Just a Theory - SMBC Theater

Professor James explains his theory of evolution.
http://www.smbc-theater.com
Executive Producers: Zach Weiner, Marty Weiner, James Ashby
Written by: Zach Weiner and James Ashby
Directed by: Chason Chaffin
Starring:
Satan / Professor: James Ashby
Student: Kelly Smith
Scientist: Sean Fogarty
Archeologists: Zach Weiner, Marty Weiner

• Category

  Entertainment

[GBart]

This is what Creationists actually believe.

[Rephistorch]

I happened to go to a Christian school as well, and not only was evolution taught as a lie, they integrated Religion in almost every class I attended. Looking back, it was actually pretty terrible. I'm just glad I was able to see through their lies and think for myself. I'm now a practicing Pastafarian.

[Trollsnews]

sooo what you're saying is that your absence of belief in the idea that I have second pair of balls that are made of gold, are the size of Neptun, are located exactly 1337 light years away and are connected to me telepathically is no more valid that my belief that I have them.

Just because you can't prove that I don't have this second pair of balls, it doesn't make it any less stupid. Therefore your absence of belief in my mighty space balls is more valid.

[DeathRyokai]

Any belief is a belief. The belief that something does or does not exist, without empirical or falsifiable data, is by definition nonscientific.

It always amuses me how the majority of atheists are are just as blindly following sheep as the fundamentalist religionists.

[biddlemd]

The absence of a thing is a thing?  You really shouldn't try logic until you learn what it is (and more importantly, what it isn't).

[DeathRyokai]

That's adorable. Agnosticism would fit that mark--but a "lack of belief" is still a belief that cannot be tested or supported. Theism is the same--but theists cop to it. Atheism is simply another belief, albeit the belief in the absence of something, that doesn't explain anything and also happens to contradict the laws of cause and effect.

Amazing how atheists tout logic, when the majority of them just believe out of faith or because it suits them to believe so, mirroring the fundamentalists.

[Paden Snell]

that last sentence is the dumbest thing i have ever read. atheism isn't a "belief system" as much as it is an absence or rejection of one. it requires no leap of faith or hypothesis whatsoever. THEISM on the other hand, your description fits perfectly.

[DeathRyokai]

Yeah, we're done. I'm clearly arguing with a fanatic. You've totally ignored anything I've said. It's hilarious how illogical you present yourself and then accuse others of the same.

This is exactly the form of argument I have every time I try to discuss something intelligently with a fanatic. Congratulations--you have the same logical abilities and rationality of the hardcore jihadist, totally closeminded, merely parroting and repeating while totally ignoring what the other person says.

[tuseroni]

and you clearly don't know what your fucking bible says. doesn't say "week of creation" it says 7 days, it lays out exactly what happened on each of those seven days, including setting the standard on the first day as to what a day is.

you clearly lack the logical capabilities to engage in a discussion without resorting to ad hominem so we are done here.

[DeathRyokai]

If atheism means the inability to grasp simple English, I'll pass, thanks.

I mean, you clearly don't have the mental capacity to understand the possibility of the "week of creation" being a parable for a society whose science was incredibly primitive, so you aren't helping your cause.

Not to mention that atheism is another nonscientific belief system--albeit far simpler--involving leaps of faith regarding untestable hypotheses.

[tuseroni]

(cont) and they do, "if we plot them geographically through time can we plot human migration" and we can, "knowing this if we go to x and dig in rock layer y we should find bones belonging to creatures at this point in the line" which is the main way we FIND these fossils now. evolution gives a framework, it sets a pathway to new information, it allows us to not just sit and wildly guess at the nature of an unseen, unknown, unknowable creature for evidence but to look to nature to find it.

[tuseroni]

(cont)why do we share 80% of our DNA with chimps because we share a common ancestor with chimps we not only have an answer to the question, we have a path to more questions with more answers, because we have a framework for how life arose we can say "if this is true there should be other creatures living or extinct with which we share even more DNA" and indeed there are, and their discoveries allow us even more questions "if we map their mutations and plot it geographically do they line up?"