Yer a lar, EVILution is a lah, mah TRUTH FISH eats yer darwin decal on the back of mah FORD TRUCK.

Awesome site. Your contribution to this YTMND 'debate' is fantastic.

not bad at all

-1 for a totally enlightening kickass YTMND that ends in cheap-shot stereotyping of southerners and republicans (of which I am neither).

Thanks for shedding some light on this subject to those that won't open their eyes.

-1 for ya rly. I mean christ.

You choose to believe in evolution the same way fundamenalist christians choose to believe things happened suddenly. It's still a theory and not a fact.

5 for raptor jesus.

Good sh*t. I believe all of that.

+1 for republican joke

Almost all the answers were "B".

Yeah... this will be less effective because of the Republican comment (which I am not).

WitchPirate, for reference, what do you consider an example of "fact"?

You are SO going to get Left Behind when Jesus sees this.

Change Republican to George W. Bush.

evolution is a fact, natural selection is the theory.

Evolutions stares each of in the face every day, not just life but culture, technology, thought, everything evolves. To deny it is true blindness.

@WitchPirate - Except we've seen evolution occur, such as in the species of plants and fruit fly that I mentioned in my YTMND. Its an accepted fact in science, as much a fact as other theories such as cell theory, atomic theory, continental drift theory, etc. In science, we only give the title 'theory' to things that are facts and massively supported by facts.

YES YES. Eat sh*t sh*teating fundies!

"Creationists make it sound like a 'theory' is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night" - Isaac Asimov

What we call gravity is a fact. The name gravity and all the constants associated with it are observations, as is the theory of evolution.

Yeah . . . maybe that last slide will lose you some love. If you care.

WitchPirate- the thing about those that believe in the teory of evolution accept that they may be wrong. Religious nuts think that a book written a couple thousand years ago is the absolute truth, and there is no way that it can be wrong. Science accepts that nothing is 100% certain. Religious people assert that their "truth" is divinely 100% true and there can be no other way about it.

+4 for effort, -1 for random assholism in the last frame. Not all Christians are raving fundamentalists, and not all republicans are christians. I for one believe in a very non-literal interpretation of the Bible. You have to remember it was written by less-than-perfect people who were limited by their own understanding of science, or lack thereof. BTW, science once insisted the world was flat, too. Can't dodge all the blame for that one.

~~Gravity is/was a theory itself~~

You make me smile....

evolution and itelligent design are both hard to believe, if we all evolved from single celled organisms how the hell did those organisms get here in the first place? they just popped out of nowhere?

Right WitchPirate, and what we call evolution is a fact. The theory of evolution we use today is the modern synthetic theory. It explains the fact of evolution the same way cell theory explains the facts of cell biology.

holy crap! you knew i was a republican!

The heathen and Anthropology major in me salutes you.

P.S. >>>>>> http://www.theonion.com/content/node/39512 (old, but still relevant and hilarious.

nice...like the music

DUDE TH EEARTH CANT' B ROUND

Dumb. I scored 7 btw. A Theory is NOT a fact, because it only aplies (sp?) to a specificplace OR it hasn't been proved that it appies in other parts of the Eth/Galaxi/Wharever.

lol, Resident of Alabama and passed, hoorayyyy!!!

If Christians have open minds, we can see that evolution does not contradict the bible. Does anyone else think it's interesting that the order that things were created in Genesis is EXACTLY THE SAME as the order that scientists say the universe formed and life evolved? (IE: first stars, then earth, then water, then fish, then simple land animals, then humans?)

For example, la gravity theory. It states (IIRC) that the gravity constant is of 9.8 (meters or kilometers?) per hour. This isn't true on other planet (Actually, it isn't even true in some parts of this planet) so it can't be stated as a fact.

In science, a theory is a proposed description, explanation, or model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation.

There is no physical evidence of evolution. It's just a way to rationalize where everything came from. The theory grows when they come up with something new that fits. They certainly didn't come up with the Promordial Soup on their first try.

Wamg, my spelling sucks. Earth* Galaxy* The* >_>U

It follows from this that for scientists "theory" and "fact" do not necessarily stand in opposition. For example, it is a fact that an apple dropped on earth has been observed to fall towards the center of the planet, and the theory which explains why the apple behaves so is the current theory of gravitation.

Artema- give it up. it is 9.8 meters per second squared. It is also based on the mass of the object (planet) which is causing the gravity. Therefore, the larger the object, the larger its gravity. That is why the gravity on the moon would be lesser than the gravity here on Earth.

"holy crap! you knew i was a republican!" - Raptor Jesus told me you were. Folks, the reason I included Republicans, Fundamentalist Christians, and those three states in the last frame is because those are the leading political and religious groups that have fought against evolution. Republcians do it to follow party lines and win constituent support, the populations in those states have voted against teaching evolution/for teaching ID, etc. There are exceptions from the rule, but they are just that.

Woamg* And I can't believe that I forgot that it was 9.8 m/s

lol, education

"There is no physical evidence of evolution. It's just a way to rationalize where everything came from." There is, we've witnessed evolution in plants and animals. A long list of physical evidence can be found at this page: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html

Again artema, give it up. It is 9.8 mss or approximately 32 feet per second per second. If you need help, I will give you a class on this

Well done.

Crap. 1'd

Just for the record, I do believe in evolution. But I think that another ytmnd bashing religion was unnecesary.

3'd for first question and results "failed" page. First page should have a third answer, in which you describe and the failed results are incredibly demeaning and a failed attempt at being funny.

I'm not denying that there are kooks out there, but still, you've got to keep in mind there's a lot of jerks on both sides. I'm willing to listen to arguments on both sides, but I've met a lot of people on the internets that think Christians are insane fundamentalist bigots without exception or that athiests are satan-worshipers or something, neither of which are true.

A scientific theory is not always necessarily a fact. It MAY be both, but it does not have to be. I think this remains a little bit unclear in the answer to the first question. Of course evolution is both theory and fact. But the Æther theory for example was a scientific theory which was not a fact. It was wrong, but believed to be true until the 1960s. If there was no proof for evolution (but, as you mentioned, there is)... well, and if you're a Christian fundamentalist and reject this proof...

Ok, upped to 5 because the downvoters are pissing me off.

i agree that it would be better with the redneck and republican parts removed. i'm not a republican, but i'm not a democrat either, both parties are retarded. and politics has nothing to do with it anyway. people aren't creationists because they're republican, they're republican because they're creationists! perhaps 'fundamentalist muslim' or 'fundamentally a moron' or 'mullet man brought you back to the future from 1578' etc would be suitable replacements.

What seperates the theories from the facts is belief. Most people believe that gravity is correct. But what about Herby the Hobo Hermit? He believes that a giant million mouthed creature lives at the center of the earth and has enourmous sucking power. So enormous that all things close to the surface of the earth accelerate towards it at 9.8 meters per second squared. He's not wrong in his belief, but it's not necessarily fact.

You don't "believe in" evolution or global warming - you believe in intelligent design or unrestrained capitalism.

[quote]In science, we only give the title 'theory' to things that are facts and massively supported by facts.[/quote] I am a scientist, and as I said above, this is not the case. Except you believe in the Æther theory and have proof for it being true, lol.

So the thing we observe as gravity, which can't really be given a name without becoming the start of a theory, is fact. The name we give the observation which allows us to study it in depth is a theory.

I'm not a scientist but I do own a labcoat, goggles, and rats, some of which are even white.

Thanks Shinryuu, for explaining was I was trying to say. 3'D because I'm felling nice.

Feeling* >_

I scored 8/8 and Im from Kansas, I demand that you change it to " resident of kansas, excluding Lawrence"... please?

"I am a scientist, and as I said above, this is not the case. Except you believe in the Æther theory and have proof for it being true, lol." You've just found an exception to the rule with Æther theory. Its also an example from about 100 years ago, so its nonsensical to compare it to the way 'theory' is used in modern science. The definition I used was taken out of an anthropology textbook, "Understanding Physical Anthropology & Archaeology" 8th edition.

-1 for the republican jab

I got them all and I'm a republican. ZOMG impossible!

You're mostly right, but your definition of "theory" is slightly misleading. A theory is a scientifically accepted explanation for a phenomenon, backed up by factual evidence and sound reasoning. Technically, it is not a fact, as it can still be disproven; however, it's so well-researched and proven and accepted that it is *assumed* true for the purposes of instruction and future research.

Evolution for the win. I got them all correct.

Thus, it's technically correct to say "It's a theory, not a fact," but the statement doesn't actually mean anything. Both are treated the same way scientifically, unless someone can provide evidence that casts doubt on the theory.

evolution is fact, natural selection is the theory for god's sake

You win the internets. Al Gore would be proud of your brilliant use of his creation.

I got them all right. I win.

YOU ARE A KYKE - YOU ARE A KYKE - YOU ARE A KYKE - F*GGY JEW - STOP WHINING BITCH - GERMANY WANTS YOU SO THEY CAN GASS YOUR *SS - BITCH *SS JEW YOU ARE A KYKE - YOU ARE A KYKE - YOU ARE A KYKE - F*GGY JEW - STOP WHINING BITCH - GERMANY WANTS YOU SO THEY CAN GASS YOUR *SS - BITCH *SS JEW YOU ARE A KYKE - YOU ARE A KYKE - YOU ARE A KYKE - F*GGY JEW - STOP WHINING BITCH - GERMANY WANTS YOU SO THEY CAN GASS YOUR *SS - BITCH *SS JEW YOU ARE A KYKE - YOU ARE A KYKE - YOU ARE A KYKE - F*GGY JEW - STOP WHINING BITC

Wasn't a fan of your Quran quiz but this one is absolutely right on the nose!

YAY

I like question 1.

This argues points against creationism that aren't there. I would explain, but I tend to only answer questions asked. I downvote this because it's just bashing.

"Does anyone else think it's interesting that the order that things were created in Genesis is EXACTLY THE SAME as the order that scientists say the universe formed and life evolved?" Wrong. http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/Genesis_1_got_the_order_of_events_right

Sweet, a nicely made SMARTMND!

Pure dog sh*t.

-1

You rule, hopefully creationists will GTFO YTMND and the internet, they don't belong! lol