Creationism Science Fair

[Mallifica]

I know that this page has been around for a while, so it may have already been posted at some point.

http://objective.jesussave.us/creationsciencefair.html

I especially like the 2nd place winner: "Women were designed for home-making"

[mmonk]

1. creationism and science

in the same name is a little strange.

[tk2kewl]

2. dyslexic spelling bee

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

3. Agree, it's a total oxymoron n/t

[Kingshakabobo]

4. Is this site a joke? Please tell me it is . n/t

[toddaa]

5. It's a joke, son

You realize that the web site belongs in the same category as Landover Baptist Church. In fact, the Landover Baptist Shutdown page should have given it away.

[Az]

6. This is a well known mock site

Move along. The creationists are scary enough without adding to their nature.

[democracy eh]

7. OOOKAY

wow
I read and read and read trying to figure out if this was a joke

I don't know, there are links and links of a similar nature

bring on the dark ages

self imposed ignorance

[bullimiami]

8. malloy talked about it several weeks or so back

i love it. :)

[Redleg]

9. Here's my favorite part about women:

"...social sciences show that the wages for women workers are lower than for normal workers, meaning that they are unable to work as well and thus earn equal pay..."

Jeebus H. Boosh. These are some really stupid fucking people. Isn't home-teaching grand?

[FizzFuzz]

13. cute how "normal" = male, isn't it?

I feel sorry for girls in the Jaysus cult.

[DrWeird]

10. The funny part is...

how close to reality that satire is.

[Wolf1728]

11. Methinks Tis Time For My Science Project

Yea, as our society taketh a giant leap backward in intelligence, perchance I wondered what lie beneath it all. Demons? Devils? Evil Spirits? Don't be silly. It is evident that the core of society's woes is due to people being afflicted by bad humors. Nothing like a good bloodletting to cure that.
By the way, I am glad that sight is NOT for real. (But I think Dubya and his buddies in the Red States are not very far from that mentality).

[FizzFuzz]

12. I'm not sure its a satire site!

I clicked on some links and found they are for real. For example, the Zounds Xtian music link, which then has a list of various Xtian links. All real. Some are bands I knew of already as Xtian music(Jars of Clay, Stryper, Newsboys). The link to GO magazine is also real--(GO is a Xtian version of 17 magazine. Saw a review of it in Bitch magazine, if I remember correctly.)

Soooo, I shudder to say this but I think the site is real. And the link to Landover is for "real" Xtians to use to harrass Landover.

This is my take on it.
Disgusting, actually, the repression of women. Why did they even bother letting girls in the "Science Fair" to begin with? They should have assigned all girls cookie baking and toilet cleaning duty.

GO magazine according to Bitch is of course, also very repressive towards the girls who read it. Reinforces male superiority, the importance for girls to submit and please males (in a virtuous way of course. like don't be as smart, be quiet and meek...all that shit)

[toddaa]

14. Trust me, it's satire

When Landover first started a lot of people were fooled because they were not nearly as over the top as they are today. Objective: Christian Ministries is more subtle, using legitimate outside links to fool the unsuspecting. But it is a satire. If you still don't believe me, try to find a real Fellowship University with degrees in Divinity and Theobiology or Advanced Gamemanship for Theologians. Finally, the Baby Jesus thongs for sale in the merchandise section should be the dead giveaway that these guys are none other than the merry pranksters at Landover Baptist.


Don't feel bad, James Randi of CSICOP was fooled by this site.

[FizzFuzz]

15. It was absolutely the links that make me believe it was real.

The thong and something else I can't remember made me believe it was fake, but then those links made me change my mind. I never heard of a satire site using real links.

Gee, couldn't any of those real sites sue or cause some kind of trouble for being linked without their consent?

(I have no idea how this works)

who is James Randi and CSICOP?

[toddaa]

16. CSICOP

http://www.csicop.org/">Committee for the Scientific Investication of Claims of the Paranormal

[immoderate]

19. Link text here needs edit.

Also for Randi fans,

http://randi.org

I read his commentary every week. People around here who are into mumbo-jumbo astrology, ESP, talking to the dead, magnetic bracelets, etc. don't like him. He blows that bullshit out of the water. One of his latest targets are the outrageous sound accessories like Monster Cables, that are touted by the stereo magazines.

Randi is a recipient of the MacArthur Genius Grant, and a great human.

--IMM

[FizzFuzz]

22. hmm interesting

though I found him a little too strident in his counter-claims.

Hey, I am always suspicious of over the top caustic sarcasm presented as de facto invalidation of alleged events.

And though I am unable to control their occurence, I have had plenty and I mean LOADS of weird synchronistic experiences. There is room in life for the wierd and inexplicable. Even if it can't always be controlled.

[immoderate]

26. He may be a curmudgeon, so be it.

Sure there are many unexplained occurrances. Synchronistic experiences, how do they differ from coincidences?

But for the most part, we are talking about rip-off artists here. Do you think that John Edward really talks to the dead? People pay thousands of dollars to these charlatans.

What Randi does, I think, is hard to fault. He invites people to merely demonstrate their claims, they invest nothing, if they are successful, they get the million dollars.

What does too strident mean? I usually hear the term applied to Helen Caldicott, and other activist females. They said that about Nader in his glory days. It's applied to people who take you out of your comfort zone.

Maybe I'm prejudiced, because years ago Randi explained how someone was trying to run a scam on me.

Sure, people who spend $1800 on audio cables, don't want to hear that no one can detect the difference between those and ten dollar cables in a double blind test.

Some people have LOADS of reasons to believe that George Bush is the chosen of God. And whatever you say to refute it, they'll have some reason to believe it.

I'd love some example of "over the top caustic sarcasm presented as de facto invalidation of alleged events" because that's not what he does. Sarcasm can be entertaining though.

--IMM

[FizzFuzz]

27. synchronicity =coincidence

****disclaimer I suspect I sound snarky in this response. Sorry that's just my way of writing. I just like to make my points and explain them as well as I can, but I'm not purposely trying to be snarky.********


synchronicity =coincidence
I didn't say otherwise. And when the perfect coincidence happens, I enjoy it. I don't sit around berating myself for thinking it was pretty cool, or even for getting a sense of comfort. Randi just comes off to me as having that attitude of condescension towards any kind of appreciation for that which is not scientifically proven.

A powerful experience of inexplicable coincidence I had, for example: my Dad's death, which was frought with odd, inexplicable, coincidences which were meaningful and comforting. One particular one, (if you'll humor me): a silver frog charm he gave me, which I had lost in Western NY some ten years ago. When we arrived in NJ at the hospital after driving at breakneck speed all night, we learned that we were too late. We pulled into Dad's driveway, and I opened the car door. I looked down as my feet touched the ground and there, between my feet, was a silver frog charm. The same one? I dunno. But it looked identical.
Weird, huh?

I also do not disagree that charlatans make a killing claiming they can produce paranormal results at will, and I'd be pissed too if I fell for a scam. Perhaps that's where the line of demarcation lies: appreciating them when they happen, as opposed to seeking them out as if they were an effect that occurs as a result of some measurable repeatable cause?

Charlatans should definitely be publicly outed, I have no argument there. And yes, vigilance is important because its so easy to despiccably scam people with this kind of stuff. On the other hand, I've actually been helped--significantly so-- on several occaisions by the intuitions, if you will, of a woman whom I spoke to on the phone but never met. I won't bother going into long explanations here, but every conversation was specific, in depth and accurate, giving me information which I was actually able to verify and use. I was able to protect myself from someone dangerous that I didn't know about prior to our conversation. She even told me this person's diagnosis, which I learned of later. She was correct. Very weird.

Anyhow, about this remark of yours: "What does too strident mean? I usually hear the term applied to Helen Caldicott, and other activist females."--I was disappointed to see you seemingly harbor that sexist prejudice, that women who speak forcefully about the institutionalized biases against women are to be negatively labeled "strident", so that any observations or research or hypotheses they put forth may easily be ignored. (yes, I saw you say that Nader was labeled strident. Still, you did say you yourself usually hear the term reserved for feminists. That sounds as if you accept that connotation. After all, why would my using the term be particularly deserving of comment, as if it were strange that I was applying it to a man. Hope I'm wrong about that)

ON EDIT--please examine the interesting difference between the connotation of STRIDENT vs CURMUDGEON. Strident is typically applied negatively to women as mentioned above, but Curmudgeon is reserved for men. Funny, eccentric, intelligent older men who are loveable and cuddly in spite of their pricklyness. Please take note of this interesting choice of words you demonstrate!

I did explain why I saw him as strident; it was the continuous arch sarcasm he employs. The Flying Pig Awards was what particularly got my attention--winners will be notified telepathically, and all that. Which was actually pretty funny. But every article has that same mocking tone to it, and THAT is what I'm saying appears strident. Also, that's what I was calling de facto. I mean, it looks as if he uses his cutting tone itself as proof that his refutations are genuine. The more ridiculously you paint your opponent, the more clearly authentic your opinion is? Though I'm sure he provides actual proof deeper into the articles, the tabloid like headers have this tone.

[immoderate]

31. No qualms with most of what you said.

Just to clear something up, I have never called any feminist or female activist strident. I said that's what I hear said, and I usually pose the same objections you do. I also hear them called shrill. I muse on the onomatopoeic notions that female voices that we disagree with are called strident, while male voices are called curmudgeonly. Granted that curmudgeon has an affection aspect that strident lacks. Gruff and grumpy have this too. I think this is a part of the prejudice that has found its way into our language culture. I'm trying to think of equivalent terms for women. If they exist in our culture, please advise. I try, as much as a male can, to be feminist.

One time at a family holiday gathering, my cousin's son got a space station, and her daughter got a kitchen. When I pointed out to my cousin that girls should get toys that stimulated activity and imagination rather than reinforcing sex role stereotypes, I got that "Well, you're so wacko," response from the family. I had to dig her a little by reminding her I'm a much better cook than she is.

Your stories of synchronicity, well that's what makes them stories. To borrow a phrase, "things happen" all the time, and some are bound to include remarkable coincidences. That's what makes them interesting and repeatable. Think about all the times you got out of your car and didn't find anything. You don't remember that, and you don't recount those times. Perfectly normal, and IMO not indicative of anything guiding these events. The stories I tell have the same types of coincidence, or irony.

I would also ask you to consider the audience for Randi's commentaries. Yes, I am a member of the choir. Furthermore, I love sarcasm. (I'm from New York, where sarcasm was invented in 1953.) My favorite teachers were the most sarcastic. (I also don't condone it for younger children, or those in need of remediation. I also taught in certain parts of the country where it doesn't work very well. There was a thread here recently that quoted a study that showed that even some adults don't attain the capacity to process sarcasm, so I'm careful about my audience.) But consider that Randi is talking to those who identify themselves as skeptics. That might put a different perspective on it. You even said that it was funny. Imagine Jon Stewart without the sarcasm.

That you have been helped by people with intuition, no problem. Intuition is a great talent, and to me does not rest on anything supernatural. Complexities in existence lead to all sorts of unexplainable results. I just accept them as unexplainable, while some have to attribute them to some magic force. I'm not saying that you do this. and it's OK if you do.

If you take his work as a whole, Randi is performing a great public service. He challenges those who are deceiving others, and often, themselves. He is the ultimate anti-Pat Robertson, and that should cut him some slack around here.

So--what's snarky?:)

--IMM

[FizzFuzz]

32. can I get back to you tomorrow?

This is great food for discussion here and I want to give it proper attention, but I have just lost brainpower for the night!

Spent too much of it on other posts here-heh heh.

OK?

[Lone Pawn]

18. No, you can't sue someone for linking to you ;)

[FizzFuzz]

21. my cover has been blown---

I come here pretending to be a smart person.
:silly:

[alfredo]

24. It's not "Baby"

the word is Ruby.

[Lone Pawn]

17. Don't believe it's satire? Go to the kids' site.

Click on the head of Mr. Gruff the Atheist. "Hey kid--wanna read some Ayn Rand?"

Or the thong:



"Please don't forsake the baby Jesus."

[FizzFuzz]

23. or how about KangaJEW?

I was aghast, yet I was guardedly believing they were for real...it truly was right on the edge of credibility. After all, I know a number of fundies (well, not on a deep personal level. I don't think I could stand that), and there was not one thing there that I couldn't imagine someone actally believing --or wearing, as the case may be!

Maybe I'll order a thong me-self. :evilgrin:

[Taxloss]

20. I just get bounced to a site called "web1000".

eom

[Squatch]

25. Breaking...Uncle Steve, NOT a monkey as previously thought.

Refusal of bananas offered as proof!

LOL

[jayctravis]

28. mehehehe....heheheh...mahahaha....

"Patricia Lewis (grade 8) did an experiment to see if life can evolve from non-life. Patricia placed all the non-living ingredients of life - carbon (a charcoal briquet), purified water, and assorted minerals (a multi-vitamin) - into a sealed glass jar. The jar was left undisturbed, being exposed only to sunlight, for three weeks. (Patricia also prayed to God not to do anything miraculous during the course of the experiment, so as not to disqualify the findings.) No life evolved. This shows that life cannot come from non-life through natural processes."

Right. She was wanting the process of evolution to happen for her in a jar in 2 weeks. And she prayed that something miraculous *wouldn't* happen??? Well the fact that nothing "miraculous" happened certainly proves that god exists!

I bet in heaven that's an automatic granted prayer, "You *don't* want anything miraculous? <stamp...chunk...foldfold fold> Put this right in the mail Mr. Gabriel!"

[SemperEadem]

29. well, now I know who not to hire in the future

even though it is a satire site.. the fact remains that this is a growing problem in the US--last night on nightline, they featured this guy who has taken the graven image of the 10 commandments on a road trip so that xtians can worship it as it rides through their communities. The easiest question the reporter or Ted Koppel could have asked is "why are you encouraing the worship of this graven image in violation of one of the commandments engraved upon this image?"

Then they got a preacher on from Kansas who actually tried to imply that the founding fathers of the country were evangelicals and wanted this country to be governed by religious laws. I have to give Koppel 1/2 a point for saying (paraphrasing here..)"the first Europeans on American soil were religious people escaping religious persecuting for their beliefs--how is your position any different from those who forced them out of England?" It effectively stunned the preacher and he didn't rebound as smoothly, I'm sure, as he would have liked.

[LeftHander]

30. Oxymoron....nt