Ok Veeky Forums please explain these people to me...

I can understand the denial for evolution because it's hard to immediately demonstrate on a large/ grand scale. On a smaller scale it's a bit more easier because organisms with short life-spans can be exploited and observe to prove it is a natural phenomenon.

But because these organisms are so small and inhuman the ability to relate yourself to them is somewhat strenuous.

Climate change on the other hand is different though and anyone who denies it are ignorant fucks. We literally have constant documented historical evidence of humans exploiting several elements of a environment and a decade or two later the environment/ ecosystem goes to complete shit.

>inb4 fedora-tipper rolls on through

Prepare your asshole, user-kun.

Yup, which is nihilism.

Scientists live to test everything, not blindly deny it all.

any of the boring shit you find on /s/

What's global warming?

seconding this
what part do you find hard to believe

>personal relationship

Like, you hang out with him for a drink?

In my experience they're either really dumb or smart people who are simply ignorant of the subject and their intelligence makes them overconfident, so they think knowing a bit of popsci makes them qualified to reject the findings of expert scientists.

That is one of the most disturbing images I have seen this year. I mean, I could understand having sex with a midget, but that is not just a midget, that's like a super midget.
Kill its consciousness and hook it up to machines and you basically have a Tleilaxu Axolotl tank.

love is blind

...

>I like feel God's existence dude

The god you have "faith" in is just an imaginary friend in your brain you've convinced yourself is real

I'm sure psychotic people think the voices in their head is real too

That isn't evidence

The power of echo chambers. If you purposefully only listen to "accepted" voices then you end up with a distorted image of reality.

There are certain brain fucks that can be exploited, like the irreducible complexity fallacy. People prefer seemingly easy explanations to tough problems so they don't have to wrap their heads around it. There are certain pseudo explanations that you can just insert into gaps of knowledge like magic, deities, angels and so on. And suddenly you understand how the world works again. Though people usually don't think past the fact that these explanations would be even more complex and harder to explain than the actual problem they have "solved".

I'm sure that she is an specialist sucking dick and tittyfuck. A couple like that is made to have insane dirty sex.

I say teach both sides.

>evolution doesn't real
>the holocaust never happened
>the earth is flat
>constellations somehow direct your future
>the confederacy wasn't just a bunch of angry white rednecks
>slavery is okay
There's a reason nobody teaches the "other side."

Exactly.

quads of truth

>hurr u just crazy
good point

is she pregnant or does she just look like that? they could have adopted...

>personal relationship with God
What, you chattin it up with God about the sports and the weather?

Seems pregnant to me.

>they could have adopted...
How could you resist knocking up that... thing?

Honestly, I think you are way too hopeful, user.

no.

Such nuanced responses. You really stumped them.

I just dont get some people

>I expect nuanced answers to stupid strawmen designed to mock people who disagree with me

Global warming is a scam. You'd know that if you did a modicum of reading on it rather than following your masters.

he looks a bit half baked aswell desu

>have a friend who graduated with a degree in meteorology
>he denies man made climate change

He thinks man made climate change is 100% bullshit and is just a political scheme, and that the rising temperature is in a natural cycle of the earth's climate patterns.

I mean I understand the earth has climate cycles but I was taken aback when he told me what he thought. Isn't man made contribution to CO2 in the atmosphere well studied and documented?

>both sides of evolution

What is the other side? If you're gonna teach divine creation as an alternative you might as well teach all the other religions' ideas as well, not just Christianity.

>holy shit, a scientist is being skeptical? what an idiot! science is always 100% correct!

these people only exist in america

Not quite subtle enough / 10

What the fuck is with that syringe at the bottom?

Evolution is a strange concept with a lot of moving parts. I'm a biologist, so evolutionary theory is very central to my job, but it still blows my mind whenever I start thinking about it. It's really a lot to take in.

They aren't necessarily unintelligent, just ignorant. They either haven't been taught how to research (look for objective sources following the scientific method) or are willing to pretend they don't know any better because they want to believe. Denial of evolution/the earth's age is even worse, to be honest. The basics of radiometric dating are taught in high school algebra classes, so to not understand that the earth is many many times older than 6,000-10,000 years old is just crazy.

That's how they extract the goo

>they could have adopted...
See the legs of the kid on the left of the image. It makes me sad.

I want to berate you for /threading your own post, but you got quads, so I guess its okay.

>god you have "faith" in is just an imaginary friend
Why do you think God can be your friend? Too many athiësts think that God is some kind of king sitting in his cloudy chair. This is very narrow minded. Sure, some religious people will be this retarded, but many believe God is something very different. For example, check what pantheism means.

>they claim they've done their "research"
keep in mind, for them "doing research" means "watching youtube videos"

...

They just do not want to go against the groupthink of their current social group, and so refuse any evidence contrary to the narrative, out of fear of social ostracism.

People believing in young-earth, people believing in the holocaust, people believing the oceans aren't acidifying...
In the age of information, with Humanity's knowledge literally at our fingertips, the only thing saving ignorance from eternal oblivion is fear.

I did not start this discussion.

Back to

back to

Back to >>>stormfront.org

back to

I debated a family friend who is a bit of a fundie on evolution on a weekend trip we were taking to his property. I was explaining genetic evidence about the sorts of "junk DNA" we have and how you can trace lineage through its inheritance. He kept asking me how we know that it's "junk." I at one point asked him if he actually knew anything about genetics and inheritance and he said no, then kept on arguing with me.

It's not that these people don't have the ability to go out and learn about it, it's that they really are stubborn in their ignorance. Their minds have already been made up and any evidence you give them, even as a trusted friend of many years, just further engrains them in their way of thinking, and thats a shame.

Back to >>>jidf.com

please don't lump evolution with global warming.
Global warming is very recent in the terms of science, there is a long way to go before we can even isolate if the current trend is only dependent on the sun or if there are more variables.

At least we have a couple hundred years of documenting evolutionary pressure and we've seen things like horizontal gene transfer.

People also tend to oppose evolution based on religious ideals. Where people are cautious about global warming due to the global cooling scare in the 1970's and the things organizations and governments want to do will literally cripple economies and trade.

Because climate models under global warming have consistently failed to produce accurate results.

If the data doesn't fit the theory, then the theory is wrong. That's how science works.

There still might be man made global warming but it isn't as impactful as everyone says

Co2 emissions are well documented. Their impact on climate is not.

Current climate change theories predict linear warming with with Co2 increases.

Co2 emissions have increased exponentially since the early 1900s.
Warming has not increased exponentially.