Wednesday, March 18, 2009

"The sky isn't blue"-says a creationist

I'm on Youtube alot and I knew before hand that there are alot of crazy people out there. I'm also quite aware that over half the people in my country currently deny evolutionary theory, which to a person currently studying evolutionary biology is like denying the sky is blue.

So when I encountered a new video denying evolutionary theory, I posted a comment that went something like "To deny evolution is deny a direct observation. It's like denying the sky is blue while refusing to look up." About an hour later, someone posted a reply and I am here posting it in it's entirety

"the sky isnt blue you silly person you, its clear and how is evolution a direct observation when have you obsevred a monkey give birth to a human or an animal evolve . evolution is not a true science! science are things you can test,observe its called empirical science which is true science , you believe animals did something millions of years ago that they never do now, that's change into another kind of animal then you have more faith than i do. "

Yes you read that correctly "the sky isn't blue". *blink*

Now I could have linked the guy to this page,, that shows direct evidence of speciation . I even could have linked him to the wiki page that says ". During daylight, the sky of Earth has the appearance of a deep blue surface because of the air's scattering of sunlight."

However I'm still numbed by the stupidity rays that are currently being blasted through my computer screen due to the extremely high radiation level that this comment gives how. If anyone has any suggestions, pleeze let me know.

1 comment:

mymelody95 said...

In L.A. it's more smog colored. ;). Yes creationists can get ridiculously frustrating. When I hear misinformation I, and many critical thinkers I find, have this somewhat instinctive reaction to remedy the situation with, as we can see from this post, a correction backed by evidence from reliable sources. Sometimes I wonder, however, if supplying people with evidence, who probably are not interested at getting to truth claims so much getting the world to fit into his/her own personal schematic, which is what i saw when he used the word "faith," is a bit pointless. :P Either way. I wonder if the poster understand what "clear" looks like ;)