Stupid Creationist!

[Rachel Bronwyn]

Originally Posted by genderhazard

Rachael I'm disappointed in you.

I.... don?t care?

I have already provided basic information on who mitochondrial Eve is. You want me to expand upon Eve, yet you send me to just fucking google it.com telling me to Do my own homework.

When you ask a favour of me such as an answer to a question it?s your responsibility to provide me with satisfactory explanation, not mine. I?m the one doing the favour. You?re the one benefitting. Hence, you need to step up, not I. I?m not going out of my way to answer a question for someone who can?t be arsed to explain themselves.

By suggesting you google an answer to a stupid question you posed earlier, I provided you with a means by which to find the answer as opposed to wasting my time. Use the suggestion.

And I asked you to show me this extensive evidence. If it is extensive then this should not be hard for you. (and it will take more than the size and shape of beaks.)

The mere fact you?re behaving in this manner suggests you don?t believe I?m capable of providing this information and will refute what I do provide (which is readily available and extensive, by the way.) I?ve dealt with many idiots in my life. Why spend time on another?

The evidence is readily available to you as is the scientific method; something you?ve yet to incorporate. If you give a shit, by these means you will find that answer. There is only one right answer in this case.

This is not fact this is conjecture.

So you either don?t know the meaning of conjecture or what the scientific method is. Not my job to open your brain or teach you grammar.

Some of the quotes you?ve found are hilariously creationist in nature and from the mouths, fingers and minds of individuals who don?t understand evolution or the scientific method. If I?m going to engage in a discussion with anyone about a matter this massive, they best have the same knowledge and understanding I have. You don?t. You?ve demonstrated as much as well as a keen interest in concluding that humans have not having been different ?in the beginning?, which is a ludicrous conclusion to come to by all accounts ? more evidence of your ignorance. What, pray tell, evidence do we have of a bipedal hominid existing pre-Ardi? None. BUT THERE COULD HAVE BEEN! There also could have been unicorns prior to horses. It?s still a fucking ludicrous thing to say sans evidence.

If you were being remotely reasonable or basing your opinions on something other than religion and hilariously unscientific commentary, I might be willing to discuss this with you for the sake of education. I?m not putting effort into what is ultimately a waste of time for me though. I can verify my correctness as can the universal scientific community. That?s good enough for me. Your approval doesn?t come into play. The scientific method is a bit higher up on that totem pole.

I am tired of addressing the readily dismissed only to have my concrete proof denied by those with agendas. While I am prone to these behaviours, they exhaust me. I entirely promote Dawkins? idea all discussion with creationists about evolution be halted. The energy I waste on these people could be used in a far more productive manner, hence why anyone displaying creationist behaviours makes the ignore list. I will not waste energy on what is a fool?s mission. I will keep those creationists who come up with fresh ways by which to "disprove" scientific theory for as long as they can throw new ideas at me and don't deny the scientific evidence that contradicts there "What if"'s. Responding to the same false evidences over and over again though is boring and frustrating. When scientifically legitimate criticisms become apparent I will thoroughly examine them. Until then, I have to make the world a better place by encouraging scientific output.