Picture by: dunno source Submitted by: dunno source via Fail Uploader
-
-
Copy & paste this:
« Previous CHERish This Deal | McDonald’s Sign Fail Next »
Science Fail
» 664 Failures in Communication
Leave a Reply
Popular FAIL Videos
-
Recent Failures in Communications
Epicliciousness on Music FAILS: Everyone Knows Th… TT on Music FAILS: Everyone Knows Th… 
Josman Rodriguez (@j… on Dating Fails: Well Now I Feel … MostlyHarmless on Dating Fails: I Pronounce You … Ghotistyx on Dating Fails: I Pronounce You … McdanielLawrence on Dating Fails: Well Now I Feel … TT on Engrish Funny: Canada Just Got… Stereotypicus on Music FAILS: Everyone Knows Th… howmuchdidyoupay on School of Fail: Doctors of Mus… Spinach on Dating Fails: I Pronounce You … 
Cheezburger Company Blog
![\"Quantcast\"/](\"http://pixel.quantserve.com/pixel/p-94wNw88f65Rhk.gif?labels=MTVN%20Digital%20Tribes\")
Lol, shocking O.o
Haha, very shocking.
Not when you consider that it came from Bob Jones University Press – I hear they’re pretty insulated.
Am i the only person that notices that shes holding a gun?
That’s Texas for ya…
shopped?
O rly?
Yes, really. Anyone with half a mind can tell that in the original picture, she is holding a hair dryer or curler or whatever the f***ing hair care thing women use nowadays, but it is not a real gun. Besides, that gun is too large to be real, considering all the specific details and caliber, most likely a 1911 .45 model semi-automatic, but then again, I don’t know a whole lot about guns as much as I’m interested in them.
I’m pretty sure it is a combined gun-hairdryer. Probably just styled after the 1911.
its actually an automatic barrett 50. cal sniper machine-gun, but all the same
a .50 BMG would be nearly as long a that gun, were do you suppose you load them? and how does it opperat?
i do realise you weren’t at all serious, but it was just so increadibly stupid i had to be snarky
It uses Magic Bullets. Duh.
@ AFB- YOU ARE A HORRIBLE PERSON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Get a life. Knowing about guns is lame.
You idiot! I hate when people call it the Barrett .50 cal because they dont specify what kind of gun it is ( I.E. Barrett m95)
You idiot! The Barrett m95 is a bolt action sniper rifle!
It’s actually a Browning Hi-Power 9mm, but all the same, not what the girl was actually holding.
Nothing like a good ol’ Browning Hair Dryer and Bear Repellent.
Quoting GLaDOS:
“The “O rly?” part was in massive sarcas quotes”
sarcasm*
dammit
I take it that is apposed to the standard fully automatic version?
Judging by the stupidity of the text (which deserves a fail all on its own), there is also the possibility the photo was ‘shopped when the article was written, as opposed to later for submission to failblog.
Why hasn’t this made F.S.T.D.T.?
i think youll find that the picture is shopped and is to signify the dangers of electricity as if to say that an electrical appliance in this case a hair drier could be as dangerous as a gun due to its magical electricity. EPIC intelligence FAIL a pox on all of you!!!!
It should also be noted that her thumb appears to be going through the gun handle (next to and just bellow the trigger) where the clip eject should be. VERY shopped.
On a handgun such as that it is not a clip. It is a magazine.
Well, on most firearms it’d be a magazine. A clip is when the bullets are all attached together like with a moon clip for a revolver, or a block clip like on the Garands. Clips go into magazines, just like loose bullets do.
That said, nobody is getting confused when someone calls a removable magazine a clip, so nitpicking it is just inane.
@ AFP: Which you’re doing… Haha
@Jase: Eh, the clips vs magazines thing always annoyed me. Was never sure why anybody *cared* if someone called a magazine a clip, since there’s pretty much no situation where someone will have a problem because they get them confused.
No no no! Your all morans! It’s an electric gun! This girl is pulling her hair away for a cleaner shot. Girl says to herself: “I don’t want to live in world where so many scairy things around! Electricticity could be demon powered”
That is definitely shopped.
Certainly looks shopped; there are parts of the gun that are missing.
Don’t ask why I have a copy of this book, but I checked it out and the gun is indeed shopped in (she was holding a hairdryer). The text, sadly, is not. It is used as an introduction to the electricity unit. It’s actually odd, though, seeing as how it does go on to explain how electricity works (and properly).
…so they suffered from “stupid liberal arts major editing” like just about every other publication?
I have seen the non-shopped version of this floating around the webs as memes. I’d love to see the rest of the chapter as well as the copyright date.
Yes.
She’s not holding a gun, she’s holding a hair dryer that *looks* like a gun!
BTW,
I have definitely felt electricity!
mre too, found out the hard way that marking electric fences is not regulation
…and by “marking”, you mean…?
*shudder*
Noticed, but missing the reasoning.
Nevermind that a word such as “reason” was no where near this article when it was written much less published.
so thats why its a fail. thanks
I actually failed to notice. Thanks for telling. The stupid in the text made me go blind.
Same here. For all the stupid in the FIRST SENTENCE, it made me not notice, and I simply assumed that she was holding a bulky, white hairdryer.
Yeah, me too.
total fake.
What? Are you believing this? Or shocked at the stupidity.
…..you do know what a pun is, don’t you?
yep, a pun is a lame word play, which is supposed to be funny.
No, no…not a pun…What’s that thing that spells the same backwards as forwards?
A palindrome.
A palingnome.
She breeded again?
A thunderdome!
Can’t we just get BEYOND Thunderdome?
FINALLY! Someone said it!
Hey, not so fast Mr. Robot! There’s rules to getting beyond Thunderdome. Most importantly “Two men enter! One man leaves!”
bust a deal and face the wheel
Electricity is made of tubes. It’s a series of tubes. I thought everyone knew that.
wrong NJ star, it is the flow of unbound electrons from one body to another, yes friction may produce this flow, as when you may rub your feet on carpet and gain a static negative charge by passing some free electrons to the carpet and then you pull in electrons whenyou touch something appropriately possitively charged.
Unless one of those two men is actually a midget riding a retard.
marathon?
please ignore the stupidity of my previous post.
I prefer Thunderclone — “One man enters, two men leave”.
I lol’d.
Wow, only 17 years for that MST3K joke to finally be implemented? Honestly, it was sooner than I thought.
How about, “Over Macho Grande?”
“No, I don’t think I’ll ever get over Macho Grande.”
AAAAHHHH!!!! EXTREME RICE!
Notlob!
Good, I was worried no one else got that.
That’s Bolton backwards.
This is Ipswich!!
Is Ipswich anywhere near Sparta?
Norwich!
RACE CAR!!
Race fast, safe car.
Elf fart raffle.
A race car?
^ Too hot to hoot.
a man, a plan, a canal. Suez.
jk. a man, a plan, a canal, panama.
Shopped. i have this book in original shes holding hair dryer. look at wallpaper warped around gun
What is the name of this book?
the title i “i came in your momma’s face” by Earl Stabbingord
I can’t find that title at Amazon
I found it at Barnes & Nobles… it was only 99 cents and in public…
Even without the gun, the text is a major fail. Nobody knows where electricity comes from? They think it comes from the SUN?!
Yeah, the picture was ‘shopped, but there’s surely no way the text was ‘shopped too! Only one manipulation is possible per picture!
Just had to say that this is the stupidest comment I’ve seen in this fail. YOU look at the wallpaper around the gun. It’s a shower curtain. They bend. You’re an idiot.
You’re right, it is a shower curtain, but he’s also right, there’s easily visible artifacts around the gun. You’re an idiot.
that’s a shower curtain, i felt compelled to point that out.
Truly shocking
I find it electrifying!
FAil xD
Disney xD
bah, NINJAed ><
Eels. Do they know nothing?
Don’t forget the lightning bugs. I’m sure they have a role in God’s plan for my refrigeration and heating.
There are eels in my hovercraft, and they’re after the potato salad…
My nipples explode with the light!
Arrrgh!
Delight! “explode with DELIGHT”!!!
“Blinded by delight
Wrapped up like a douche, another odor in the night”…
Team Rocket blasts off at teh speed of light! Surrender now or prepare to fight! MEOWTH, DATS RIGHT!
hahahah i’m so glad im an atheist!
Yeah, haha! It looks like atheists are 200 years more advanced than christians…
2010 years, I’d say
Zing!:O
Went your heart strings?
Meet Me in St. Louis WIN
u great
Yeah, haha! Let’s judge 2.1 billion people based on the misinformation of one publisher! It looks like atheists are just as backwards and prejudiced and hateful as they claim Christians are…
*Eats chip on your shoulder* Yuck. I hate Piss and Vinegar flavor.
When those 2.1 billion people are judging _you_, you have every right to return fire.
While not all Christians who do that, it’s a rare thing indeed when a Christian will stand up against a radical to defend the core principle of their faith. That, friends, is a true Christian.
We all must fear evil men. We must also fear the indifference of good men. By condoning or even merely allowing hateful and deceptive actions in the name of so-called divine love, you are not turning the other cheek, but acting as an accomplice to an activity which has far more in common with the fabled Satan than it does with the fabled Yahweh. It is blind and foolish to believe otherwise and ignorance will not grant you immunity.
Yes they are as prejudiced and hateful as you are, it is sadly the nature of society. But they judge you not on “the misinormation of one publisher” but on the countless hundreds of millions or maybe even billions which you and your ancestors have put to death or torture for failure to follow YOUR beliefs.
it is unfortunate, then, that there have been just as many and, by most counts, far far more killed by atheists and atheistic informed decisions, such as the removal of religion and the concept of god from communist russian and maoist china.
Wow. For someone so arrogant, you sure are terribly wrong…
There have been a few atheist tyrants and mass murderers, this is true, but not a single one of them committed those atrocities in the name of atheism. Pol Pot, for example, was entirely about the politics and economy. It had nothing to do with spiritual beliefs, or lack thereof.
Yet almost all atrocities committed by theists have been because of that theism, at least in part, if not entirely. From the Crusades to Hitler, the Thirty Years War to the Spanish Inquisition, Christianity alone has ripped a blood soaked swath of destruction, horror, and intolerance throughout its history, tempered only marginally by its claims of love and understanding, and recent charity to enforce those hollow claims.
And that’s not taking into account Islam, Judaism, or any of the other violent belief systems that have time and time again proven that the most dangerous foe decency and good-will have ever faced is the self-purported champions of morality and understanding, religion.
jm, there’s a fair chance that tylerjames is only talking about political leaders and large-scale government movements… in which case you’ve addressed his comment handily. I could see however where many would say that there are millions of other deaths caused by agnostic/atheist influence, in the form of abortions. I believe that that point would be a red herring as well, though, as the vast majority of women who have abortions do subscribe to some religious belief. They don’t have abortions in a fit of atheism. Furthermore, a large percentage of women who support legal abortion have religious views. The idea that there’s some secret cabal of atheistic hags pulling the strings behind the legalized abortion scene is crazy, period, but it’s still a popular myth. For the record, there are atheists who are against abortion purely on ethical grounds. People hold widely varying beliefs. Period.
I’d also like to say that I originally came back to this post for the sole purpose of congratulating you on another post you made below, in which you BEAUTIFULLY summed up the basics on agnosticism and atheism. You said, “No honest atheist can say “god doesn’t exist”, and very few are those who would try. However, atheism and agnosticism are not interchangeable. I am an agnostic atheists. I do not know, and I do not believe. Any permutation of these two words, or their counterparts, is allowable, even if most of those positions are indefensible.” Simply and beautifully written, jm. With your permission I’d like to borrow it.
The religions in and of themselves are NOT violent, it’s the leaders and their fanatical followers who hang onto their every word that are the ones doing the killing. People killed people, Christianity was just an excuse.
… I’d like to think the irony there is intentional, but I have a sneaking suspicion that it isn’t.
Not ALL Christians are this bad. Christians are still people, with smart ones and dumb ones, just like atheists. That being said, there are some denominations that embrace ridiculous ideas like this, but there are plenty of other people who embrace similarly questionable ideals.
All Christians believe in Jesus. Believing in Jesus is dumb. Therefore, all Christians are dumb. Simple logic… Unless you’d like to argue that believing in Jesus is not dumb, in which case I suggest you look at the evidence (all weak and dated at least 50 years after his alleged death). Good luck with that one. And good luck finding a dumb atheist.
Christians do have some stupid ideas that are held universally, but it still holds true that not all of them believe things that are this dumb.
Christians aren’t allowed to hump on Tuesdays and Thursdays ):
But Christian side hugs are always allowed.
There’s stupid people everywhere, in every walk of life… I don’t need luck to find them, unfortunately.
I’m not religious though. Church is just a building, the Bible is just a book. They can be more, but only for some-not for me.
Oh hun, it is not hard to find a dumb atheist. Not believing in a higher power doesnt automatically equate to higher IQ. In fact I could produce about 20 of my friends who are atheist and among the stupidest people I know.
Also, your logic is flawed. In your opinion, believing in Jesus is dumb. However belief in Jesus therefore would not make any person who did believe in Jesus dumb, but in your eyes that belief dumb. Many smart people have done ‘dumb’ things, but that does not render the whole person dumb. Your willingness to critisize a group of people based on a stereotype shows a significant lack of maturity. Which you know… is pretty dumb.
Fail.
Doing something dumb once doesn’t make one dumb. Repeatedly and continuously doing something dumb makes one dumb. Believing in something that has no evidence for it and all attempts to find evidence for it has resulted in no evidence is dumb.
Christians believe in a group of stories which contradict each other and known provable facts. The only evidence for the this belief is the stories themselves which we have already determined are unreliable.
Every attempt to show there is a God has failed, and there should be some evidence out there somewhere. Even the intercessory prayer experiments failed miserably. Those are facts, not stereotypes.
Christians repeatedly and continuously believe in something for which there is no evidence and for which there is considerable evidence against. That is dumb. It is actually worst than dumb, it is willful ignorance.
Doing something dumb once doesn’t make one dumb. Repeatedly and continuously doing something dumb makes one dumb. Not believing in something that has undeniable evidence for it and many attempts to find evidence for it has resulted in confirmation is dumb.
Atheists don’t believe in a group of stories which fit perfectly with each other and known provable facts. The only evidence for the this lack of belief is a collection of unverifiable metaphysics and faulty logic which we have determined is unreliable.
Every logical attempt to show there is not a God has failed, and there should be a lack of evidence out there somewhere. Even prayer experiments have succeeded measurably. Those are facts, not stereotypes.
Atheists repeatedly and continuously believe in something which there is no evidence and for which there is considerable evidence against. That is dumb. It is actually worst than dumb, it is willful ignorance.
Being unable to talk makes one dumb.
Not necessarily. An injury can also cause this.
Google “dumb”, and not the colloquial use. Then apologize.
WIN!
Summarily:
Give your lunch money to the bully you only hear about on restroom wall scrawlings just in case he can actually pound you to death.
Sounds like playground logical fallacy.
It’s far better to be prepared to strangle the bully with your bike chain since nobody who puts up that much of a front can back up their tough talk–think along the same lines as the stereotypical internet tough guy.
Just because you’re using the same words as the original poster doesn’t make your point equally as valid. If you want to spread the word of God, snark probably isn’t the way to go about it.
The onus is always on the person making a claim to provide evidence for it. I can catalogue the contents of a room and prove that the items therein exist (within reasonable bounds), but it would be impossible to catalogue everything that *isn’t* in that room. I can’t prove that God isn’t in that room because he could be in between the fibres of the carpet, of he could be suffused through everything, or he could be in the upper back corner of the walk-in closet, jumping out of my frame of vision constantly, or He could be impossible to observe with the instruments I have at hand. If you want to convince people that God exists, you have to prove that He does. No one is obliged to prove that He doesn’t in order to disbelieve His existence.
I could also go ahead and write a series of stories loosely based in historical fact and claim that those ties to what you can verify must, ipso facto, make the stories I have written either true or worth consideration as themselves historically accurate. Most logical people would, however, refer to them as “historical fiction”.
I don’t think that what we know of of history or science is infallible, but I’ve yet to find good reason to disbelieve in the facts we have wholly, which is what firm Christian beliefs demand.
“Atheists repeatedly and continuously believe in something which there is no evidence and for which there is considerable evidence against. That is dumb. It is actually worst than dumb, it is willful ignorance.”
…Nealry everytime someone questions a persons belief in magic-Jesus, they say some variation of “Well, you believe everything came from nothing!” Even if that were true, though I’ve never heard any one actually say they believe that, is that somehow supposed to make the Jesus story more plausable?
And the idea that “You can’t prove god doesn’t exist” does nothing to support his existence. Nor does it mean the probability of his existence is 50%. While it’s true he/she either exists or he/she doesn’t, the same can be said for Bigfoot.
The claim “there is a god” is the positive claim. The burden of proof falls on that claim.
The atheist position of “I do not belief due to lack of evidence” has no burden of proof as it is not the positive claim being made.
So, feel free to share with us this “undeniable evidence for [god]“
Considering choosing whether or not to love Christ is the most important decision one will ever make, it’s no surprise there is a large amount of stuff written on it.
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/answers.html
You can get started here. Shorter than most books on the topic.
(I’d present the evidence myself, but it wouldn’t fit. Of course, I’m only providing the scientific here)
AAARRGGGHH!!
This is why I’m Pastafarian!
You’re saying atheists are wrong. Understandable. We should all bow down to His Noodly Goodness and obey the way of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, for this is The Only Truth!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster
I don’t believe in anything unprovable. Atheists may be wrong, but that doesn’t mean Christians or Muslims or Buddhists or Jews or Hindus or whatever are right.
“Atheists may be wrong, but that doesn’t mean Christians or Muslims or Buddhists or Jews or Hindus or whatever are right.”
No it doesn’t. Generally it’s much better to prove something right than to prove everything else wrong, especially when there are infinite explanations.
“I don’t believe in anything unprovable.”
Neither do I. Though your belief in FSM shakes your statement.
James, as an atheist myself, I think you are a freakin idiot. Don’t talk, you are making the rest of us look dumb.
I’m sorry, but I have to say that I find atheism to be very similar to theism in certain respects.
There is no proof that God does not exist. There is no proof that God does exist. As there is no definitive proof for either position, the only logical answer to the question “does God exist?” is “I don’t know.” To take either position requires belief without evidence, also known as faith.
And really, there isn’t anything wrong with that. If faith can help someone get through a difficult time, or just get through the day, it is a good thing.
What you are expressing, James, is fanaticism. You are saying that everyone who disagrees with you is dumb, and that no one who believes like you do can possibly be flawed, or at least be considered “dumb.” Fanaticism is rarely, if ever, a positive thing.
‘There is no proof that God does not exist’. I’m sorry but you put your finger on the problem right there. There is no way to disprove the existence of anything, but that is not a good enough reason to believe that it exists. We have not yet proved that Thor, Baal, the Tooth Fairy, the Flying Spaghetti Monster or Santa Claus do not exist, but we tend to accept the balance of probablility in the case of those ‘entities’. And atheists take a similar view of God.
I didn’t say that lack of proof that something does not exist was equivalent to proof that it does. I was saying that I think that both theism and atheism are flawed in the same way. That is, the holding of a particular belief without the ability to prove that belief true.
When you say that you can’t disprove the existence of anything, I think you admit the possibility that it could exist. However, there is no proof that it does exist. So, it cannot be disproved, and there is no current proof of its existence. It may be more probable that it doesn’t exist, but that’s possibility. It is still unknown whether it actually exists. So, I personally believe that “I don’t know” is the best answer.
I could always be wrong, of course. Feel free to try and convince me.
(For the record, I have no problem with either belief. I was simply trying to make a point to another individual. While I enjoy having this sort of discussion, I also think its irrelevant what people choose to believe as long as they live as good people.)
…and don’t try to impose their (dis-)belief onto others, I might add.
Just one thing is missing in your otherwise very agreeable comment. I’ve already written somewhere down there: IF an almight God exists it certainly is within his power to reveal himself to an individual without enabling said individual to prove to anybody else that God indeed spoke to him or her.
That should count as “personal” proof.
I’ve always believed that conversion is impossible without a personal revelation of some sort, yeah.
And even if it was in some way not real, I really don’t see anything wrong with the person in question having that faith to keep them going when times get tough.
Of course, so long as they don’t try to attack others for having different beliefs, as you say. That’s part of the point I was originally making.
agreed, and very pertinent point.
An argument often used by atheists is Occam’s razor:
entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem
entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity
In short, this means that you should always use the “simplest” explanation for any given problem. Simplest means the one with the least assumptions. God is to atheists, an assumption. Whereas other theories of the creation of the earth have less assumptions. Therefore, God isn’t a consideration.
I cut myself this morning while shaving with Occam’s razor.
Oh do be careful! It’s quite sharp.
Atheists assume something somehow created the singularity, often some sort of multiverse. Assumption 1. Then they assume many things were able to fall into place on pure chance, such as the earth’s position even occuring being less than a 1 in 10^120 chance to happen. And they assume life can form naturally, and advanced life from that.
That’s a lot of assumptions.
The idea that many things fell into place is improbable, but it’s not an assumption as such, there is evidence to suggest it COULD have happened. There is also evidence to suggest that life COULD form naturally, so that’s not an assumption either.
Wait, so a god wouldn’t use the normal laws of physics to build the universe? And here I thought he played with Legos built out of celery sticks…
You really not getting it? God is an extraneous factor, He isn’t needed to explain the origin of the universe, therefore, He’s not a consideration.
He is, though.
He did use the normal laws of physics. (Well, except for the creation itself and such…laws of physics cannot incorporate that…)
well i saw a documentary on PBS that shows how scientists figured out how it happened quiet interesting there was a lot of dust and one big piece then they all kinda came together and boom earth was formed.
Math fail.
(point 1 – the entire universe born of a singularity) Limit(x -> 0) (f(x) = 1 / x) = Infinity
(point 2 – rarity of an Earth-like civilization of sentient beings in an infinitely large universe) Infinity / (1 / 10^120) = Infinity
What’s the greater miracle, that an omnipotent invisible being created everything including intelligent life forms capable of not believing in its creator, or that this all happened by chance?
Blindfolded throw a dart in to a board. It will hit some point of it. What was the probability of hitting that precise point? A big zero, FYI.
There is no evidence of evolution. If there were, we would still have “links” in the evolutionary chain in existence. All purported evidence has been found to be manufactured hoaxes by men desperate to be acknowledged. There would be a recorded history of how humankind advanced forward from a previous stage of evolution. By your own logic, since there isn’t any evidence of evolution, then it didn’t happen.
To say that the chances of evolution are akin to a blindfolded dart throw is simplistic and fantastical. Only a champion dart player could make such a throw. By that analogy, only a master of manipulation of the laws of physics, biology, chemistry and who knows what else could combine the necessary elements to create and propagate life. No one knows what else is needed to create life. Man can only create life FROM life, and as such is not qualified to quantify the necessary variables to CREATE life. You can call it Chance, Kismet, Big Bang, Singularity, E.T., heck call it Gizmo if you like. We prefer to call that manipulating force Jehovah God, and his son Jesus.
I can see how difficult it must be to believe that someone cared enough to send his son to let us know that he still cared. Kind of like when a chief of medicine sends a resident out to do rounds and make sure the patients are comfortable. Nah, who wants to believe that someone’s watching us? That’s creepy… but hey aliens? Magical appearance of life in a vacuum? Sure, no problem.
Only a highly knowledgeable and powerful being (whether with assistance or not) would be able to design the complex and diverse organisms that exist today. That anyone would care to believe that it was all by happenstance is a greater leap of faith than to think that a guiding force was behind it.
For the record, the Bible does not contradict itself. The doctrines that men draw from it (or create to oppose it) to further their own agendas are what contradict the Bible. Any intelligent being can find the underlying message it carries; it can be found from Genesis to Revelations, and it never wavers. I’ll leave it to you to find it or not, as your freedom and will dictates.
I hope you’re taking the piss, and you aren’t honestly this stupid.
Hope. That’s all, I just hope. I’m not betting on it.
Here’s a hint: before you dismiss anything, you should understand it. Unfortunately, you don’t have any clue what you’re talking about. “we would still have “links” in the evolutionary chain in existence. …. There would be a recorded history of how humankind advanced forward from a previous stage of evolution.” You poor thing, you honestly have no idea what we have, or where it came from or how we figured out what it means, do you. Probably the only thing you’ve ever learned about anything to do with evolution is the misinformation and mangled drek regurgitated by creationist websites, who pretty much rely on the ignorance of their audience for their credibility.
This is sad. It tells me you are afraid to find out anything real about a world which you undoubtedly genuinely believe is created by God. Actually, it’s both terrifying and sad — so few religions actually embrace what science is capable of illuminating, and are willing to say (to paraphrase Carl Sagan) “the universe is so much larger and more amazing than the Prophets told us, this is wonderful!” — most seem to want to keep their God, and their universe, very small and very limited and understandable and appealing to small and very limited minds.
If you ever get over being afraid of learning how amazing the real universe is, let me know, I’d love to answer any questions about the science.
if x is GREATER THEN or equal to zero (or simply greater then zero) then 1/x=y, y being a set of all real numbers & infinity. Did you ever take Alg. II ?
The “argument from fine-tuning” is such garbage. While it is true it is a one-in-a-bagillion chance that a planet can support life, Earth is that one-of-a-bagillion planets. It’s like the guy who wins the lottery saying that god made it happen. No, there was a one-in-a-million chance and he was that one guy out of a million who bought tickets.
And everything didn’t just “fall into place” that idea is called “Hoyle’s Fallacy” (it applies to abiogenesis but people use it for other stuff, always fallacously). You need to learn about science from actual scientists, not from creationist liars and people at your church who went to Liberty Universtity.
This one always confused me, I’ve thought about Occam’s razor before. Take this question:
Why is there a universe?
Either you make one assumption(or possibly two) there is a god(s) and he/she/it made the universe. For the scientific argument you must accept every single scientific theory as correct. Two assumptions or hundreds, therefore a basic rule of science says God created the Universe until such time as scientific theory is confirmed fact.
…until you ask the logical follow-up question: where did God come from? if he’s always been here, then why could the universe not have been? If he was created, then who created him – and where did that creator come from? The simplest assumption is that the universe came into being for reasons beyond our current understanding – but that does *not* mean “god did it”.
As for assuming scientific theories – no. There are many *hypotheses* as to how the universe came to be, but no testable theories. Stop using the colloquial terminology and things will make more sense.
-The Universe is proven to have had a beginning
-God had no beginning and thus was always around
-The Bible is testable
-The Universe is proven to have had a beginning
The Universe is proven to have a singularity which is impossible to see past. There *may* have been something around before that, thus there is no proof of a beginning.
-God had no beginning and thus was always around
Says who?
-The Bible is testable
And repeatedly proven false or so woolly as to be useless.
-Time has been proven to have started at the big bang. “Before” isn’t really in consideration here.
-God
-Give me one false point. I know of none.
@ nicholas smith: you want a false point? how about you explain to me why the two genealogies of Jesus are totally different? because I bet you don’t know the actual reason why they are.
Yes, intelligent, intellectual atheists will admit the possibility of a deity existing, just as we’ll admit the possibility of your bed teleporting through your bedroom wall. However, the rejection of the belief in a deity comes from the fact that there is no reason to believe in one. If you wish to tackle it from a statistical or probabilistic point of view, then you just say it is VASTLY unlikely that deity exists because there is 0 evidence for it. If you chose to believe in everything which you could conceive of, people would consider you a rather odd person.
That is to say, it is a complete fabrication of the imagination. Should such a fabrication happen to exist then golly gee! What a coincidence! Chances are though, it doesn’t. That’s what separates the logical rejection of belief in a deity to its illogical counterpart. Hence theism and atheism are different in the logic of the choice made.
To state an agnostic atheist viewpoint: I don’t think it is possible to know, but I choose to reject the belief. I contend that this is not faith because faith entails a belief in that for which there is little or no reason to believe and not the converse.
sam, i agree with your point, just because i don’t believe in something it doesn’t mean that thing doesn’t exist…. claiming that something does not exist just because I don’t believe in them is a really really big show of megalomaniac behavior and that would make me as closeminded as the opposing arguments.
And to stagger…. yes!!! why can g0d use every laws of physics he/she/it could think of in order to build the universe?? do we, as human race, know all and every laws of everything?? i think not!
by the way i do believe in a higher power, does this lowered somehow my iq?
“do we, as human race, know all and every laws of everything?? i think not!”
I agree with this, if only because of one of the mysteries of the universe. Our current understanding of the universe says that matter cannot be created or destroyed (quantum theories aside). So, where did matter come from in the first place? We do not know, but the default answer is *not* “god did it”.
“by the way i do believe in a higher power, does this lowered somehow my iq?”
Depends on WHY you think that. If you believe it because other people told you with no evidence to back them up, or because a book written a few thousand years ago by sheepherders tells you so, then yes.
If it’s because there are things you cannot explain and you do not believe that science can explain, then less so. But, remember, in the history of the Bible, people also did not know how clouds were formed, what stars and planets were or what caused earthquakes and lightning. just because science cannot *currently * explain things, that doesn’t mean that a god did it.
You’re stupid if you think you have to have a reason to believe in anything.
YES! This is the best argument I’ve seen so far.
False equivalence. Saying that we are all all the creation of an omnipotent human-like intelligence, to say nothing of the belief that he had a son, sent him down, etc, etc, is an extraordinary claim. As such, it requires extraordinary evidence.
If you tell me that you just won a wrestling match with a bear, my asking you for at least a photo does not represent a leap of faith.
I see your point. However, I don’t think it invalidates my original statement.
In your wrestling match example, asking for proof does not constitute a leap of faith. I agree with that, but I wasn’t saying the desire for proof was the part requiring faith. Now, If I cannot provide a photo, you have no proof that I won a wrestling match with a bear. But, unless someone can provide concrete evidence that I did not win the hypothetical wrestling match, you have no proof that I did not in fact, win.
So, it is impossible for you to actually know if I won or not. One version of events is certainly more plausible, but that does not automatically cause it to be true. So, if you choose to believe either version of the story, you are then making a “leap of faith” because you are believing something without concrete proof.
In terms of God, it is essentially the same argument.
“If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense.”
- Bertrand Russell
I am sorry, but you are wrong. If your god existed, then according to belief he should answer some intercessory prayers positively.
Yet, the results of the intercessory prayer experiments, done by believers including Jesuits, showed that not only did intercessory prayer fail, in some cases it was actually detrimental.
If the universe was created by a god some 6,000 years ago, there would be some evidence of it. Yet, there are records that are traceable to civilizations much older than 6,000 years. There is no evidence for the so-called Great Flood of the bible, which would have left evidence literally everywhere.
Remember, your god is a prerequisite to the alleged Jesus.
Also, it is not that atheists believe there is no god. It is that atheists do not believe there is a god. There is no proof for and the results of every experiment to show evidence of a god has come up empty. There is no reason or need to believe in something for which there is no evidence.
Please explain in detail why anyone should believe in something for which there is no proof, for which every attempt to find proof has failed, and for which the stories which are the source of belief in said thing can be shown to be false and self-contradictory?
I’m agnostic, as can probably be inferred from the contents of my other posts, so I’m not arguing that anyone should believe in anything. I’m only referring to the theoretical existence of a God.
I’d like to see these experiments for myself before I talk about them, by the way. I’m not doubting you, I just want to examine them for myself.
Now, I accept that there is no evidence of the existence of God. However, as it has been said,it is impossible to prove the absence of God. Therefore, lacking proof that God exists and unable to prove that God doesn’t exist, I am forced to admit that I do not have an answer. To believe that God does or does not exist requires belief without real evidence, which I call faith. This is my only point relating to this discussion. That is, both theism and atheism are unprovable beliefs, and therefore are both faith based. It does not matter which one is more likely or which one is “right.” Neither belief has (to my knowledge) concrete evidence to back it up, so they are both based in faith.
However, as I’ve said already, faith can have positive benefits regardless of its correctness. It can help people through difficult times by providing a source of comfort, for instance. So there is a definite reason for faith. It may not be logical or even necessary, but there is a real reason it exists.
You have a common misunderstanding of what “atheism” and “agnosticism” mean. Atheism deals with a lack of belief. Agnosticism deals with a lack of knowledge. Atheism, by the way, is a LACK of a belief. Not a belief, but, rather, a denial of theistic beliefs. Agnosticism, likewise, is not knowledge that god doesn’t exist, but a lack of knowledge that god does exist. Not knowing and not believing are not affirmative claims, but, rather, denials of affirmative claims.
Also, they are not mutually exclusive. Most atheists are agnostic atheists. They do not know, but the lack of evidence and logic for a god gives good reason to disbelieve. I myself am an agnostic atheist.
There is no proof that Thor and Odin do not exist. Therefore, the only logical answer to the question “do Thor and Odin exist?” is “I don’t know”. To take either position requires belief without evidence, also known as faith.
There is no proof that fairies do not exist. Therefore, the only logical answer to the question “do fairies exist?” is “I don’t know”. To take either position requires belief without evidence, also known as faith.
There is no proof that ghosts do not exist. Therefore, the only logical answer to the question “do ghosts exist?” is “I don’t know”. To take either position requires belief without evidence, also known as faith.
There is no proof that vampires do not exist. Therefore, the only logical answer to the question “do vampires exist?” is “I don’t know”. To take either position requires belief without evidence, also known as faith.
The difference between Lordy’s claims and claims about God is the concept of what God is supposed to be. Vampires are creatures, they would, for example, be visible; therefore we can say that the fact that there’s no solid evidence of vampires indeed indicates that they don’t exist. The God of Muslims, Jews and Christians is not visible (unless he chooses to be), therefore the lack of, for example, photographic evidence doesn’t mean anything. It’s as if you’d try to prove the non-existence of light by saying you can’t smell it.
“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?”
-Epicurus
He is able but not willing. If He stopped all evil we would have no free will.
false. if you truly have any education in Christ then you would recognize that God has already halted evil, but in a way that we are only able to recognize it as a future, needed event rather then a current reality.
and we have free will as it is given, regardless of the existence or non existence of evil. scripture speaks nothing of losing free will once in heaven.
Except if something we know to be true(say, the Bible) says they are not real, then…we can know they are not real.
Atheism is “I do not believe a god exists.” That’s it. For me, it’s “I do not believe a god exists because there is no evidence or reason to suggest that he does, thus I deny theistic claims.” You don’t need evidence to say that something probably doesn’t exist. You just need a lack of evidence that it does exist.
No honest atheist can say “god doesn’t exist”, and very few are those who would try. However, atheism and agnosticism are not interchangeable. I am an agnostic atheists. I do not know, and I do not believe. Any permutation of these two words, or their counterparts, is allowable, even if most of those positions are indefensible.
Thinking that atheism makes any sort of claim on the existence of god is foolish. It announces only a denial of theistic claims. That is all.
I don’t believe that believing in Jesus is dumb. I’m fairly certain he existed. I doubt that he was the son of a virgin (unless there was some serious premature ejaculation going on w/ Joseph), or that he made water turn into wine (I thought sobriety was a virtue), or that he performed all the other miracles that were attributed to him (ex. resurrection). But fairly certain he existed. Saying that people who believe in Jesus is dumb is like saying that believing in Rasputin, or King Tut is dumb (both of them existed though their ‘magical’ exploits are dubious)
well, i didn’t read anything about that joseph ejaculation thing in the bible….. sooooo…
There is a wealth of evidence from multiple sources (pictures of him, records written during the reign of Tsar Nicholas II, etc) for the existence of Rasputin, and we’ve found the corpse and burial chamber of Tutankhamun. There is no such compelling evidence for the existence of Jesus. The only significant source for the existence of Jesus is the Bible, which is
a: Only a single source
b: Of dubious truth, given the obvious bias present in it and the occasions in which its claims do not match up with the evidence provided by more reliable historical sources.
You believe there was nothing, a big empty vastness. But one day, there was something. All of the matter in the universe simply appeared in a mass the size of a pinprick. And then that mass exploded. And gasses started spinning into planets and stars. Then, on one particular planet that happened to have perfect alignment with its nearest star, a lightning storm happened, and it created a single living cell from various unknown elements. And after crawling out of the magic primordial soup, that cell survived the utterly brutal conditions of a planet with no oxygen, and eventually turned into everything we see in it today.
I think I found my dumb athiest.
Replacing Big Bang & evolution with God means replacing one thing we don’t really understand with another we don’t understand, but can relate to better. Neither constitutes stupidity.
The big bang is a *scientific* theory; it is at least partly testable and replaced previous theories because they didn’t properly explain the evidence. Replacing a scientific explanation for something with an unfalsifiable one does constitute stupidity.
It’s forgivable stupidity though. The fact is that people are religious because the people they love are religious, not because they heard the Adam and Eve story and just knew it had to be true.
(Evolution, is very well understood and has been in the civilized world for around 150 years. Not everyone is properly introduced to it, unfortunately, and they are told that it is complicated and full of holes, when neither is true. The only remedy is to read up, I guess. Unfortunately this can sometimes mean breaking away from the beliefs of people you care about, but remember that because you care about them does not make them correct on scientific matters.)
There are several things in the Big Bang theory which don’t really fit together, which seem to contradict eachother or aren’t (yet) fully understood. An absolutely coherent explanation for everything is yet to be found. But even if we have the GUT some day: Who says God couldn’t have started the whole thing by snipping his fingers?
If you’re a big fan of science (like myself), you should admit that calling people who believe in God(s) “stupid” isn’t justified until it’s scientifically proven that God(s) don’t exist.
You can’t prove scientifically that something doesn’t exist.
I’ve never really understood why that is, but I would love to, if you have the time to explain it. (I’m not really that smart)
Because then every claim would have to be taken as true until disproven.
It is simple really. In order to prove a negative, all things would have to be known.
To demonstrate, I will use unicorns and the non-existence there-of. Someone says “Prove unicorns don’t exist”. So, how do we do that? First, we would have to show that there are no unicorns anywhere on Earth now. Then, we have to show that there have never been unicorns on Earth at any time in the past. Then, we have to show that there has never been any unicorns anywhere in the Universe, ever. It would require omniscience, knowledge of everything.
Now, how does one prove unicorns exist? Find a unicorn.
While one can not prove a negative proposition, one might come up with a situation that can exists if and only if the negative proposition is true or if and only if the negative proposition is false. In do that way, one ends up with positive proposition. However, this is not always possible.
thanks.
My proof:
If God is so powerful, could he create a rock so large that even he couldn’t lift it?
Exactly, who’s to say? Supernatural explanations make for bad science, because you can’t say when they’re true and you can’t say when they’re false.
The mark of a good theory is falsifiability. Cosmological theories prior to big bang theory didn’t explain things like redshift and cosmic background radiation well, so they were tossed out. There doesn’t have to be a GUT for the scientific method to be useful. Just this willingness to exchange current theories for ones that explain the evidence better.
Now, I agree that it is not good to call people stupid. FWIW I was only referring to the act of equating scientific explanations with non-scientific ones and not any person doing it.
I would also like to point out that it’s no one’s job to prove that God doesn’t exist. The burden of proof lies with the claimant. Nobody has to accept something as plausible merely because it can’t be disproven. As I said above, supernatural claims can’t be disproven anyway, so to say that they “might be true” doesn’t hold much water. It might rain tomatoes tomorrow.
The starting point of this discussion was atheists and religious people calling eachother stupid, that’s why I steppend in. I never said nor insinuated scientific theories aren’t useful, in fact I said I myself am a big fan of science. As far as the inability of proving non-existence is concerned: True that. But you can gather evidence – for example it is highly unlikely that it’ll rain tomatoes tomorrow, ’cause that was never observed happening anywhere before. Being a scientist you still can’t fully exclude the tiny little possibility that it’ll happen, but you can say that it is so unlikely that it’ll be a waste of time to spend your time expecting it.
Finally, “The burden of proof lies with the claimant” – sure. Unfortunately, IF an almight God exists it certainly is within his power to reveal himself to an individual without enabling said individual to prove to anybody else that God indeed spoke to him or her. Or, in other words: Prove to me scientifically that you love your parents/children/partner. You can’t? Then your love doesn’t exist, or does it?
Notice that I’m not advocating intermingling religion and science, I’m merely saying one doesn’t exclude the other; both CAN be true. The reason for my comment up there^ was my dislike for stubborn “I’m correct and you are stupid” rants when, in fact, a topic is discussed which is undecideable unless God speaks to you or you die and find out for yourself that God does or doesn’t exist.
Actually certain parts of your brain react when you experience certain emotions. So all you would need to do to prove you love your parents/children/partner is monitor the reactions your brain shows (most probably through an MRI) when presented with images of your parents/children/partner.
Unfortunately, due to lack of knowledge, I’m not really qualified to discuss this. In case you are: Would a brain scientist really claim 100% certainty about complex emotions like love or hate? “No doubt possible, this reaction pattern we see on the screen means the person loves, this interference shows he loves but fears a little at the same time and here we see hate resulting from disappointment.” Seems unlikely to me, but as I said I’m not an expert on this matter.
If you lack the knowledge, perhaps you should not jump in and make claims and/or ask ignorant questions.
The fact is that believers are making an extraordinary claim and expect that said claim should be taken as proven fact and truth with no evidence. They expect everyone to live their lives as thought said claim is true.
Atheists do not believe in the extraordinary claim and ask for proof the claim is true.
Now, I will ask you a simple question: If you believe in one god, why do you not believe in all the other gods? Why do you not believe in Thor, Baal, Set, Jupiter, Zeus, Apollo, Shiva, etc? There is just as much evidence for the others as there is for the one you believe in, so why not believe in them all?
First of all I suggest you actually read what I wrote, try to understand it and don’t just assume. I’m an agnostic leaning towards the possibility that God(s) don’t exist, but, being an agnostic, I won’t claim absolute certainty about this issue. Either God speaks to me one day, or I meet him when I’m dead, or I don’t. Then I’ll claim to be sure. Or not, ’cause there’s no ‘me’ anymore.
Secondly, my claim to not be an expert was about brain science. Apparently you’re also not qualified to answer the question (which btw wasn’t ignorant), so I suggest you practice what you preach and STFU, especially when you’re unable to contribute anything of value to a discussion which was respectful before you jumped in.
Thirdly, Aheists claim the same certainty that believers claim, in their case it’s the definite non-existence of God(s). Just not believing, but accepting the possibility of being wrong on this issue makes people agnostics, at least in the definition I am following. My point is, the claim of atheists is as extraordinary as the claim of believers is, because it inherently means that atheists insinuate that all the human beings who have ever claimed to have had religious revelations are mistaken or liars. I’d say such an accusation would also require extraordinary proof – which cannot be delivered. Did I clear that up for you?
Let me guess, you read that t-shirt? As said above my post, at least there is some evidence speaking for this theory.
There were no cells in the primordial soup. Just organic molecules, which the universe is abundant in. No magic either; magic isn’t real.
Jesus’ death is not “alleged” — it’s 100% certain he did die. Resurrection, on the other hand…
Well, sort of. It is not certain that the Jesus of the christian religion actually existed.
The evidence of historical documents is quite strong on that point, actually. Whether Jesus performed miraculous acts or not, whether he actually was (or is) the son of God, that may be up in the air, but there’s no reason to doubt that the man Jesus actually existed.
I studied this a lot quite recently. There’s greater evidence of the historical Jesus than of any other person in ancient history, bar none. The number of documents that discuss him, the quality of the documents (eyewitness testimony and interviews of eyewitnesses), the number of copies that confirm the accuracy of the copies themselves… it’s astounding.
We have better proof of the life, death, and burial of Jesus than of Alexander the Great, Socrates or Plato, Julius Caesar… go read “Leading Lawyers’ Case for the Resurrection” or “The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict” (first book is small but hard to get, second long but readily available).
Yeah, there’s no authority I’d trust to not bend the truth to their own agenda like lawyers.
Could you please provide evidence to support the claim that ‘There’s greater evidence of the historical Jesus than of any other person in ancient history, bar none.’?
I think I just met one… Hello, James!
That 2nd sentence was extremely ignorant. and i know plenty of dumb atheists. your tempting me to call you one.
Wasn’t it Stephen Jay Gould who said something to the effect of “About half my colleagues (scientists) believe in some sort of god, so either half my colleagues are idiots or it’s possible to reconcile a belief in god with current scientific understanding”? Would try to find the quote, but don’t have time to go hunting tonight.
You advise me to “look at the evidence.” I request you do the same. “The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict” or “Leading Lawyers’ Case for the Resurrection.” The evidence for the life, death, and burial of Jesus Christ is far greater than that for any other figure in ancient history, bar none. And that evidence also shows compelling personal testimony from multiple eyewitnesses about his resurrection appearances.
You think 50 years is a big deal? We know of Alexander the Great from stuff written FOUR HUNDRED years after his death. Giving up on stuff written a few decades after the events means abandoning almost EVERYTHING we know from ancient documents. It’s an unreasonable standard seemingly applied only to the accounts that together make up the Bible.
Are you saying that the evidence for Jesus’ life is greater than that for any other figure in ancient history? Because if you are, you’re full of crap.
I’m not saying I don’t believe that there was some historical Jesus, however, your sources are both by preachers of some sort. This leads me to two possibilities: you had a wider range of reading but the above two agreed with the point you’re trying to make here OR you only read the above two and therefore got a biased impression of the historical consensus.
I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with the books being by preachers, but rather that throwing in some books by recognised historians would be a good idea.
you may want to recant the last line, some people are athiest just becasue they don’t answer to no one. douchebags. unlike true athiests who came to the conclusion through intelect and having not been brainwashed as they were raised
Spoken like the former. XD
Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaail SATAN!
i know lots of dumb atheists, actually.
Ridiculous ideas such as thinking there’s an invisible sky daddy watching us at all times that can hear your thoughts and grant wishes even though there is no evidence whatsoever for this?
and plenty against
I’m a Christian and this “ee-lek-trisiddy” scares and confuses me. Is it a good wizard or a bad wizard casting the spell that makes these strange machines work?
I actually saw a comment like that a few weeks ago on a board for that Insane Clown Posse video where they think everything, like magnets, works by miracles. I had pointed out the irony/hypocracy of insulting scientists and calling them liars in a video that required quiet a bit of advanced technology. Two or three people expalined to me that they (ICP) were Christians so they didn’t believe in science. What was so great about it was that you rarely see such an honest and concise admission that religion basically equals ignorance.
If you think about it though, both sides (Atheism and theism) require a certain amount of ignorance, for the same reason mind you. Both sides are claiming that what they believe should be accepted as fact because of the lack of proof the other side offers.
No single living person knows for absolute certainty if God exists or not. Many people believe beyond a shadow of a doubt.
I’m not saying that neither side has merit. I am saying that the only real ignorance in the situation is to consider either a fact.
Just as there are stupid Christians, so too shall there be stupid Atheists. It is law.
Man, one whole lot of trolling!
I don’t know what is worse, the shop job, the description of electricity or, the outfit!
Probably that poor molested boy they’ve dressed up as a girl there…
The outfit.
The hair!
This is… this is just… what?
Really, REALLY what!
Actually, it’s not as inaccurate as it seems. We know virtually nothing about what caused atoms to have the chance to generate electricity. Scientists don’t even know whether electrons are actual particles, or energy waves, or both of them together.
So, while the way this article is written IS indeed a fail, since it doesn’t explain in detail what’s the matter with not knowing what electricity is (and, let’s admit it, the picture is the biggest fail of ‘em all), what it says is not a fail.
Please don’t open your mouth again, you already put several people into coma’s with that passage of absolute stupidity.
you, sir, need to apologize. that was a very intelligent and informative passage, while your responce was very shallow and unjust. :3
Daniel, MechBFP, I’d suggest going back to school but…. well, by the sounds of it, it would be lost on you… but for the ‘lords’ sake, please, pretty please, don’t breed.
FML, I meant Daniel and Jake_the_win, Mech BFP, failblog applaudes you.
I don’t applaud him. Since when does one need to “open their mouth” to post on failblog? Do not type for all of us.
Judging by the content of the post he was addressing, it’s quite likely the poster is a mouth-breather.
Probably has his tongue hanging out when he completes a thought, a la Jordan.
Yarr, ye be takin’ it too seriously!
Uhhhh, completes a thought? You made a fail just there.
John Dewey would disagree, see the link in my name.
i do, my nose is blocked a lot
lol, in that case you failed.
My degree in Quantum Physics agrees with Daniel.
so does anyone with even the smallest understanding of the true nature of electricity. everyone else in this thread is an idiot.
Well, as far as understanding things go, I’d imagine electricity is right up there.
It’s just that, after a certain threshold MISSING from everyday concepts, things get shaky. The thing is that the scale just keeps going and going and going.
The complexity of even an entire power grid fails to match it, let alone an electric hair dryer.
No such thing as a degree in “quantum physics”. Just regular old physics. And as someone who has such a degree, I can tell you it’s not that scientists don’t *know* whether electrons or particles or “energy waves”, it is that they are BOTH at the same time. Same with photons, protons and neutrons. Welcome to Wave-Particle Duality. We’ve known this for decades and have used it in all sorts of technology already, so it’s nothing new or mysterious. Scanning Electron Microscopes and Neutron Diffraction are two examples.
Perhaps not where you went to university…
But my diploma definitely says Bachelor of Science Honors Specialization in Quantum Physics.
(And I brought up the duality in a different comment here.)
Don’t be such a Bohr.
Touché
that was hot
Well my master’s degree in theoretical physics disagrees, if you want to throw around qualifications.
What Daniel said was
“Scientists don’t even know whether electrons are actual particles, or energy waves, or both of them together.”
WRONG! If you have a degree in quantum physics then you know many consider it to be the most successful physics theory of all time. Quantum physics says that it is ‘both of them together’ (except we wouldn’t refer to the wave part as an ‘energy’ wave – that’d more likely be reserved for EM phenomena). So we DO know.
Furthermore, experiments involving energy fluctuations have been devised and performed which show both particle and wave properties at the same time.
Sure it’s counter-intuitive. Sure, we sometimes see phenomena that seem particle-like and other times wave-like but those are effectively encompassed by the theory. It is not a region of ignorance.
The only leg Daniel has to stand on would be debates about epistemology vs. ontology but that’s not what he was going for and those debates are pretty futile anyway.
A subset of ontology debates though are those that involve different interpretations of quantum theory such as the deBroglie-Bohm interpretation of pilot waves. However, the debate waxes philosophical when you enter such realms.
I merely meant in the case of Daniel vs. The people calling him an idiot that I agreed more with him than them.
And particle wave duality tells of the functional properties of electrons, no their physical existence. We “know” that everything exhibits properties of both waves and particles, but, since all matter does this, it doesn’t actually prove whether the electron is a physical entity or purely energy which acts as one.
I’ll admit, that there are really few to no repercussions of this though, and simply referring to electrons as both a wave and a particle works fine, since that is definitely how it functions, but the truth is still that we don’t know what the “physical” identity truly is.
I just learned on FailBlog. Gratitude goes out to the physics degree holders.
Please…I beg of you. The world needs more physics jokes. You got that degree for a reason, people!
It seems to me like you’re delving into a philosophical matter. In that case do we know the ‘physical’ identity of ANYTHING?
To quote Bohr, ‘It is wrong to think that the task of physics is to find out how nature is. Physics concerns what we can say about nature…’
Ultimately, everything we observe will be through the tinted glasses of humanity. Furthermore,our whole understanding of measurement in quantum physics implies that the observer to some degree should be considered when we measure something.
Perhaps not, but we definitely currently believe that there is a difference between a human and a beam of light.
It’s not unreasonable to compare an electron to said beam of light (or photons).
Am i the only one who find all this physics talk a turn on?
Does getting turned on by girls who get turned on by physics talk count ?
And, we should believe you have said degree why?
Unfortunately, it’s because he’s right.
But he’s right on a level that requires quite a bit of understanding.
Um, that passage’s only merit was that it was slightly – perhaps ten percent or so – less stupid than the actual Fail.
I assure you that we do know quite a lot about electricity, and have for many, many years. And pretty much everything we know is in direct opposition to the text page shown.
Many people take ignorance for stupidity. They are not the same. Daniel clearly shows his ignorance on the subject of electricity here, not his stupidity.
Perhaps, but the textbook, which is written by people who should know better are willingly, even pridefully ignorant and that, in my book, is stupidity.
Most people here are much more ignorant that Daniel when it comes to this subject.
If you really have trouble believing anything he says, watch this video about the wave and particle properties of electrons:
THANK YOU QUANTA. The only truly stupid people here (or anywhere really) are the ones who think they know what’s going on.
Heisenberg’s uncertantity at work.
Indeed.
But this is even more than that! This also illustrates an example of wave-particle duality, which suggests that all matter (Yes, even humans) show both wave- and particle-like properties.
As a really insane (and somewhat mind-blowing) example, consider this:
If you are walking into a mall entrance and there are 4 sets of doors, if you walked slowly enough (which would be physically impossible, of course), you would actually walk through all of the doors simultaneously!!!
ok…so checking my understanding of what’s going on…. according to the video — in your example, if it WAS physically possible to walk slowly enough to walk through all 4 doors at once….it would be impossible to prove because the act of observing (recording evidence) would change the behavior of the particles (person) sooooo…. while we know a lot about the physics of the world, electricity, etc, it’s not 100% solved… we don’t understand the ‘observer effect’
While my example was rather far-fetched, that would hypothetically be the result.
Though, you want to be careful of associating “observing” with “proving”. Direct observations are not the only evidence of these events. Things like the interference patterns are also good indications.
And ultimately, nothing is proven. For example, Newtonian physics, which was considered “proven”, simply ceases to work at extreme small scales.
student, it’s not just that we don’t know what’s going on prior to observation. The particles really are entangled. Check out the WP article on “hidden variable theory.”
See, this was not the issue at hand-Waves, and particles, blah blah blah. What Daniel said was that the article was right, and that we know nothing of what causes electricity. And that it may be the sun. THAT is the issue, and that is where his retardation occurs most heavily. We all know. Well, maybe not all, as Daniel and the morons who have written this article have proven, but the Scientists know. Those who SHOULD have written this article know. However, that video was most fascinating. The observation part was especially interesting.
I took a different message from his writing.
I believe that he said that the article was a fail, but that the concept behind it isn’t.
I took from it that he was trying to show off by kinda sorta mentioning wave-particle duality, and in the process drew a false equivalence between reasonable people saying that science has limits, and BJU press’s anti-science propaganda. I wonder how many other places in that book it says “scientists don’t know X?” I bet it’s a lot, and I bet I know why.
Perhaps….
Since he hasn’t said anything since that post, I guess we’ll never know though…
“I believe that he said that the article was a fail, but that the concept behind it isn’t.”
Exactly what I was trying to say. I’m not a native English speaker, so sometimes I might express things in a wrong way.
I understood you perfectly well. Expect to be bashed when you get involved in discussions that Americans (I assume!) feel to be extremely important.
How do you know that?
While this video that Quanta posted does show the slit test in a pretty accurate way…the movie this comes from “What the bleep do we know”, is the largest pile of garbage ever made. It was produced by followers of J.Z. Knight’s cult “Ramtha’s School of Enlightenment”. This lady claims to channel a 35,000 year old entity that is showing her and her followers how to change their reality. Seriously, that movie is pseudo science at it’s absolute worst.
Oh indeed.
Other than this clip (and possibly the one about imagining other dimensions), the collection of videos as a whole is completely worthless.
I feel much less stupid now. Thanks man.
Observing does change the observed without going to the single electron level. I use a multimeter on a circuit full of 60Mohm resistors with nanocurrents flowing (accelerometer balance circuit) and the meter interferes because it has a resistance of 10Mohms in-circuit.
The slit frame wasn’t made of nothingness. That material had to be made of a substance with electrons in it. I wonder how that plays into things? Now I’m getting into this. It’s super interesting.
He’s partially correct, electrons do have a wave nature, the same way that photons do, it’s science. Go look up Louie de Broglie.
….and technically it is right in the statement “some scientists think that the Sun may be the source of most electricity” it doesn’t exactly quantify that statement with why that is the case….. *noms chemical energy* …..*transforms it into kinetic energy by running around the office*
But first that chemical energy was converted into electrical energy to get your nerves and muscles working.
I took a shortcut…..
Shut up
Since you have already killed the joke, I’ll answer you seriously. What it says is, indeed, VERY FAIL.
The fail is that this is was written by a religious organization as an attempt to dismiss or discredit scientific study and put it all in the mysterious hands of god.
It is not that we don’t know if electrons are particles or waves; we know that electrons exhibit the properties of BOTH. Describing atomic structure in terms of electron count has proved to be completely correct. Describing the behavior of electro-magnetic energy as a wave dynamic is also completely correct. As for the things we do NOT know, don’t worry, we will get there eventually. That is to say, we will get there as long as certain (and only a few, not all, but very loud) fear-mongering anti-science ultra-conservative religious organizations do not have their way in places like Texas.
But what he said isn’t a FAIL. The brochure, tottally a FAIL. But we are still trying to prove electrons actually exist, even though they basically explain an electric current (I don’t know how you say it in English). MY physichs teacher once said scientists invented the electron so they could sleep well at night =) oh and I’ve been an atheist ever since I was 12.
Do you know what a cloud chamber is? You can “see” single electrons there. They really do exist.
You don’t “see” single electrons.
You “see” electron probability clouds. The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle explains this phenomena.
Also, if you’re really curious about how the clouds are calculated check out the Dirac equation.
However, to actually address your point, yes. Scientists are aware of “something” that they’re deciding to call electrons. They know they exist, and they know some of the basic functions. What is undecided is whether they are truly particles or just (relatively) large packets of energy.
Finally, someone who understands Physics well. Thank you Quanta for explaining this one for me.
I’m not sure what Quanta is saying about electrons being ‘truly particles or relatively large packets of energy’ is right and would be interested in a more detailed explanation of exactly what he means or source.
However, Hcdragon, electrons are considered to be particles in the standard model. Sure, there is the whole wave-particle duality but that is a property of all particles. Electrons fit into the definition of particles as well as anything else we consider to be a particle. Furthermore, they’re very easily observable particles endowed with mass, charge and spin which makes them nice to experiment with.
We should wait and ask ATLAS and ALICE
Well, it’s a really, really long explanation actually…. but it stems from the concept that there is a finitely small amount of energy (or matter) that acts as a minimum. That means that everything is made up of these little “packets of energy” called quanta (singular being quantum).
So, long story short, the argument is that electrons may possibly just be groups of quanta (similar to photons, which although they are not real “particles” act as though they have mass in collisions).
Generally, I’ll admit, the particle theory is more widely used, simply because the debate as the the “physical” properties of an electron really doesn’t change much. Our understanding of physics so far doesn’t depend on this information.
I’m quite sceptical here. I’ll be honest: I’m beginning to worry that you haven’t divorced from your classical intuitions and precepts. Either that, or you’re adhering to a unorthodox interpretation or model. Which is fine, but I’d like to know if you were!
To get to the point, it sounds to me like your mind might be on quantum field theory. However, as far as I’m aware there isn’t much confusion on the matter. Quantum field theory is a very nifty idea, however, photons are STILL considered particles. Sure, they’re not massive, but that doesn’t make them any less particles than electrons are.
They’re considered particles pretty much because we’ve defined them as such. Again, it’s all part of the standard model, which, I might add, is a big fan of QFT.
Of course there might be other interpretations. If you ever use one, however, you’d better be certain to specify because it’s just natural that people will assume you’re going with the convention.
Failblog is hardly the place to go into detail about my works (or studies of others’ works, in most of these cases).
However, in a few words, here it is. Take it or leave it, since it really doesn’t change the mathematics that make up much of our field, it’s merely a conceptual difference (at least, so far that’s all it’s changed).
In this conceptual model, photons are comprised purely of energy, whereas true “particles” are comprised of both energy and matter. Generally, in this model, electrons are considered to have matter, and are usually categorized as particles.
I’ll admit that most of my work is not in that niche, and so it may be a couple years out-of-date, but it’s unlikely that it’s going to be completely revoked, since as a purely conceptual difference, it doesn’t impact mathematical calculations.
Thanks, I enjoyed reading that.
Either you, your physics teacher, or both of you are morons.
Well you just kind of killed any Evolutionary argument, because I’m pretty sure I’ve met more eloquent monkeys than you. You’re an idiot. You don’t understand a rat’s tail about physichs, you’re probably going to refute that by sticking a wikipedia copypasta in the reply, and you basically believe anything you’re taught. Scientists know SOMETHING exists, something which creates electricity, they just decided to call it an electron, and right now they’re still doubting wether it’s a particle and not just energy. Go read a book, primate.
oh, good, so intelligent people also read this blog… I thought I was the only one
The line starts back there, you know…
Do your trans parents see you often?
Have you seen the textbooks coming out if Texas lately? Those religious organizations are pretty much having their way.
And as a result, they’ll have the know how to match the technology and culture of the Taliban in no time at all.
/plant the seeds of stupidity, reap the ‘benefits’ of that.
i’m wondering if it actually was satire on religious organization publications and, in effect, a WIN instead. I mean, really, a gun? how could you accidentally use a gun with a cord on it to take a photograph?
Thank god! I was waiting for someone to mention the gun… I mean, wtf?
I would imagine it’s a NRA inspired novelty item.
Maybe they’re saying electricity is dangerous since we don’t understand it … then it reverts to FAIL again.
Seriously? The FAILer put that up as a message of “Shoot these idiots, please” basically. That’s obvious.
Rogue, you have the only really intelligent reply in this whole series until your last sentence. Why you dis Texas? That is really ignorant.
I’m originally Texan and my father holds the patent on OCR technology and growing up, my next door neighbor won the Bonner Prize in Nuclear Physics.
Step down and examine your attitudes a bit.
You do know this is one of many humorous sites on the web right? It isn’t supposed to be intelligent or taken serious.
What she said
There’s a big “who’s writing the textbooks” problem in Texas right now. Don’t know what’s going on in other states, but educators no longer have much say in the matter here. It’s really scary what’s passing for education now.
And the real problem is, because Texas is one of the largest textbook markets in the country, the standards Texas sets often become the standards used for producing textbooks for the entire country.
It’s a big enough worry that several politicians in California recently introduced a resolution to closely monitor textbooks used in California schools for signs of Texas influence.
So in summation Lost Almost, I’m not saying that there aren’t intelligent people in Texas. But the political situation has stepped into the quality of education. And that’s a damn shame.
I’d be very worried, too. BTW, I misread the name as ‘Lost Almond”. Made me *snork* .
Actually, Lost, we DO have reason to “dis” Texas.
The Texas board that reviews and approves the materials to be taught in Texas school textbooks has just recently voted to promote the teaching of religion as part of the science curriculum; the Judeo-Christian mythological story of creation will be taught as a “theory” alongside the scientific explorations of evolution. Since Texas is the largest publisher of grade school textbooks, this decision will radiate outwards. A SINGLE RELIGIOUS VIEW will now be taught IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS despite the best efforts of those wiser men who determined that our nation would not do such things. It is therefore ironic that while Texas is courting the winning the hearts of technology leaders nationwide, it is simultaneously corrupting the teaching of science to gain favor with the Christian Conservatives.
Note: By saying the “Judeo-Christian” story of creation, I point out that this decision ignores the Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, Shinto and OTHER current and valid religious views of the origin of life and man. Are they any less valid?
The teaching of religion belongs in our homes and our churches and synagogues and temples and mosques, NOT OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS.
I should clarify that I think Texas is a beautiful state. I have family there. But as an American who believes in the wisdom of the Bill of Rights, I am appalled at the Texas school board’s decisions.
You have some very good points. If they are going to teach creationism then they need to teach all forms of it. But to thrust the concept into the realm of science?
I have been following the Textbook issues out of Texas as well. Alot of religious zealots have brought national campaigning and million dollar budgets to the local school level so that they can place their supporters, blind supporters I might add, in positions where they can influence the content of textbooks in this most influential of states. They seek to promote Christian Creationism as a valid theory which is a direct violation of the First Ammendment to the US Constitution.
The only Constitutional way they could do this is to represent all religious creationist ideas equally and simultaneously.
I’m confused. How does teaching any form of creation in schools violate the freedom of speech?
Ever Since The Days We Were Living In The Caves
Some Assumed Leadership Others Became Slaves
Brother Against Brother Cain & Abel Were Both Wrong
At Eachother Since The Dawn Of Civilisation
We Ran Out Of The Darkness Like Dirty Human Haunts
Into Blazing Enlightenment They Call The Renaissance
Dividing Of The Classes Breeding Ignorance & Hate
Remember What You Get What You Amalgamate Church & State
Lest We Forget?
Time Waits For No One It抯 Forever Moving On
Colonial Development Employment Of The Gun
Kings & Queens & Presidents, Power Shifting Schemes
Ending In A Blaze Of Bombs & Artillery
Lest We Forget?
Here We抮e Living Now In What They Call A
Modern World
Documents Are Signed & The Banners Are Unfurled
A Funny Little People On A Spinning Little Ball
The Higher Up The Ladder Now
The Further Down You Must Fall
Lest We Forget?
The Real Mackenzies
Um I thought the fail was that there’s a gun where the hair dryer’s supposed to be? I didn’t even read the article.
Hey now, not everyone from Texas is an idjut.
We learn good science in Texas, thank you very much.
Just learned the other day that clouds come from smokestacks on the sun. Shows how much you think YOU know.
>.>
Everyone has seen these pamphlets. AWAKE is one. As a scientist myself, it’s painful to read. (especially when religious passages are placed at the end). And if the point is to ponder about no electricity why can she still turn on the lights in the bathroom and plug in the gun…..(long sigh)
Fail.
You are mixing up photons and electrons.
both are part of electromagnetism
Electrons have duality too…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron#Quantum_properties
Has you never seen “electronic arcing”? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPvonY2_kRY
“Scientists don’t even know whether electrons are actual particles, or energy waves, or both of them together.” – Actually, we do know exactly what they are. Every object (including you) starts having a wavelength as soon as it moves. Our macroscopic world moves too slow for us to notice, but an electron can move fast enough to have both particle properties (mass = 9.11×10^-31kg) and wave properties. Also, atoms don’t “generate” electricity – electricity is the mere movement of electrons. Nothing gets generated.
Yea, the “generates” part was formulated wrong. Sorry about that. And thanks for the explanation about the wave/particle properties. I remember my physics teacher in high school telling us that scientist were still trying to figure out what electrons exactly were, so I had no clue about this.
I can accept people like you saying I failed, because you show knowledge about the subject, but a lot of comments here didn’t even bother to reply to my statements, I’m not sure they even know what I was talking about.
religion = peddling lies as truth
Angry much?
No, religion = peddling guesses, hopes and unproven writings as truth.
Actually, the electron, or indeed any particle is a superposition of both a particle and a wave, similair to light in that respect. It’s just simple quantum physics (ok, maybe not simple, but you get the idea)
You’re either retarded, or thinking of light. Not electricity.
Since light is part of the electromagnetic spectrum….
Visible light is a narrow band in the electromagnetic spectrum.
It is photons which have no true distinction between being waves or particles. If you’re going to be a smart-arse, do it right.
um, no, sorry boss, electrons too. See Quanta’s Youtube video posted above.
WE know that the part of the proton that carries charge has mass, other wise where was e=mc^2 derived from?
A simple Google search proves you wrong. Scientists know what an atom is composed of, and how it generates electricity. Sorry. This is basic science that you should have learned in at least junior high.
The textbook is taking this so-called “ignorance” of electricity as a way of say that God must exist, because we can’t figure out where things come from.
The whole “Absence of Evidence does not equal Evidence of Absence”
Sadly most people beleive this is true. Just because you cannot disprove it does not mean you prove it.
photons are the in-between entite, and electricity is not related to atoms, it is free electrons flowing from one body to another, if an atom lost an electron it would destabalise and blow itself apart
except in the event of ionisation, the ionic bond holds it together and when the ions are separated they take their old electrons with them
electricity is the movement of charge Daniel. Ask any high school student taking physics and they should know something as basic as that. Electromagnetism was solved by Maxwell at the end of the 19th century any textbook could say that. This is an epic fail!
Thank you for not making this more complicated than it actually is.
I know that too. I was referring about the behavior both as particle and wave of electrons. See above reply for more details.
I’m not as stupid as you think you know.
Psst… Your ignorance is showing….
Try doing some research on Wave-particle duality and then you can come back and try to defend your lack of stupidity.
ummm are you saying that electrons DON’T behave as both particles and waves? because, surprise! they do. i’m thinking it’s *your* stupidity that’s indefensible…
that’s photons, electrons are all partical baby. they may emit photons under the right curcumstances
Even an elephant has a wavelength, actually…
There is so much fail in this… NOBODY has felt electricity? REALLY!? What about those people that have been electrocuted? And the obvious fail is the gun instead of a hair-dryer… but I don’t see how the scripture is involved… besides the electricity relation… it has nothing to do with the discovery and use of electricity. And another thing… electricity is caused by high amounts of friction in material that holds electricity (forgot the word for that…). And the only thing I’d have to change in my “getting ready” part of the day is not having my light on…
….or driving, or having a hot breakfast, or milk that doesn’t turn into yoghurt, or coffee, or checking failblog…. Hmmmm, that may suck a little.
you don’t need electricity to do any of those things.
except failblog, obviously
and driving… unless you’re using like… a horse and carriage.
Hever heard of a Diesel engine?
Driving….battery on the car….chemical energy to electric energy…ya know what a spark plug does right?.
Checking failblog….I defy you to make a computer work without one spark of electricity.
Fridges, which are fairly useful at keeping milk from turning to yoghurt at a room temperature of 85 degrees, which it is here at the moment.
Granted coffee and toast can be got around, patricularly in a gas fueled house, but your statement is somewhat flawed.
Ah, you noticed then.
ROFL, you’re killing me…too funny X-D
you can get milk fresh from a cow, make toast in an oven, coffee on a stove. There are gas and wood stoves, and I don’t think cows run on electricity, save the electricity of firing neurons.
So, you own these things then? ’cause that is the only way that having no electricity would make no difference to your day.
robok is Amish but is currently out on Rumspringa.
Ummm you’re forgetting that in order to move or think your body has to convert chemical energy into electrical energy to fire your nerves and neurons within your body which then activates your muscles. In other words you can’t milk a cow without electrical energy or light a gas or wood stove or even think “what’s for dinner”
*squeezes K@*
*panics*
Who is the blue man…….eeeeepp
*wriggles*
*cries a little inside ’cause K@ doesn’t remember him, although, he does realize that he hardly posts anymore, and really didn’t post MUCH back in the day . . . *
Ooooops
I didn’t recognise you with your blue outfit.
Just happy to be recognized at all!
I gave you the squeeze because all of your comments were SO clever, and made me smile.
You were definitely on a roll!
do you recognise me? sry, i guess i’m a little bit of an attention whore. i get ignored a lot IRL and when people do notice s**t it’s mainly the bad stuff. i feel sad now. must go onto new lolz
yogurt=/=spoiled milk
there’s a process involved. just sayin.
Everything else spot on.
Well… there are ways to get around the milk thing too. One could, theoretically, own a cow. There’s also powdered milk.
Course, powdered milk is the most god awful horrible crap ever and fresh from the moo-boob is warm and kinda gross but still…
Or a goat, but then there is the pasteurisation process…which for someone who has never drunk unpastuerised milk, may be essential….and no…no powdered milk thankyouverymuchlysir
(please credit me a little about the yoghurt statement….this is a funny site…..)
No credit, cash only.
I grew up drinking raw milk (the product of owning cows), it isn’t essential as pasteurisation was only introduced in the late 19th century, and normally it isn’t harmful to drink raw milk or eat unpasteurised cheeses though there can be a higher than normal risk of contracting listeria, bovine tubercolosis or brucellosis. But there are tests for these diseases (in particular all cows should be tested for brucellosis and bovine tubercolosis before milk production starts and removed if positive)
Also the number of people who get sick or die by consuming raw dairy products is less than the number of shark attacks each year. Mind you the alleged health benefits of raw milk over pasteurised milk are negligible, but I love unpasteurised cheeses such as roquefort, real brie, gorgonzola, feta etc. Thankfully I have a deli that supplies me with it “under the counter”
Diesel engine requires no battery or any electrical wiring whatsoever.
OBicycle…
The GUN — thank you!
It is a gun shaped hair dryer. Thus the electric cord.
Its a PHONE
Then who was phone?
RIGHT? I mean, electrons and particle physics what, that girl’s got a GUN to her head!!! lol
ur right play w/ capacitors u r going to get shocked
You make my brain hurt. Please don’t do that anymore. We are not part of your contacts list so texting is not an option.
No electricity, no muscle movement, done.
I wouldn’t call this a science fail as much as a religious nutcase fail…
agreed
more like winning at trying to destroy america
I would hope this is a parody. What is the source?
Mustard.
That’s really funny!
No parody (although the gun was ‘shopped in and it didn’t need to be). It’s from a creationist text book published by Bob Jones University. Creationists want to believe the world is 6000 years old, and they have to distort or completely toss out tons of science for that to work (which it doesn’t). More about it here (with original picture).
6000 years old? uh…the Chinese dates back like at least 5k…
*hides geology textbooks behind back*
Yup let’s not go there, last time this conversation started it got very silly…..very quickly
And Gully Dwarves only date it back two years. No more than two.
That’s true.
well you have to admit, two years is like, 349,587 generations for them. they’re like fruit flies.
and Eqyptian culture goes back farther than 6000 years.
Even as a Christian, I don’t get the math that other Christians are using to date the earth at 6000 years. Someone tried to explain it to me once, but it still didn’t make sense….
A bishop named Ussher, back in the 16th century, added up all the “begats” and given ages at death for people in the Bible. Since, of course, the Bible is inerrant, literally true, and contains perfect and complete information on everything, with no translation or transliteration errors *ever* creeping in [/sarcasm], he was able to calculate the moment of Creation as occurring on the evening before October 4, 4004 BC. Since then, Biblical literalists have used the “6000 year” age for Earth, and for the universe as a whole.
This is true about electricity. We’ve never really figured out where it comes from or a whole lot of details about it. So it’s not that off, really.
MORAN
MORON
MORISH
MORIA?
My cousin Balin in the Mines of Moria will receive us like Kings!
oh God, please read some physics book… ANY physics book. please!!!
I know where electricity comes from – out of the socket in the wall, of course.
Or batteries.
if you want to feel it just stick two fingers into an electrical outlet.
it doesnt hurt, i promise (unless you live in a 230v part of the world)
FYI, it’s shopped (duh). The original picture (see
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/07/frickin_electricity_how_does_i.php for example) is less of a WTF, but the text is still a major science fail (as is, apparently, the whole book it is taken from).
Bob Jones U. is “accredited” by the same agency as Liberty University (the diploma mill where such creationist luminaries as Kenneth Ham got his bogus Ph.D.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_University#Accreditation
The scandals surrounding SACS and TRACS are quite interesting. A while back I chatted online with a rep from Liberty U. regarding their accreditation claims and mentioned SACS/TRACS scandals listed on Wikipedia… the rep replied “you don’t actually believe anything you read on Wikipedia, do you?”
Christian fundamentalism has achieved a singularly remarkable re-branding of the word “truth”. Be afraid, planet Earth. Be VERY afraid.
HAS ANYONE EVEN NOTICED THAT SHE IS HOLDING A GUN!
~Really…..Noooooooo~
There is a race horse in that picture
Neigh, you lie!
Is anyone eagerly anticipating the moment she pulls the trigger?
“I think I’ll put my fringe right th—-”
Wouldn’t you be tempted to shoot yourself if your face is portrayed above a text that supid?
erm…
no. did you?
Wait, that’s a gun and not a hairdryer? I hadn’t noticed! Thank you ever so much for pointing this out to me! I’ll look for your help in other fails so that I don’t miss something like that again!
LOL, You are right, it seems that everyone was so caught up in the science issue that anyone noticed it!
Yeah, not quite sure why the gun is funny though.
Um, it’s a gun shaped hair dryer, see the electric cord.
Is not! It’s an electrical gun, all the rage in Afghanistan.
wrong pic! The original “science” hasn’t got the gun in the picture:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/07/frickin_electricity_how_does_i.php
No but the passage is still a fail.
Textbook fail. The people who write textbooks usually have a few brain cells missing anyway. This whole page is so poorly conceived that I have to wonder why they bothered writing it. If one is going to teach superstition instead of science, why say anything at all?
The answer to all the things you just said rests in three words.
Bob. Jones. University.
Geez, why is she holding a gun?
You would too if you were in picture, above the FAILtext
God makes electricity. Everyone has known that’s true since back when Adam and Eve were riding the dinosaurs! How else do you explain the burning bush? Don’t you remember the miracle where lightning bolts were coming out of Jesus’s arse?
Burning bush? Try Canasten.
Look up “electric pickle” on youtube…
No thrush though eh?
Wasn’t that Godzilla?
I always liked Mothra.
why is the girl holding a gun to her head?
because she is having her picture associated with lethal amounts of toxic STUPID.
Really? We don’t know where electricity comes from? Then how do you explain the MILLIONS of poweplants, wind turbines, and electricity generators in the world, all of which were built by HUMANS?
She wants to shoot herself because she is in such a stupid book.
FAKE
Electricity… from the book of the Amish
True that we can’t see or feel electricity, but the “Where it comes from” is retarted
Stick your fingers where a lightbulb goes, then turn the light on – you’ll feel the electricity just fine. As far as seeing it goes, just watch a lightning storm and you’ll see it discharge.
…hold on, did you just call me a tart?
I could do with a flan actually, where are the baked goods?
*shows k@ her cupcakes*
You should be studied.
Seriously. A human being that is completely immune to static electricity is a scientific marvel worthy of extensive research.
I will be applying for a $1.5 million balloon and fluffy sock grant in order to begin my investigations.
Why not go for the full on family guy all in one pyjama grant, I hear they have openings…
Sowwwy
because then i can’t have a balloon and fluffy sock party!
Why would a goldfish want socks anyway?
Kurt Cobain, the early years.
The original image has a hair dryer and not a gun. http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/upload/2010/07/frickin_electricity_how_does_i/electricity.jpeg
Electricity is the way to God, you only have to connect with it. Pls try it, just put a screwdriver into an outlet and touch the metal. And BAM there is your God, have fun with him.
Heyy they stole that from me! I’ve said the same thing to some atheists on IRC a year ago. They don’t believe in God, I don’t believe in electricity. The moral of my rant was that it’s Jesus who makes your PC running.
Wow, jesus does such things? Is he cooking my toasts too? Can I rent a jesus? We say it’s free…
Hey, soon as Ben Franklin sends up a kite with a key on it and it comes down with Jesus on it, you’ll have a point.
Yes, Jesus can smite you. If that’s what you’re implying.
Everybody knows that electricity is generated by yellow mice called Pikachu who, contrary to what TV documentals says, they live in dams.
is it cos the description is wrong?
or is it cos she’s holding a gun to her head?
or it might be the poodle hair, but I don’t really get this one…
You fail to, or you win at troll!
No, it’s just your average fail.
which part was the fail again?
A mix of the religonazism and the design on the blow dryer.
Or you, because you somehow, in this unending stream of comments, failed to notice the eight times the link to the original picture was posted. There’s no “design” on the blow dryer.
I feel so sorry for these religious idiots–they’re so convinced that they’re in the right and that the Bible backs up everything they say, but they don’t even understand half of what they quote. Of course, since I’m Christian, I’m automatically in the same category as these guys–psychotic, devout Creationist, completely full of myself, etc. :/ When things like electricity are stripped down to their atomic core, conservative “Christians” seem to jump to the conclusion that, since it’s not expressly stamped with God’s seal, it’s a lie of Satan. Why on earth is it so impossible to recognize the genius God gifted the men and women of science with and accept their discoveries as another gift from God?
I bet that girl’s father wrote that horrible excuse of educational material too. Poor dear.
Don’t worry, man, same here. Personally, I have no problem reconciling the Bible with science, considering much of the text is historical record or not meant to be taken literally. Christianity is a source of spiritual meditation for me, not a literal map of how I should live my life or, worse, try to influence others through politics or morals (because we all know morals exist outside of religion…).
*applauds both*
*joins in the applause*
*applauds Dragon*
Wait, what?
*applauds Arthur*
We’re in the mutual admiration applause society!
Is this from a textbook in Texas?
*Sigh*. I hope not…my education is pretty expensive.
F!@#ing magnets, how do they work?
Glue and hamsters.
Don’t forget the duct tape.
Miracles I’d say
Electricity comes from Faygo Particles in the air.
Don’t forget glitter. That’s how the magic happens!
WIN!!!!
This is probably from some homeschooling textbook.
PZ wrote about this a few days ago… Frickin’ electricity, how does it work? (with the original picture) It’s not parody, it’s real…terrifyingly real. I know people who use text books like this to home school their kids. Follow the link on PZ’s blog to the publisher (Bob Jones University) and see more pages from the book.
All who thinks this is fail are morons. Ask some of the most cleaver people in the world – and they would agree, that this is a beautiful way of discriping electricity. Idiots.
I thought it was an insight of what goes on in an American teen girsl mind.
If it had to do with cleaver people, wouldn’t she be holding a knife not an electric gun?
If you consider religious tarts as ‘some of the most cleaver people in the world’, then they would think it’s a beautiful way of describing electricity. Otherwise no. They wouldn’t.
So Nikola Tesla, Georg Ohm, and others who have worked with electrical currents and electromagnetism are not clever? Because I have to say they would disagree with this description of electricity…
Cleaver…. *backs away*
*writes warning about sharp objects on Piece of paper*
*duct tapes it to Carstens forehead*
*reads discrip*
*runs*
I accept your challenge sir or madam!
I shall ask June, Ward, Wally, and of course the Beav if they have ever seen lightening because they are the most cleaver people I have ever known.
…
They all have.
And Beaver called you a doofus.
Clever. Describing.
If you have read the bible, you should at least know how to spell correctly. But somehow I feel a book is an alien concept to you.
OMG that blow dryer is a hoot! Is she practicing for when she gets depressed that she knows nothing and has been educated to be a complete idiot?
PULL THE TRIGGER!
oyi, and the religious world has hit a new low…
Looks like someone at the book-publishing house was bored…
:D:D
Sadly that is not the case…
Oh humanity. I weep for the species…
Bang theory.
Crazy religious people. Psh.
Nice! Looks like a Browning Hi-Power.
YOU AIN’T GOT NO PANCAKE MIX!!!!
I suppose these are the new conservative Texas school board brand textbooks. *sniffs* That smell, ladies and gentlemen, is America.
Texas isn’t that conservative. Why do they have the highest number of Planned Parenthood clinics in the country?
They’re advancing Conservative ideas using the textbooks. If Texas itself isn’t conservative, the next generation will be.
FAKE!!!
Poe’s Law… Poe’s Law points out that it is hard to tell parodies of fundamentalism (or, more generally, any crackpot theory) from the real thing, since they both seem equally insane. Conversely, real fundamentalism can easily be mistaken for a parody of fundamentalism.
It’s real (except someone thought it should have a gun for some reason, I think it’s funny enough without it). http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/07/frickin_electricity_how_does_i.php
more like a win. will take less time for women to use the bathroom.
If they shopped the gun over a sci-fi electron ray gun, that picture is pretty much accurate.
Electricity. The Silent Killer.
Somewhere… Theres a robber trying to rob a bank with a hair dryer…
People laughed until he shot them..
Looks shopped
I don’t believe in electricity.
Too bad your computer shouldn’t run!
I’m pretty sure the picture comes from a safety warning about using hair dryers around sinks. I’ve seen something like it before, warning about X number of people getting electrocuted by dropping dryers in sinks every year. The text either comes from something else or was made up entirely for that picture.
so… why is she holding a gun (specifically a Browning Hi-Power) to her head?
Because the entire picture is a shoop.
http://pbh2.blogspot.com/2010/07/electricty-courtesy-of-bob-jones.html
This description of electricity isn’t as silly as you think.
We DON’T know a whole lot about the nature of electricity. It’s true.
Yet another voice adding to the chorus shouting, “Crack a physics textbook already!!”
The nature of electrons, and electricity in general, is pretty well understood. Look up Clerk Maxwell for the fundamentals.
On the other hand, now I want a hair-dryer shaped like an oversized .44 automatic…
Before you post, please read that 100+ statements that will give you a better description than what is in this book. Are you a physicist? I’m sure there is one at a local college who would love nothing more than to discuss electricity. We know a whole lot about electricity, enough to power your computer, turn on that light, drive your car, fly a plane, send people to space, etc.
The worst thing about is that it isn’t ignorant, it’s downright lying.
Who needs to use a gun in order to dry their hair?
How do we know this is actually from where it says it is? Nobody has yet to prove that this is anymore that a bad joke that ended up on failblog.
Ya notice, anything else that seems just a little too silly or unlikely immediately brings forth a Grand Chorale of “Izza Shop!” But the same bunch will unquibblingly latch on to the most egregious rubbish as long as it pokes fun at the Stinking Christers.
This isn’t real, surely?
What do you make of this?
actually this is kinda sad
Si, que lastima…
American Fail… only in America you can find people that buy this stuff…
Chile Fail… only in Chile you can find people that buy this stuff…
Why the Chile-hate?
Why the America-hate?
I hate nothing, I just dislike with great enthusiasm.
*snork*
Europe rocks
Except for France.
No reason–just because
As a French, I can recognize you damn british accent xD
Lots of creationists in the UK. Just sayin’.
Oh yeah, Turkey too. Muslim creationists, who hate both Christians and evolution. Eek!
As a Christian, this kind of thing makes me want to cry… blood. *facepalm*
Is she holding a gun?
sad, truely sad. Her missunderstanding of electricity has caused her so much pain, she feels she should end it all.
nobody has felt electricity!? How about people in the electric chair…? I’m pretty sure they’ve felt it.
FAIL !
I got pancake mix and you aren’t.
fake image. See scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/07/frickin_electricity_how_does_i.php
We’ve observed electrons. We’ve also observed electric currents in cathode ray tubes. That’s how the particulate nature of electricity was discovered. (Notice I didn’t say “particular nature” – you might have skimmed over that. I said PARTICULATE – as in Particle-like nature.)
you sux
haha fail
uhh, wtf
BJU fail
I heard this exact same analogy, but wind was used instead of electricity. No one can see electricity… except for lightning and stuff…
Is she holding a gun? sad, truely sad. Her missunderstanding of electricity has caused her so much pain, she feels she should end it all.
Its a mobile phone you stupid!
Ok, now. Seriously? What kind of complete neanderthal would buy this crap? And this is a freaking UNIVERSITY textbook?
Friggin’ unbelievable.
No. Bob Jones University publishes elementary level textbooks as well.
I’m hoping – really hoping – that this is a lower level science book and they’re just trying to keep it simple for the littles. I do know, however, that BJU Science is not exactly a respected resource among the homeschool community, except for a small group who uses them.
…WTF?
Damn religious ignorand a-hles.
*ignorant
And here i thought electricity was electrons moving charge, silly me it’s unknown.
Lightning is observable. Therefore Electricity is observable and this book is rediculous.
But the light that you see from lightening isn’t the electricity itself; it’s what the electricity does to the surrounding air (burning). The electricity iself is invisible.
Religious people lmfao. BTW have you noticed a lot of people use these comment sections for like threads and shet?
Am I the only one seeing the gun in her hand?
This has got to be a parody. It’s true that Christian fundies can be stupid, but not to this extent, not at the college level. The reason the source material is not referenced indicates this is just a parody.
This is not a college level textbook.
now i see why so many people have a problem with texas and their textbooks
‘shopped
F$%&^ing electricity, how does it work?
Some scientists think the sun may be the source of most electricity.
BIBLE fail!
Isn’t that true for the whole thing, though?
The problem with making fun of Christians in general for what some of them once believed is that they can just as easily make fun of us for once believing that the sun revolved around the earth. When you make illogical generalizations about them its very easy for them to dismiss you as illogical enemies. Do you really want to change their minds or are you happy to keep them where they are so you have someone to look down upon?
I like you.
Heh… Actually, it was the church that insisted the sun revolved around the earth. Scientists were thrown into prison on charges of heresy for suggesting it didn’t.
Thank you, i was just about to point that out Floop!
Though Drat, you make a good point – you can’t argue against illogical beliefs with other illogical beliefs. That’s why scientific reasoning is so very important.
Actually, no. In 1616, the Catholic church denounced heliocentrism as “false and contrary to Scripture.” Why do you think Galileo spent much of his late life under house arrest?
That is EXACTLY what I said.
Heliocentrism: The belief that our sun is the center of our particular planetary system, as opposed to the belief that the earth is the center with the sun revolving around it.
So basically, you just agreed with him.
This looks shopped. I can tell from some of the pixels and from seeing a few shops in my time.
double fail in this.
1. science explains electricity, this writer apparently rejects fact in place of religion.
2. the girl has a fricken GUN HAIR DRYER!
If you give this to a kid and try to pass it off as “educational”, is that child abuse?
Depends on the IQ of the person you’re asking.
One small step for weird pictures. One giant leap for horrible science.
If you liked this fail as much as I did, check out the Creation Museum just outside of Cincinnati. http://creationmuseum.org/ I spent a whole day there and loved it. The people-watching alone was great, but animatronic dinosaurs and cavemen, together… enough said!
Ha, the next thing you know Christians are going to be saying that evolution doesn’t exist! Oh wait….
What ARE birds? We just don’t know!
People like this give religion a bad name. They act like science and religion can’t coexist, and so rely upon deceiving people to make up for it.
There’s no verse in the Bible where it says “man is incapable of truly understanding electricity”. Absolutely no good reason to say something so stupid as what this book says, no contradiction between God and electricity. Indoctrinating people for the sake of making them stupid doesn’t serve any purpose, and if they can tell what’s going on it’ll just lead them FURTHER from having any trust or respect for religion.
A Beka is just as bad, they make up and change history in their history books for the sole purpose of making Catholics look bad.
tl;dr – Why did they write this, unless they were TRYING to make Christianity look bad? Then again, that may be the primary reason Bob Jones University exists, to act as a shining example of religion gone horribly wrong.
1. Religious people have had it in for science since before the scientific revolution.
2. BJU is very real, and is what homeschoolers use for textbooks.
3. Catholics tend to accept that wacky “evolution” stuff, but then, I always found the whole “Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus” viewpoint to be pretty disturbing. Plus the fact that the Vatican uses its UN seat to prevent condoms from getting to the third world, and the policy of excommunicating clergy who go to the police about molestation… as a Catholic, I hate to say it but, we already look bad.
Not backwoods fundie embarrassing bad, but “we haven’t even taken the first steps towards making up for the atrocities committed during the crusades, and the church is still finding new ways to commit political suicide” bad.
Lol, drying your hair with a tangant sight Hi Power! Its shopped though.
This pamphlet is FAIL.
The author is FAIL.
The people who label this as a typical Christian belief are even more FAIL.
Gah. Cleverness fail, on so many levels.
Proof that religion is a curse to humanity.
Holy crap. Stupid author doesn’t know the answer, so proclaims it a mystery and effectively tells the poor student whatever would stop the student from going out and finding out about electricity. It’s like they want to remain ignorant on purpose or something. Oh wait, that’s exactly what they want.
See how much more wonderful this great country of ours will be if we let the religious nut-jobs take it over? People this stupid should be banned from using electricity. Then they wouldn’t have printing presses with which to propagate this disgraceful pile of feculence.
“If?” You say that as if the last decade of American politics didn’t reek of the bad governance of a man who claimed to be able to talk to Yahweh.
So let me get this straight:
This is an attempt by someone of faith to throw doubt on not only science but a long proven aspect of science?
Uh…?
IF only the earth had less stupid people
This must be one of those new Texas schoolbooks.
Really? is that necessary?
the message in general is correct. scientist know nothing about electricity, only it’s side effects. N. Tesla was the last person who really scratched the surface of that knowledge.
i object to the psalm and the gun though.
and electric appliance in the bathroom.
and why has the chick that terrible piece of cloth on?
why has the chick any cloth on?
It almost sounds like something from BBC’s “Look Around You” spoof series.
“What is electricity? It’s a difficult question because electricity is impossible to describe. One might ask the same about birds. What are birds? We just don’t know”
“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” – Arthur C. Clarke
It’s not these peoples’ fault for being morons, it’s just that the technological understanding of intelligent people is far beyond theirs. They’ve been taught to say “God did it” when they don’t understand something, that’s all.
A shame that religious indoctrination and teaching ignorance passes as “education” in certain parts of the US. Those children will be left behind the rest of us who worked out how electricity works at 7 years old and as adults are now creating the technology of the future, which will leave them even further behind.
Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you 80% of the homeschooling textbooks available in this country. Be afraid.
80%? Really? That’s interesting because from the ones I’ve seen texts like this are in the minority.
Can you please back up your statement with proof?
No they aren’t. Homeschooling is mostly on the rise because parents are sick of the education system. It sucks and we’re behind other countries because of it. Most of them use the same books you did or ones colleges use. In fact homeschoolers are usually favored by universities. Basically, they’re smarter than you
(and no I wasn’t homeschooled)
Christ, just Google “homeschool science curriculum”, and you’ll find that practically *all* of them support Creationism/I.D. Homeschooling is a tool used by zealot Christian parents to protect their children from real science.
This gives a whole new meaning to the phrase “blow your brains out”. Although given by the quality of that textbook there are no brains in there.
Pull the trigger!!!! Do it!
There is religion for us. Always holding back humanity. I have nothing against Christians or whatever, but there is NO proof at all for God, and believing in something that has no proof is just dumb.
There is no proof that God DOESN’T exist. Science doesn’t prove things, it simply disproves alternatives to arrive at a best guess. If we found a place int eh universe where there is a different constant for gravity, we’d have to revise over 300 years of science.
God isn’t testable by science. There is no proof of his existence, nor of his non-existence. And quite frankly, science doesn’t gain anything from trying to prove or disprove God.
XD lets count how many things are wrong with this picture~~
1) why does she have a gun-shaped hair dryer?
2) why is there a picture of a HORSe in the bathroom?
3) She looks like shes from the 70′s.
4) her hair isnt even wet, its messed up.
5) what the F is that on the sink?
6, 7, 8, 9, and 10) Everything said in the writing below.
This isn’t a science fail – it’s a pseudo-science/religion fail. Not being able to explain something with simple with facts, backed up with a line from the bible.
Not to mention, the gun….
No wonder secularism is rising!
There’s a creationist school textbook for you.
I guess the writer of this article has never been electrocuted.
Even the text here is a fail, unless it was written, like, 60 years ago.
TIME LINE FAIL
It would have had to have been written like 150 years ago, for it to make any sense at all. 60 Years ago we had many power plants and even more appliances that used electricity.
That is just not right..
Can’t understand the FAIL here. Electricity is yet to be defined. As I remember from high school, the all-accepted definition will receive a prize. A BIG one.
Encyclopedia Britannica says: “Electricity: Phenomenon associated with stationary or moving electric charges.”
I say it’s a FAILBlog FAIL.
Just wanted to add that the passage is basically correct. The Bible quote is unnecessary, everything else is widely accepted among physicists.
Oh, and remember: electricity is NOT synonymous with energy!
In summary: movement of (charge-carrying) electrons or other ions.
‘shoped
Did i get an instant ban? Why?
This fails in so many levels
Poor Tesla would be rolling in his grave if he read this.
This page in the original post is real? There are people that have been so poorly schoolded that thay don’t know how to fact check or research? Wow, they must feel no pain, because most humans learn from mistakes. We are in trouble if this is what some poor kid had to learn, I hope he finds the internet and quickly!
jeez, anyone who thinks this is real is a FAIL.
its obviously shopped, look at it in a higher resolution
It may be shopped, but the caption was probably written by an inexperieced kid? I’ve heard people beleive all types of crazy stuff, so you saying someone is dumb for thinking someone else thinks something else is right? Recursive hate I guess you’d call it
People believe the earth is only 4000 years old, and a million other things science has proven to be fairy tales!
Are you people saying that you’ve never seen a gun shaped blow dryer?
Of course, the switch is the trigger,
So the FAIL is that she is trying to dry her hair without even turning the dryer ON!!!
Yet another book brought to you by ICP. Or is this their next song?
This looks shopped. I can tell from some of the pixels and from seeing quite a few shops in my time.
I fail to see the fail here. Sounds pretty accurate to me.
It’s easy to feel electricity. Just stick a fork into an electrical socket.
its funny how if someone cant explain something they ether call it magic or god
It’s magic, duh.
Looks like Gary Busey wrote this book.
what a fu *** ck. nobody knows where the electricity comes from? what a fu *** ck.
1. Nobody has seen electricity.
2.Everybody knows electricity exists.
3. Therefore, God exists!
Worst. Logic. Ever.
Yet, I have heard this before. Believe it, or Not.
That page is from a Texas “science” class textbook, isn’t it?
*facepalm*…. protestants…
As someone raised in a family of Christian engineers (in Texas, too!), every time I see something like this it makes me die a little inside.
And then I see all the bile that’s apparently OKAY to spew at Christians for the actions of a minority and I die even more inside. Hate begets hate begets hate. Ugh.
Agreed. I’m a Christian biologist from Tennessee and sometimes I feel like there’s nothing left inside of me to die when I come across something like this
Can you say “Photo shop”?
No wonder homeschoolers use this tripe. They charge just $32 for a textbook whereas a normal textbook can be $200 alone.
May I just point out that this girl is using far better trigger discipline than most folks you see on TV and in movies? Seriously. It makes me cringe sometimes when I see folks waving guns around with their fingers on the triggers on TV.
TRIPLE FAIL: 1. It’s a guy that they are trying to pass by as a girl. 2. The gun. 3. Their theory of electricity is a fail.
God, A Red Nugget, A Fat Egg Under a Dog
miracles
so much wrong with this . . . .
So that is what “Christian science” does….
Again: religion fails!!!!!
This is what physics textbooks would look like in a world of fundamentalists and fanatics. Where information such as the nature of electricity (flow of electrons from areas of high concentration to areas of low concentration) is not available to, or deemed necessary for, the general populace, lest they begin to dought their blind obediance and faith.
HOLY CRAP! There’s a lot of comments in here… Okay, as far as I can tell, from what I have read from them, it’s a J.W. tract. They’re all like that. Weird stuff that doesn’t make sense and just makes you laugh. It is obviously shopped, but still. The text is pretty recognizable as a J-dub tract. No offense…
OMG i swear before i clicked see all coments it was a hairdyer not a gun… i can see dead people 2
also if its supposed to be like for a little extra funny init then, my bad but hey if its not then Fail at photo shop.
Dolphins are pretty
I think I saw the tenth dolphin
Can I just say, as a Christian and as a biologist, that we’re NOT all that stupid…. This is pathetic. man… its just so embarrassing… In my personal experience, its harder to find Christians like this than it is to find ones like myself, who know evolution exists and who definitely know what electricity is…
Lol, You can still see some of the hair dryer behind the gun. Also, Her hand is going THRough the part right before the trigger And the cord? Lol.
However, it’s clearly intentionally shopped poorly because they wanted to show that electricity is dangerous.
this has to be from ‘of pandas and people’
ELECTRICITY, EEE-LECT-TRICITY!
The original:
http://i.imgur.com/4hfC6.jpg
YES OF COURSE THE GUN IS SHOPPED; the real tragedy is, the text *isn’t*.
Two words for you:
The game
Mwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!!!!!!1!!!eleven!!!
This is one of the reasons I hate christian people.
They’re always trying to obliterate reality using their god as a excuse.
This is one of the reasons I hate Cerberusdraco.
He’s always trying to hate religious people using ridiculous blanket statements as an excuse.
Catholic Teachings + Science = Oil + Water, or better yet, BP + Preparation.
And nice choice of hairdryers.
comment #666 lol also who is really this stupid
666 is gay