doomed To Repeat It."
Reply
:iconrawanxiety:
RawAnxiety Featured By Owner 6 days ago  New Deviant
There's studying history, and there's willingness to follow a text to the death.
Reply
:iconthe-venturers:
The-Venturers Featured By Owner 6 days ago
This is how those scientists, who aren't committed to denying God religiously, often go towards being agnostic or Christian after reaching a certain level of understanding.
Reply
:iconouroboroscobra:
OuroborosCobra Featured By Owner 6 days ago
What would you find acceptable as evidence? Molecular genomics? Phenotypical data? Phylogenetics? Endogenous retrovirus sequences? Contemporariously bbserved ring speciation?

There's tons and tons of evidence, so before I take the time to write you something longer than a PhD dissertation, please tell me what you'd like to see.
Reply
:iconthe-venturers:
The-Venturers Featured By Owner 6 days ago

"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." ~Albert Einstein

Something like; "why would evolution process evolve to require a male and female to reproduce? Because that is how they where initially added to the world, surrounded by the food and resources necessary to sustain themselves."  Or even, "the birds came first and not the egg, because one needed to fertilize the egg, other needed to lay it."



Reply
:iconouroboroscobra:
OuroborosCobra Featured By Owner 6 days ago
“I think I can safely say that nobody really understands quantum mechanics” - Richard Feynman
Einstein spent the last few years of his career trying to disprove parts of his own theories because they didn't seem "simple" to him. Further experimentation has found that Einstein's theories, including those he tried to disprove because he didn't like their lack of simplicity and elegance, were accurate. So no, you don't get to discount the huge amounts of evidence for evolution by quote mining an axiom that represents Einstein's greatest failing as a scientist.
- "why would evolution process evolve to require a male and female to reproduce?"
It doesn't. Evolution does not require a male and female in order to reproduce. Most organisms on the planet do not reproduce sexually. Most bacteria, for example, reproduce via binary fission. However, in eukaryotes, crossover events during meiosis and allele mixing during sexual reproduction result in greater genetic variation in offspring. As a result, successive generations have greater capacity to change and adapt to their surroundings, especially if those surrounding conditions are themselves changing (a climate shift from a lush forest to a dry desert, for example). As a result, natural selection favors organisms with this ability to adapt to new conditions quickly, and sexual reproduction does this better than binary fission or mitosis.
Bacteria are able to get away with not doing this because the timespan of generations is so small. Where humans require decades from birth, to reaching sexual maturity, to finding a mate, to reproducing (and even take 9 months in gestation), successive bacteria generations can take place in a matter of minutes (E. coli is 20 minutes, for example). This means that, while depending on a much slower genetic variation afforded to them by mutation during binary fission, over a timespan of weeks or years, they can have an adaptability similar to organisms with sexual reproduction over the same timespan.
-"Because that is how they where initially added to the world, surrounded by the food and resources necessary to sustain themselves."
No, they weren't. Rather, organisms would have gone from binary fission to mitosis, itself a long process of successive generations and evolution, as endosymbiotic bacteria within a larger bacteria resulted in eukaryotes evolving from prokaryotes. In fact, this is one of the pieces of evidence for evolution; your mitochondrial DNA greatly resembles the genetic code of bacteria. This is to the point that the triplet codon language used in mitochondria to code for amino acids follows the "language" (it isn't a language, but rather just a series of chemical reactions and hydrogen bonding patterns) for amino acid coding in bacteria. It doesn't match the codon sequences used for amino acids in your cell nucleus. That's because mitochondria organelles are the result of endosymbiosis of bacteria into a larger cell.
So, we get mitosis after this endosymbiosis takes place. Mitosis has various advantages over binary fission. Sexual reproduction came later. I have a feeling I've already overwhelmed you, so I'd like to see your response to all this before I continue.
"the birds came first and not the egg, because one needed to fertilize the egg, other needed to lay it."
Nope. Not how it works. Which came first, you or your mother? Your mother came first, but you are genetically distinct from your mother. You did not need a "you" to create you.
Reply
:iconreptilliansp2011:
ReptillianSP2011 Featured By Owner 6 days ago  Student General Artist
And yet The-Venturers ignored your response with ad-hoc reasoning. By the way, thank you for doing this, I was gonna try, but thank you.
Reply
:iconthe-venturers:
The-Venturers Featured By Owner Edited 6 days ago
Again that strengthens my point, those that require male and female to reproduce where introduced by those means. Bacteria and amoeba wouldn't evolve into something that required a male and female. There is no evidence of evolution, we never change our "kinds" as the bible explains. Dogs remain dogs, humans remain humans, birds remain birds....none of them can turn into the other. Yet each can adapt to their environment, to make other breeds of the same kind.
Reply
:iconouroboroscobra:
OuroborosCobra Featured By Owner 6 days ago
No, they weren't. I literally described to you how they were not "introduced by those means"
I literally described the process that sexual reproduction evolved WITHOUT "being introduced by those means"
Go back and re-read it. I will not be re-writing it, since you chose to intentionally not read it the first time.
" Bacteria and amoeba wouldn't evolve into something that required a male and female."
Why not? I literally described why they would do so, and why it was advantageous for them to do so. Again, your failure to read it is not a lack of evidence. You put your fingers in your ears and shouted real loud, rather than actually try and learn something.
"There is no evidence of evolution, we never change our "kinds" as the bible explains."
I listed multiple pieces of evidence. Also, ring speciation is a thing we have observed, so no, your biblical "kinds," which doesn't even have a definition within the Bible, is no limitation.
"Dogs remain dogs, humans remain humans, birds remain birds....none of them can turn into the other."
Evolution does not say that a dog should ever become a bird. You are arguing against a claim that evolution does not make. In fact, a dog becoming a bird would actually disprove evolution. It is not a prediction made by evolution.
That you are ignorant on what the evolutionary model describes is your failing alone, and not that of anyone else.
You literally pulled a crocoduck.
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconrawanxiety:
RawAnxiety Featured By Owner 6 days ago  New Deviant
What "Kind" is a platypus then? 
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconrawanxiety:
RawAnxiety Featured By Owner 6 days ago  New Deviant
Einstein was brilliant at physics. He's not the final word on all fields of study. 
Reply
:iconthe-venturers:
The-Venturers Featured By Owner 6 days ago
His quote was shared to express there isn't a need for a long winded explanation on something, if you know it well enough to make your point by a simple means.
Reply
:iconrawanxiety:
RawAnxiety Featured By Owner 6 days ago  New Deviant
Yes, actually, sometimes there IS.
If science was easy, everyone would be making breakthroughs.
Reply
:iconagoraphobichobo:
AgoraphobicHobo Featured By Owner Jun 10, 2021
Honestly? The amount of "I don't believe in evolution" bullshit has taken a plunge, as the people who peddled it found better grifts. General conspiracy theory bullshit works better for them, honestly, because that can be directed at their political enemies easier. 
Reply
:iconhobby-crafts:
Hobby-Crafts Featured By Owner Edited Jun 10, 2021  Hobbyist General Artist
I use to think evolution is bullshit as well, but my ideas have changed. I don't believe in the whole science fantasy part of it, but do I think the plants we have today are different from the plants we had 100 million+ years ago, definitely, will the plants we have today look different 100 million years from now, the universe isn't set to stay the same. From the beginning of creation it is set to evolve.
Reply
:iconshadowstalker55:
Unfortunately, the Republican party seems to be really pandering to regressive uneducated nitwits and plebeians. It also wouldn't surprise me that stupid cow also believes the Earth is flat.

And as far as her name goes...
memecrunch.com/meme/97GN1/the-…
Reply
:iconnervene:
nervene Featured By Owner Jun 9, 2021
I wouldn't be surprised if Republicans only had accepted mathematics within the past 40 years
Reply
:iconagoraphobichobo:
AgoraphobicHobo Featured By Owner Jun 10, 2021
You've never heard of the Pi is exactly 3 bills? Now, it hasn't come up in ten years, or so, but it's been a recurring thing that pops up every now and again because some asshole gets it in their craw that the Bible presents some really bad math for a circle at one point. 
Reply
:iconnervene:
nervene Featured By Owner Jun 10, 2021
It's fake, but feels more plausible now than ever, given that our last president seriously discussed the possibility of injecting disinfectant or using UV light inside of the body to destroy CoV2, or... anything Marjorie Taylor Greene says.
Reply
:iconagoraphobichobo:
AgoraphobicHobo Featured By Owner 6 days ago
,
Ahh, well, that makes me feel better. There have been efforts to define Pi as exactly 3, but they all failed miserably.
Reply
:iconragerancher:
Ragerancher Featured By Owner Jun 10, 2021
Yeah as soon as they saw the count on Sesame Street they were like "Aw hell naw! not having my kid being brainwashed by that foreigner tryna teach them stuff! He's foreign so it can't be true! Watch Bibleman instead!"

www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxwJ4c…
Reply
:iconnervene:
nervene Featured By Owner Jun 10, 2021
Oh christ. Literally.
Reply
:iconjasesaster:
Jasesaster Featured By Owner Jun 9, 2021  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Not surprised in the slightest.

Ever since I heard of that creature. I feel bad for republican voters actually falling for this bullshit.
Reply
:iconscottahemi:
ScottaHemi Featured By Owner Jun 9, 2021  Hobbyist Digital Artist
lol ok dude xD 

take a chill pill. 
Reply
:iconreptilliansp2011:
ReptillianSP2011 Featured By Owner Jun 9, 2021  Student General Artist
I am chill. Merely pointing out that anti-science stance is an agenda of a significant number of (R).
Reply
:iconloloalien:
LoloAlien Featured By Owner Jun 9, 2021  Hobbyist General Artist
221 Democrats in the House of Representatives do not believe in science. 
Reply
:iconragerancher:
Ragerancher Featured By Owner Jun 10, 2021
Of course you have evidence to support this right? Not wild supposition?
Reply
:iconreptilliansp2011:
ReptillianSP2011 Featured By Owner Jun 9, 2021  Student General Artist
That's a bold claim, can you provide the evidence for this or it is a lie? It's a lie.
Reply
:iconloloalien:
LoloAlien Featured By Owner Jun 10, 2021  Hobbyist General Artist
You provided no evidence so I not going to either.  So your post is a lie? 
Reply
:iconreptilliansp2011:
ReptillianSP2011 Featured By Owner Jun 10, 2021  Student General Artist
No interest in peddling her bullshit. I provided details on how to find her video.
Reply
:iconwolfworths15menkey:
wolfworths15menkey Featured By Owner Jun 10, 2021
http://www.christianitydaily.com/articles/11795/20210510/house-democrats-ignore-science-to-claim-reproduction-is-for-every-body-not-just-women-and-mothers.htm
Reply
:iconreptilliansp2011:
ReptillianSP2011 Featured By Owner Jun 10, 2021  Student General Artist
From a Christian site or better yet, a site known to peddle magic and fantasies.
Reply
:iconwolfworths15menkey:
wolfworths15menkey Featured By Owner Jun 10, 2021
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/jan/3/house-democrats-open-117th-congress-prayer-ending-/
Reply
:iconreptilliansp2011:
ReptillianSP2011 Featured By Owner Jun 10, 2021  Student General Artist
That link is from a propaganda link -

mediabiasfactcheck.com/washing…
Reply
(1 Reply)
Add a Comment: