The era of vocal science denial: Big Bang denial and the search for truth (reprint)

A terrific article by Michael J. Brown from Monash University on the persistence of “big bang denial”. It makes an interesting comparison climate change denial, demonstrating that an individuals and values and beliefs can lead them to reject accepted science.

Ever since Edwin Hubble discovered the universe was expanding – and thus implying the universe had a beginning – there have been those who have challenged the evidence. This article originally appeared on The Conversation. Enjoy!

By Michael J. I. Brown, Monash University

We are living in an era of science denial. An era when well-established facts are disputed, fake experts are interviewed by the media and blog posts trump science papers.

It’s an era of vaccine denial, evolution denial, and of course, climate change denial.

I’d also add Big Bang denial to that list. Sure, it might be more esoteric than climate change denial, but it’s attracting increasing amounts of attention, thanks to the efforts of people such as US congressman Paul Broun, who declared late last year:

All that stuff I was taught about evolution and embryology and the Big Bang Theory, all that is lies straight from the pit of hell.

In living memory, the most vocal opposition to the Big Bang has gone from the realms of legitimate scientific debate to that of science denial.

The 100-inch (2.5 m) Hooker telescope at Mount Wilson Observatory that Edwin Hubble used to measure galaxy distances and a value for the rate of expansion of the universe. Wikimedia Commons

But how did this come to pass? What are the origins of Big Bang denial? And does it provides clues about the future of science denial generally?

Early debates

Today the Big Bang paradigm is supported by a plethora of observations:

  • the expansion of the universe measured with variable stars, supernovae and the distribution of galaxies
  • the faint microwave afterglow of the Big Bang fireball
  • the abundances of the light elements (such as hydrogen and helium), forged in the hot and dense furnace of the early universe
  • the young galaxies seen in the distant universe.

Even a tiny bit of the static seen on an analogue TV is from the afterglow of the Big Bang.

But in the 1940s there was far less to go on.

Einstein’s general theory of relativity was largely untested. Edwin Hubble had measured the expansion of the universe, but was grossly in error. Using Hubble’s data and the Big Bang theory, it seemed like the sun was older than the universe. And the original Big Bang paper was conceptually brilliant but technically flawed.

In this environment, other theories seemed equally plausible. Perhaps the universe was in a “steady state”, where new matter was created as the universe expanded. This seemed reasonable given the limited data available. Crucially, most theories made robust predictions about what astronomers might have observed in the coming decades.

Eureka! An image of the cosmic microwave background from WMAP. WMAP Science Team, NASA.

Breakthrough

In 1964 there was a Eureka moment. By accident, Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson discovered the microwave afterglow of the Big Bang. This afterglow simply hadn’t been predicted by other theories.

Edwin Hubble’s protege, Allan Sandage, improved measurements of the expanding universe, showing it was far older than Edwin Hubble supposed. And so the Big Bang theory was no longer conflicting with the age of the sun.

Most astronomers were increasingly convinced by the Big Bang theory, but a core of opposition remained.

Steady state theories were tweaked rather than abandoned. In the process some abandoned Ockham’s Razor, the idea that the simplest hypothesis that explains the data is the best. Often the tweaks were contrived, such as “iron whiskers” being spread across the universe by exploding stars.

Typically the tweaks came into conflict with data soon after their inception. For example, we can observe very distant galaxies and quasars at microwave wavelengths, but this would be impossible in a universe full of “iron whiskers”.

Some claimed the Big Bang theory could not explain “anomalies”, such as groups of quasars and galaxies that should have been at different distances. But the statistics were so poor that these “anomalies” could be explained via random alignments of nearby galaxies with distant quasars and gravitational lensing.

Extraordinary claims about the supposed failings of the Big Bang theory weren’t being backed by extraordinary evidence.

Repetition

Today, there is a wealth of data that is explained with the Big Bang paradigm. Astronomers and physicists still propose many new theories (e.g. quintessence), but most include an expanding universe with a Big Bang at its beginning.

The original Big Bang opponents are dead or old, but some persevere. Unfortunately, they often just repeat flawed theories and analyses from earlier decades, often ignoring well-established facts and newer research.

Astronomers have surveyed millions of galaxies and quasars, but many Big Bang opponents continue to focus on small samples with poor statistics. This is similar to the way vaccine opponents often rely on small studies and anecdotal evidence rather than large epidemiological studies which show the benefits of vaccines.

The inability of many Big Bang opponents to update their analyses and let go of disproved ideas now serves as a cautionary tale to younger scientists.

The distribution of galaxies in observations and simulations is remarkably similar, despite what Big Bang opponents claim. The Virgo Consortium

Denial

But now, a new generation of Big Bang opponents has risen. Often they have an amateur’s knowledge of astrophysics and strong ideological motivations, even if they have a background in science. They want the universe to conform with their preconceived ideas.

As a consequence, science denial can come from those at both extremes of the ideological spectrum. Young Earth creationists oppose the Big Bang because it makes the universe billions of years old. Even some atheists oppose the Big Bang because it has a creation event.

Big Bang opponents often ignore well-established evidence, and as a consequence they are publishing less and less in peer-reviewed science journals. Often the most vocal opposition to the Big Bang appears online in fringe journals and websites, where it can avoid astronomers’ difficult facts and criticism. This is also true of those opposing anthropogenic climate change, who publish just a tiny fraction of all peer-reviewed papers on climate.

The amateur Big Bang opponents make amateur’s mistakes and straw-man arguments are common. There are claims, for instance, that the distribution of quasar and galaxy distances isn’t explained by the Big Bang paradigm.

However, Big Bang opponents have not compared observations with predictions from theory and simulations, so these claims are baseless. When astronomers compare observations with simulations, there is no discrepancy between the data and the Big Bang paradigm.

Astronomers point out these mistakes time and time again. However, many Big Bang opponents reframe the criticism as scientists defending orthodoxy, rather than acknowledging the errors made.

According to the Big Bang model, the universe expanded from an extremely dense and hot state and continues to expand today. The image above is an artist’s concept illustrating the expansion of a portion of a flat universe.

Australian physicist (and Big Bang opponent) John Hartnett has stated:

The standard model is assumed to be correct and when evidence questioning that conclusion is found … a special effort was immediately made to show how it could still be explained in the standard model.

“Special effort” is an unjustified and strange choice of phrase. What matters is the fact that observations and theory simply agree.

Perception

The public perception of the Big Bang debate has changed with its protagonists. When opposition to the Big Bang is discussed, it is framed in terms of ideology rather than scientific debate.

US presidential hopeful Marco Rubio recently sidestepped a question in an interview with GQ about the age of the Earth, perhaps in an effort to court young Earth creationists. The resulting controversy focused on politics and theology, and the science was rarely questioned. Eventually Rubio clarified his answer, stating that the Earth is at least 4.5 billion years old.

Perhaps this is the end result of science denial – the media and public largely stop debating the science. Decades ago the smoking debate in the media was focused on the validity of the science. The science is no longer disputed in the media, and the debate has moved on to the politics of individual choices versus public health.

So what does the current state of Big Bang denial mean for the future? There are interesting parallels with the climate debate.

The tiny minority of climate scientists who are vocal critics of anthropogenic climate change are mostly over 50. Younger climate change deniers are often amateurs, bloggers and ideologues. The number of scientists questioning anthropogenic climate change is going to decrease in the coming decades.

Perhaps this is the good news about science denial. While science denial can influence public debates, this influence wanes without the backing of scientists. As elderly scientists fade from view and aren’t replaced by credible alternatives, the public debate will stop questioning the science.

To quote German Nobel Prize-winning physicist Max Planck:

A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.

Or, to paraphrase ever so slightly: “Science advances one funeral at a time.”

Michael J. I. Brown receives research funding from the ARC and Monash University.

The Conversation

This article was originally published at The Conversation.
Read the original article.

Tagged , , ,

65 thoughts on “The era of vocal science denial: Big Bang denial and the search for truth (reprint)

  1. pete.bauman@gmail.com says:

    Reality check, we have not even been to mars yet. That put this entire subject into the realm of philosophy. We can create illuminated manuscripts all day long about the big bang, but that doesn’t improve my gas mileage, reduce populution, or cure disease. We should act like real scientists and invent something other that ways to kill God.

  2. pete.bauman@gmail.com says:

    We all need to look at the basics principle of bias. Each time the author wrote about bias, i was sure he was refering to his own. Big bang seekers found what they wanted to find, a big bang. The faithfull to the big bang idea heard a who, like Horton, and they all agreed with each other that the who was really a big bang, so their idea must be correct. It is like not knowing where the rain comes from, so the falling rain must be coming from a big bang. With so many other probable theories of the universe available, why so dogmatic toward this particular sect? Is it your favorite TV show right now? How is a dogmatic approach to the universe at this point in human ignorance a benifit?

    • crank says:

      Just love how another post on this brilliant satirical send-up of Rightwing imbecility is ‘The Myth of Income Inequality’. Of course it is quite mystifying, to normal intelligences that work from observation, through hypothesis and testing, to closer and closer approximations to the truth, to attempt to understand ‘minds’ that work backwards, from revealed, unalterable, truth, through twists and turns of casuistry and sophistry, by means of pseudo-scientific fudging and faking, twisting and turning and ramming the ‘facts’ into the vessel of Divine Revelation ( slicing off any extraneous matter that does not fit) to arrive at imbecilities that a dullard child would laugh at. Unfortunately one of the great mistakes that climate rationalists make is to engage with these cretins in a ‘Clash of Civilizations’ between rationality and religious and ideological psychopathy.

  3. john byatt says:

    More evidence

    The Protestant reformation hermeneutic inclined some of the Reformers, including John Calvin[34][35] and Martin Luther,[36] and later Protestants toward a literal reading of the Bible as translated, believing in an ordinary day, and maintaining this younger-Earth view

    Then Warren

    DF]
    Contact – Lutheran Church of Australia NSW District
    http://www.lcansw.org.au/documents/Contact_Dec08.pdf
    File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – Quick View
    breakfast was a fellow Lutheran, Warren Truss MP, the leader of the National. Party and shadow minister for trade, transport, regional development and local ..

    love this

    DESIGN OF HAWKS: For birds to be able to fly, the ratio of weight to bone strength must be exactly right or the bird will be grounded. While hollow bones are good enough for most birds, the bone structure of hawks and a few other birds are much more advanced in their design. A hollow bone design does not allow for high gravity turns. The Creator added to the hawk’s bones a design that includes diagonal struts, which provides the very best strength-to-weight ratio. This structure, known as the Warren Truss, is very advanced, having been discovered only in the last 50 years by flight engineers.

  4. john byatt says:

    Opossition deputy leader Warren Truss is a luthern, creationists

    http://www.gympietimes.com.au/search/?tag=Hazard%20Reduction%20Burn&all-sites=on

  5. john byatt says:

    The similarities between worral and ryan

    Hitler and eugenics seems to be a common theme here, Must be blog somewhere that focuss climate denial with such.

    will look around , aha here is a couple where it is a popular topic

    Debate Over Darwin and Eugenics Continues: Part 3 (Hitler in His …
    blogs.christianpost.com/…/debate-over-darwin-and-eugenics-continu…8 Dec 2012 – In parts one and two of this series on eugenics from Darwin to Hitler I noted this: Although Darwin personally was opposed to slavery (or .

    ..
    Eugenics and Classroom Darwinism – Blogs – The Christian Post
    blogs.christianpost.com/…/the-new-eugenics-and-the-old-dogmatic-cl…1 Dec 2012 – CP Blogs do not necessarily reflect the views of The Christian Post. … Nazi genocide, and today’s “new eugenics” agenda that devalues the …

    • crank says:

      Delingpole is now a favourite at ‘The Australian’ (aka ‘The Fundament’ – The Fundamental Orifice of the Nation’). Mitchell probably finds him to be an intellectual equal.

  6. john byatt says:

    A lot of them in australia read NEXUS magazine, i knew a bloke who read it, otherwise quite sane but thought that it contained sceret information that was being kept from the main stream, it was only him and others that read it that knew the truth,

    a story about the publisher, a local from maleny showed that he suffered paranoid schizophrenia, thinking that the authorities were the cause of unexplained events affecting his life ” They want to silence me “

  7. Watching the Deniers says:

    I think the story highlights how values and beliefs are going to shape an individuals acceptance or rejection of science.

    What is fascinating is the parallels between climate denial and other forms of science denial: AIDS, big-bang, vaccination, evolution, evidence based medicine, geology…

    For nearly every major discipline of science there is a counter-movement.

    • john byatt says:

      Fluoridation is the biggy in QLD at the moment , guess what? same people again, vaccination climate change whatever, deny it

    • Richard Ryan says:

      and lets not forget the great parallel between Ku Klux Klimate alarmists and eugenics, elimination of democracy, one world government and holocaust denial. Lets just see which of you will categorically deny this … while you’re at it, can we have a consensus (isnt that how we operate?) as to who agrees 100% with john byatt’s opinion. Takers? Or deniers?

      • zoot says:

        Oh I’ll categorically deny it.
        So what?

      • Richard Ryan says:

        but not agree with john byatt 100% ? interesting … I picked you as the one nutbag who would. Et tu Brute

      • Richard Ryan says:

        now zootie, a hypothetical for you … select one of the following:
        1. Individuals of all nations vote on IPCC/Alarmist recommendations and the vote is final, one way or the other
        2. A world authority, run by United Nations decides for us
        Over to you for a pick

      • zoot says:

        OK little Dick, here’s a hypothetical for you … select one of the following:

        1. You’re dreaming if you think I feel any necessity to answer your stupid questions.

      • Richard Ryan says:

        ROFL … like I thought you were going to answer it and CATEGORICALLY give away your agenda … when cornered for an answer, just refuse … its the alma mater of all you Ku Klux Klimatists isnt it. No debate! Hide/Edit facts! Dont admit to anything! Oooooops
        What a laugh you frauds are … and you and johnny byatt are the biggest frauds and avoiders of fact of the lot.
        You make sheep look smart .. its much harder to back them into a corner.
        Another dope bites the dust with non admission and avoidance. Thank you zootie … you’re relieved now … back to zombieland for you

      • Richard Ryan says:

        Next world government eugenicist please

      • zoot says:

        Yes folks, Onan the Barbarian is here all week.
        Laugh along with his witty repartee, gasp with amazement at his phenomenal intellect, watch as he destroys logic single handed.
        You’ll laugh, you’ll cry, you’ll wonder how any man can be this pig-ignorant.

      • Richard Ryan says:

        Anyone else gonna take the 5th?

        zoot said “I refuse to answer on the grounds that it will make me look like a complete fuckwit”
        john byatt said “I refuse to answer on the grounds that the facts do not agree with the ridiculous assertion on man made global warming and my belief that most people in the world, especially blacks, jews and disabled people, are way too stupid to be trusted with voting”

      • Richard Ryan says:

        zoot (not his real name because he couldnt spell “klutz”) admits to desire for world government along with leading eugenicist John Byatt … stay tuned for the next chapter in Exposes of the Ku Klux Klimate

      • zoot says:

        Watch as Onan uncovers the shocking truth: they’re coming to get you, these secret armies of the night, with their hidden agendas and their plans for world domination. They are poised even now, ready to strike at the first command from their evil overlords.
        Be afraid, be very afraid.

      • Dr No says:

        Richard/Eric/Mark, please calm down. You are in danger of overheating and contributing to more warming (go and see Roy Spencer’s latest musings to see the latest hilarious explanation by denialists for global warming).

        Please note that we (in the UN/IPCC conspiracy) agree with each other 100%. We are right, we are all white, and we will govern in your best interests when the day comes. Rest assured – we will look after you.

      • john byatt says:

        That is head vice stuff Dr No,

        http://www.drroyspencer.com/2013/01/waste-heat-as-a-contributor-to-observed-warming/

        bet you spilt your coffee

      • Richard Ryan says:

        This is gold … no doubt at all now what you muppets want is there? Not even one little denial that you want world government and no democracy (allowing the stupid people to vote). Combine that with your desire to kill deniers and your contribution to all the bushfire deaths and you lot are very dangerous indeed.
        Luckily you are a small (and diminishing) bunch of crazies and will soon die out completely as the real science comes to the fore.
        I’ll be pointing anyone who is in the slightest doubt about AGW straight here to check the supporters motives. Especially blacks and jews and women anyone not of “male aryan superiority” (which accounts for all of you). Sorry johnny, I dont think the Crusade is going to take off … and, having zootie, possibly the stupidest person ever seen on a forum, as a running mate is not such a good idea. Most chimps are going to beat him at chess

      • zoot says:

        What a genius, he’s on to us. He’s sussed out the whole conspiracy; we have nothing more to fight with, no reason to continue.
        I guess his work here is done. Shall we wave as he rides off into the sunset?

      • zoot says:

        If only one of us had denied it (sob).

      • john byatt says:

        Ryan is insane,

      • Richard Ryan says:

        Ku Klux Klimate handbook
        Rule No 1: NEVER answer a direct question
        Rule No 2:when all else fails, just call them more names …

      • zoot says:

        Onan, you can stop now.
        You’ve won.

      • john byatt says:

        They get angy when they connot control the debate, have noticed this on other blogs, they keep going on about answering questions , never put up any science,
        because they have none. i am afraid that it is not going to get any better, time to ignore him I believe?

      • Richard Ryan says:

        oh zootie, youve already made a complete [CUT] of yourself, you were no contest.

        But I still want to play with johnny, he sticks to the rulebook AVOID AVOID AVOID questions, facts, real science.
        Would it make you want to beat me up more if you knew i was black? I can dress up for you …
        You can carve “denier” on my head and send me to the gas chambers …

        NOTE: Richard – no personal insults of this nature. That constitutes a second warming. Mike @ WtD

      • zoot says:

        Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you.

      • Dr No says:

        Mmmmm! World government….cant wait.

        I think we will firstly abolish optional preferential voting (thanks sister Bronwyn Bishop for that idea).
        Then we can abolish compulsory voting (thanks brother Campbell Newman for that suggestion)
        Next step will be to remove voting rights for anyone claiming to be of aboriginal descent (thanks brother A. Bolt)
        Then, lets remove voting rights for women (thanks brother Tony A.)
        Then unionists (thanks sister Gina).

        Next step will be to abolish voting all together …. mmmmmm!

      • The connection is right wing governments. Don’t vote them in. Simples, job done.

        (Ooh, Richard does believe in multiple conspiracy theories. Stephan Lewdanowsky again shown correct.)

      • Richard Ryan says:

        funny little bunch of .. lets see, white male, loner lefties brought together by their obsessive natures and need to cling to a “big” cause. You are right, everyone else is wrong (and evil to boot).
        OK, have your cuddly little snuggle together and giggle “we showed him” … you did.
        Tell me – what the fuck are you going to do when all this shit gets unwound after the next election?
        [Cut for offensive language and in breach of guidelines]

      • Thought I might tap a nerve there with our Tourettes inclined Mr Ryan. :-)

        There’ve always been anti-science nuts from both the left and the right. But, over the last generation, the right has made anti-science a mainstay. It isn’t the science that’s political, it’s the protagonists. They’ll have to recant as the climate nasties creep up on them. Whether that’s measured in months, years or decades could be very important.

  8. john byatt says:

    At the beginning of 2013 a dome of heat settled over Australia creating a historic heat wave. The temperatures nurtured fires in five states with 90 bushfires in NSW. In Tasmania the fires consumed over 100 homes and took lives in a most horrendous way as tornadoes of flame swept across the countryside. The township of Murdunna was obliterated as the temperatures soared and set new records that go back over a century. The link to climate change is now undeniable with the increase in such extreme events due to a warming planet being verified as new research makes its way into the scientific journals. It makes me weep to hear then from our leader of the opposition Mr. Warren Truss in what will become a quote that sums up the state of conservative political understanding and the will to take action. “These comments tend to be made on hot days rather than cold days”
    Just what will it take?

    Warren Truss like Joh Bjelke Bonkers bananas was, is a fundamentalist Lutheran

    http://www.abc.net.au/religion/stories/s1354728.htm

    • Steve says:

      John, I thought there were fires in all six Australia states. I Googled this and found several articles saying 5 of the 6 states, including this one:
      http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jan/08/australia-heatwave-wildfires-alert
      But the map at the bottom of the article definitely shows a number of fires in every state.

    • Matt M says:

      Why do you post irrelevant crap on stories?

      • john byatt says:

        I see your confusion now, i posted of the PETM and you thought that I was referring to the great dying.

        one was about 55 millions years ago the other over 200 million years agio

      • Matt M says:

        Seriously man, reply to the right spot. This isn’t even the right story.

    • crank says:

      Have you ever read ‘Robopaths’ by Yablonsky? You’ll find a pretty fair description of the Rightist pseudo-human being there. The work done on the Rightwing Authoritarian personality also illuminates matters, as does any contemplation of the Dunning-Kruger phenomenon and the psychological traits (lack of empathy, indifference to the suffering of others, unscrupulousness etc) of the classic psychopath. The wretched truth is that the human type euphemised as ‘Rightwing’ with their basic character formation of paranoia, generalised misanthropy and predilection for violence, has dominated humanity throughout history, and possibly dominates human society more completely now than ever before. It has only been a matter of time before they had the scientific and technological means at their disposal to complete their destructive mission, to destroy all that is other to themselves. They have zero interest in the fate of the planet after they are dead. Indeed I firmly believe that many are driven by more or less sub-conscious motivations to destroy life out of a

      • crank says:

        more or less subconscious desire to destroy life, to be avenged on those who will be living when they are dead. The real evil genius of the denialist industry was to paint this as a Right versus Left contention, whereupon every Rightwing MSM propaganda mollusc rushed to the fray, with their talents in lying, misrepresenting and whipping up hatred through slander, smear and innuendo. And the Rightwing rabble, the ‘aspirational’ Howardites were incentivised by their pathological need to hate something, and the Greens, demonised by the Murdoch sewer in particular, perfectly fit the bill.

  9. john byatt says:

    Just one OT

    And Noah began to be a husbandman, and he planted a vineyard.
    And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent.
    And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father and told his two brethren outside.
    And Shem and Japheth took a garment and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were turned away, and they saw not their father’s nakedness.
    And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him.
    And he said, “Cursed be Canaan! A servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.”
    And he said, “Blessed be the LORD God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.
    God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.”

    Ham (Kam > Kamit) is the biblical ancestor of black people, it is irrefutable judging by the genealogy that is given by the bible; (Genesis ch.10 v.6)
    “And the sons of Ham: Cush and Mizraim, and Punt and Canaan.

    The original myth had Ham cut Noahs nut’s off, so you can see why he was so upset and people who beive this crap are the ones telling us that climate change science is a OWG hoax, the work of some anti-christ BS

    ‘ The ham Noah myth was stolen from here

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cronus

  10. Moth says:

    If I had the time (or I took on another degree – something I’m seriously considering), I’d love to explore the history of the few known dark ages.

    Just a quick look – most notably the fall of Greek Antiquity follow an uprising of a certain religious ideological movement. Ideas that prevail challenge a perceived world view (often at the expense of certain leaders). The mob charge up, burn all acquired knowledge, plunging us into a period of increased ignorance.

    The evangelical fundamentalism – especially in the US – that has risen over the past century is somewhat a text book example of this behaviour. Ultimately EVERYTHING we know understand via science renders literal interpretation of the Bible invalid. The fundamentalists have one thing correct; if the Bible isn’t correct, the religion itself is dead.

    Listening to all denial renders this – as quoted above. The agnostic denialists are evolved from old world conspiracies and cold war fears as Mike has demonstrated throughout WtD.

    It’s mind-boggling, at least to me. It also shows an arrogence; absolute certainty that “X” is true regardless of anything to the contrary. The comment threads of WtD provide excellent examples of the repugnant self-righteous denialism of evidence by fans of conspiracy and fear (yes, fear; look at the conclusions drawn by such individuals – someone is out to ruin the lives of the majority and enslave humanity in one form or another).

  11. That was an excellent article, Michael. I’ve also run into Big Bang denial. Not surprisingly, many of them are also prolific climate contrarians.

  12. john byatt says:

    “All that stuff I was taught about evolution and embryology and the Big Bang Theory, all that is lies straight from the pit of hell’ and of course he would add climate change to his list

    but apparently none of them have the guts to debate thier religious crap on blogs, even though the deniers here are 100% in agreement with the creationists.

    It is this religious mumbo jumbo absurdity that holds back action , the usefull idiots that support those creationist endeavours cannot even see that they are just as stupid

    .

    • john byatt says:

      When even in 2013 people believe the nonsense as written down by ancient foreskin worshippers as being divinely inspired and therefore some sky clown is cited as the creator of the universe.

      Those ancient judaic tribes knew F all about anything

  13. Stuart Mathieson says:

    Someone, I think it was George Bernard Shaw, said “the reasonable man shapes his theories to fit the world. The unreasonable man shapes the world to fit his theories.”
    Might not be word perfect but you get the gist.

    • Richard Ryan says:

      exactly what the Ku Klux Klimate do … could not have found a better example! Who needs the truth or facts when you have theories and hockey sticks and editing

Comments are closed.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 769 other followers

%d bloggers like this: