NEWS: Asshole Fuckface Roundup #37

To be fair, I read in one article that she didn't sit on the toilet the whole time. She just, kinda, lived in the bathroom. She showered, her boyfriend brought her changes of clothes, she would get up and walk around. It was only in the last month/s that she took to sitting on the pot and refusing to move, which is when he finally decided something needed to be done. Her legs did atrophy, from what I read. In my completely unqualified medical opinion, it sounds like an extreme case of agoraphobia to me.

More detailed article, that people seem to be overlooking in favor of the more sensational version.

I'd take you more seriously if it weren't for the following.:

>therory
OK, could be a simple typo, but you do it twice.

>matter of mact some heve
'm' isn't close to 'f' on either QWERTY or Dvorak keyboards. However, it is a matter of fact that some heave (and I feel a good puking coming on right now ...).

>peltdown
Is that a cross between an animal pelt and goose down? Maybe you are thinking of WWW "smack-down", or perhaps are heading towards a meltdown.

>falsifed
How do you pronounce that? "Fall-siffed"

> In any other Scientific study it would not be stated as a fact untill proven

OK, where to start?
Why did you capitalize 'Scientific'? "Untill"?

Also, it seems your entire premise is wrong. The scientific method is a never-ending process of further refining theories so they better match with observed reality.

For instance, the standard model of quantum field theory is the best we can come up with at present to describe things on very small scales, and describes reality sufficiently well for us to build lasers (and hence, CD/DVD players, and bar code scanners), and an entire range of electronic devices.

Problem is, nobody knows exactly how it works, or how it ties into "big picture", relativistic theories (which are also not completely understood). I suspect none of these things have been 'proven' to you in the context of your remarks.

> What is the point here
I was wondering the same thing.

> A lot of science is taken of faith, ones religion.
I think you may have meant, "A lot of science is taken on faith; one's religion.

> Carl Sagan a well known scientist believed in a creator, just by his study of the heavens.

I believe you are shy a couple of commas, and the one you did use isn't where it ought to be, but we'll let it pass. Here is something Carl Sagan did say on the subject.

This isn't to say spirituality and religion have no place in a scientist's life or world view. However, it cannot over-ride experimental observations, calculations, and other tools in the process of refining our theories.

Substituting wishful thinking in lieu of hard-won understanding is no substitute at all.

> The Truth is out there.
Yes, and it shall set you free.

So how does a nap-nazi like this, get a job in a public school? How is it he kept his job after this? Why is it, that it took a lawsuit to bring this to light?

You seem to have swallowed whole, the ignorant diatrab of Christain Fundamentalists, who pathetically try to debunk evolution without actually examining the facts.

The evidence does indeed support evolution.

Science deals in facts... theories are built upon these facts. One of the huge differentences between science and fundamentalist religion is... science will revise theories based on new evidence, religion clings to aniquated ideas regardless of the evidence.

But let's say faith-based answers on science exams, be considered acceptable. There are many religions out there besides Christianity, each with their own theories of creation and cosmology. Will the faith-based answers corresponding to these religions also be acceptable to you? Or only the one's that agree with your book of fables?

I believe he did everything and is responsible for everything. I just answered every question on every test possible. Where's my fucking Nobel prize for being such a super-genius?!?!?!?

So how about Seacrest?

"Ness County Sheriff Bryan Whipple said it appeared the 35-year-old Ness City woman's skin had grown around the seat."






this HAS to be turned into a horror movie somehow.

"Her skin kept growing, until it fully engulfed the toilet."

Wasn't this a mid-period Stephen King short-story?

Here ya go...

how nice would it be if we could bring charles darwin and thomas jefferson back for an informative afternoon seminar? attendance would be compulsory for our politicians but we could televise it for all other interested parties. of course, bringing them back from the dead may give the 'dinosaurs are a trick of the devil' crowd the illusion of credence.

So...

After the axing of all my favorite SG writers, months of some of the most mind-numbing and generic trolling I've ever seen, somebody manages to drag "durrr i eet poop and think erth is six thowsend yeers and caant reed sience goode" into a thread where it is utterly off-topic.

THANKS TROLL YOUR TREASURE IN HEAVEN AWAITS THEE

So, what's your favorite therory, bro?

I like the therorys of beer and pie.

i think when he said "therory," he meant THE 'one true' rory and we should hold no other rorys before him.

I so want that to be filled with chocolate.

There is no Rory. It is a myth devised to keep Luxumbergundian bankers from losing hope. If there ever was a Rory, he was a simple bank manager who had the idea to start Casual Fridays.

It's not really that off topic. That kind of nonsense is exactly what that woman is trying to make acceptable in schools.

Unfortunately, what Mankarlen wrote was completely on-topic, is what set me off, and why we all should be concerned.

I pondered the possibility Mankarlen is thoughtful and intelligent, but simply cannot spell very well, and I've met several people over the years who were in the same boat. I tend to reject this as an explanation, however, in light of other tell-tale signs including poor sentence construction, and the conflation of geology and evolution.

There is nothing wrong with a person integrating their belief system into what they learn about the world and science. What is wrong is integrating a religious belief system into the educational system's syllabus and testing systems, and that seems to be an intended by-product of this legislation.

Over the years I've had fascinating discussions with religious people that have informed and extended my viewpoints, and, hopefully, my views have had the same effect on theirs.

Legislating religion is one hell of a slippery slope to be playing with, and reading the full text of Oklahoma's HB 2211 did little to put my mind at ease. Apparently, I'm not the only one - Oklahomans for Excellence in Science Education and Mainstream Oklahoma Baptists are also leery of it's provisions.

The icing on the cake is in section nine (the second 'section 9', that is - there are two of them) which reads,"It being immediately necessary for the preservation of the public peace, health, and safety , an emergency is hereby declared to exist, by reason whereof this act shall take effect and be in full force from and after its passage and approval.".

Wha huh?

Are the citizens of Oklahoma on the verge of rioting?
What is this emergency of which they speak?

thinking. once one person does it, the genie is out of the bottle, its all over. total anarchy. you have to put a lid on that shit immediately or people will start formulating ideas of their own. the streets will run red with the blood of pseudoscience, baby jesus will cry, people will get sick from microbes instead of demons and broken mirrors will no longer have the power to cause you seven years of bad luck. now i ask of you, is that the kind of world you want to live in? is it?

I applaud this post.

People who don't understand what the word "theory" means in a scientific context should be legally forbidden to talk about anything involving science in any way.

Good stuff...

I laughed, and then applauded. Does that still count?

It's funny, here in Ontario, our politicians are trying harder to make sure religion and state/school etc. don't mix, and in the States, the politicians seem to be trying harder to mix it back in. Odd.