|Riskbreaker - 2009-09-02 |
Cheech and Chong's not-so-excellent adventure.
Actually, that biker guy seriously looks like someone you don't want to mess with.
|Pillager - 2009-09-02 |
This is the man I'd want as as a debate team captain versus Kirk Cameron & his ilk.
As the saying goes "Creationists always win debates, but science always wins in the courts."
The reason being is simple. In a debate, one doesn't have time to present your views and have them checked and verified, so the most charismatic (ie. the slickest and most polished presentation) wins. Since creationism generally boils down to the same arguements over and over again, people like Ray Comfort seem to know what they're talking about since they don't have to think about their answers. It's a knee jerk reaction, really.
But in a court of law, there's no time limit to the case, no audience clapping. It's just facts and evidence. Creationism has zip and science has it in spades, so when some sad creation group thinks popular opinion will win over the court, they get their asses handed to them.
|Aoi - 2009-09-02 |
This guy is a cartoon.
Er, wait, I meant to say, "This guy SHOULD BE a cartoon.". An awesome cartoon, about a science biker who travels the backroads of texas, solving mysteries, fighting evil, and educamating our childrens.
I'd watch it.
|augias - 2009-09-02 |
He sho' got some puhty hair
|pathetique - 2009-09-02 |
"it's an embarrassing word, really."
|Comeuppance - 2009-09-02 |
You had me at "Texan Science Biker," adding well-spoken and witty was just unnecessary.
|kelpfoot - 2009-09-02 |
> Why not take the opportunity to teach? About H. erectus, A.
> africanus, the telomeres in the middle of chromosome #2?
> Why not show organisms with less complex "eyes" than ours?
He tried that. It didn't take, so then he switched to justifiable dickishness.
That's how you debate a creationist. You give them a fair chance to prove themselves, they inevitably fuck it up, and then you call them on it.
Considering he nitwit he's debating originally asked about the evolution of the eye, and then then seems to indicate that at some point he believes evolution predicts that humans did not have eyes and then evolved them, what is the good in trying to explain anything?
This shows he is uninterested in learning anything, and well as stupid. Uninterested because there already exist something like 400 videos on the evolution of the eye on youtube already, and stupid because he seems to think of evolution in some kind of childish pokemon way.
|pastorofmuppets - 2009-09-02 |
|Hugo Gorilla - 2009-09-02 |
This is confusing. He has a cavalier's beard and hair, a loose one-color shirt, a nondescript backdrop, and he's debating another droning idiot from the creationist set; but I'm not at all annoyed by him. I'm also puzzled why he isn't reminding us he's an atheist in every other video.
|memedumpster - 2009-09-02 |
Some long haired biker guy from Texas has videos that I want to watch more of and they don't involve nudity, bleeding, cars, explosions, or drugs.
From now on, please tell me when I fall into a parallel universe. I hate finding out this way.
|charmlessman - 2009-09-02 |
So THIS is what The Undertaker does between matches.
|Jet Bin Fever - 2009-09-03 |
You can be pretty sure he's in to Doom Metal.
|Squeamish - 2009-09-06 |
You heard it here first, kiddies;
Texas actually has cool people living in it.
| Register or login To Post a Comment|