Shared publicly  - 
The US Congress Anti-Science Committee

Remember US Congressman Todd Akin, who said women have magic vaginas? Yeah, that guy. Well, he's not the only sitting Representative who has decidedly antireality views and isn't afraid to spew them. Paul Broun (R-GA) out-Akined Akin last week, saying the Big Bang is "straight from the pit of Hell".

Laugh all you want, but these two men - and several others with similar views - are members of the US House Science, Space, and Technology Committee!

They are actively - and in some cases, like Rep. Broun, IMO borderline unconstitutionally - spreading nonsense, and they are in a position to make it law. Women's rights, science, medicine, climate change... all of these are in an incredibly vulnerable position. 

The good news? We have an election coming up, and it's not just Obama vs. Romney. In cases like Broun, it's reality vs. nonsense. And we can vote on them.

Read more about this:
Jay Norrod's profile photoAllen Zheng's profile photoNorma Lewis's profile photoRobert Lafon's profile photo
Mike Wood
Amazing voters will elect people like them. Would be more amazing if voters un-elect  them.
I fear for Science in the US. Galileo would probably have felt at home in some areas of the US
Voters don't vote with science based issues on mind. The only things likely to matter in their elections are fiscal and social issues. 
Akin out-Akined Akin, with his comment about doctors performing abortions on women who aren't even pregnant. Let that sink in for a bit...
Religion, and men stop to think for themselves...when will they conclude that religion, in all shapes and forms, is straight from a pit in "Hell"? ;)
Got to archive this post in case some conspiracy theorists ever asks me why NASA never returned to the Moon.
Maybe we should bar officials from office if they don't know simple science.
Almost makes we want to move to Georgia, just so I can vote for the other guy.
On the other hand, Bill Prady seems to have gotten a kick out of that comment, posting:

"Oh, no!

My TV show is a lie from the pit of Hell!"
+Lukas Dettlinger Voters get the representation they deserve. You don't bar people from taking office on that basis - if they get voted in, they get voted in. Instead, you (hopefully) educate the electorate.
+R. Scott Kimsey, unfortunately, anyone outside of Georgia doesn't get a say in whether he gets to be in Congress.  I do wish the rest of us could have a say whether he gets to be on the science committee.
Well, that is if the dumbos who are elected actually want more people educated. They would probably instead prefer that it goes to the military.
+Ken Brody Yeah, but he's there to Represent Georgia (or it's people; the Senators were supposed to represent the State itself, but we changed that). However, doesn't the leadership have to put him on the committee? If enough people raised hell over it, maybe it would make an impact. I don't know. 
At-least he agreed to the existence of atoms. :-/
I'm not a fan of "junk" science myself, and a lot of it is pure junk. About time someone has sense to look at the $$$ spent on it. 
Maybe someone will elaborate on the "unconstitutional" charge. Idiotic, yes, but I'm not sure it is unconstitutional.
think twice before u wise to choose leader...
Gosh, I wonder why Phil posted the face of a moron I can't relate to.?
Ron F
It boggles the mind how they are elected in the first place.
Sadly, Rep. Broun is apparently running unopposed in the current election.  But elections elsewhere can keep people of this ilk out of positions of power, such as his leadership position on the House science oversight committee.
Some of the damage he is doing right now involves the ongoing study by the EPA regarding open pit mining in salmon rich Bristol Bay Alaska:
+Gaythia Weis I don't think there is a chance in hell the Dems will get the House back. They may well lose control of the Senate. So it will be the GOP determining these committee assignments.
Even having people present willing and capable to follow what is happening on these sorts of committees and and publicizing such actions helps.
So much for separation of church and state.
Hey, Barney...put on the breaks...we have arrived - Fred Flintstone
+Daniel Mackay The First Amendment doesn't prohibit politicians from having religious viewpoints or from expressing them, ridiculous though they may be. He can vote accordingly as well, but what he's not supposed to do is use the power of government to impose his religious viewpoints on society. Where that line is has been the subject of much debate.
+Gaythia Weis Yeah, or at least it can't hurt. Obama will probably be more or less a lame duck throughout his second term, should he be reelected, but that's better than the alternative.
Take a good look-these are the same kinds of people that are going around saying One Direction is better than the Beatles....
On one hand I can just laugh at this and think how dumb some people on the other side of the ocean are, on the other hand, it's still quite scary as long as the US still has such a powerful army. It's people like this who will start a new crusade, much like GWB and his fellow idiots already did.
You're doing okay until you slip "Women's rights" into the stream. Presumably you mean a right to get an abortion. Like that has anything at all to do with science and Science Committees.
I really hate when people make geralizations about US Citizens.  This is a huge country, and we're not all the same.  I liken it to people thinking all islamic people are terrorists. 

It's simply not true.  People are not represented by the extremists of their culture.
+Larry Olson  Yes, we are talking about women's rights in relationship to science here.  And Rep. Paul Broun's sponsorship of HR 212, otherwise known as
"The Ectopic Pregnancy Death Sentence Act for Women"
is a case in point.

Or, +Philip Plait 's point on his blog post linked to above:
The US Congress Anti-Science Committee
"Not too long ago, I (and pretty much the whole internet) wrote about the ridiculous and honestly offensive statements made by Representative Todd Akin (R-MO). His knowledge – or really, the profound lack thereof – of female anatomy made him the laughing stock of the planet. But I wasn’t laughing. I was, and still am, furious. And not just because of what he said, but also because he is a member of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee."
well now this man is stupid,,, a professional says this,,, this is a huge and i mean huge joke ,, this is why I am lmao ,,, hahahahaha
+R. Scott Kimsey So true.  In fact it's so rampant that we don't even call it what it is anymore... It's stereotyping plain & simple.  Because we use a word with a less negative connotation & sugar-coat it, it somehow makes it OK.
+Bill Stewart - Filadelfos RC my comment wasn't supposed to be a generalisation, but that man is an elected person and stands for a rather large group of people. So in one way or another, the generalisation comes automatically with his position. But by no means did I try to insinuate anything else.
Yabba dabba do...Great Kazoo for president!
+Ramon Ackermann I understand, but you have to admit generalizing is rampant, especially online, and especially against the USA.  We're good people.  We're run by idiots... I don't like any of my choices for the upcoming election, and I feel helpless to do anything about it.  We have real issues here at home that need to be addressed, and in a manner that is CONSTRUCTIVE. 

Our goverment always issues legislation as punishment.... outlaw this, tax that.... well, it just doesn't work. Prohibition created the Mafia, and the war on drugs created the Cartels. Abuse of drugs & alcocol is higher than ever, and the kids using get younger & younger. Americans as a whole are getting fatter & fatter. We need positive legislation that enforces good behavior... tax credits for being withing federal health guidelines... something, anything!  Now "Obama Care" is taxing people who can't afford insurance!

The negative enforcements just don't work, and when people spend more money to satisfy whatever their vice is, it leaves less money to be spent elsewhere that could help stimulate our economy.  Something needs to be done about the cost of healthy foods in this country. When I was a kid, McDonalds was a TREAT. It was cheaper to make your own hamburgers. That is no longer true, unless you have a large family. For a family of 2-3, it's cheaper to eat fast food. 

If you're poor, what's easier... 2 slices of pizza for a few bucks, or buying some form of protein at a minimum of $3 a pound, plus the time & cost of cooking it & adding 'healthy' sides. Vegetables (aside from potatos) are now nearly as expensive as proteins are. When people simply can't afford to eat in a healthy manner, it shows there is a real problem that needs to be addressed, and I am at a loss as to how to fix it. Healthy foods need to be affordable & available. Legislation targeting unhealthy foods is only hitting one side of the coin & doesn't address the real issue at hand. 

Just my 200 cents :D
This is what happens when you politicize science. Fools come our from both extremes.
+Bill Stewart - Filadelfos RC are you saying that Reno and Las Vegas aren't part of the economy? Vice is a huge part of the economy. Several congressmen are on the payroll of "pink goop", reconstituted meat product. Only fit for the lowest-grade fast food.
+Andreas Geisler 

I specifically said illegal or Heavily Taxed vices.  I said when they have to spend MORE it takes money away from other parts of the economy.  When someone in NYC pays 12 for a pack of cigarettes that costs $5 in other parts of the country...  it is a fact that those $7 are not going to be spent on something else... that's 7 less disposable dollars this person has.  In fact, my entire rant was about legislation, not morality.
Enough p-eople voted that  he is able to lgo to D C aqnd handle bussiness take home pay 3 times what a worker is earning assume a superiority  to decide hoow we are toi live
Regulation should not be equated with punishment.  Often it has to do with honestly apportioning payment of the full social cost of activities.  Smokers need to pay for the full social cost incurred by the rise in lung cancer (some of which is second hand).  If taxes reduce smoking, or monies so generated are used to reduce the numbers of new smokers, society benefits.  And both individuals and society at large then has funds available to move on to more worthwhile investments.

Similarly in a manner more directly impinging on the activities of Rep. Broun, having the EPA fully evaluate and work to regulate, limit or even eliminate the proposed Pebbles open pit mining in Bristol Bay Alaska, may seem outrageous to mining interests.  But it directly threatens the livelihood of those connected to Salmon fisheries and the ability of the rest of us to enjoy a health and sustainable food source. (more details here:

What really is at stake is coming to terms with the true freeloaders on our system.  It is not Romney's 47%, or some food stamp recipient, it is corporatism, and wall street speculators.
If Congress represents the people, we have far to many idiots in Washington to be demographically accurate
Anybody out there have the schematics on this?
Look up everyones past. Their words. Their actions. Look up their past, if they can't provide you with their past (education, criminal actions if any and job history .) Then maybe we shouldn't be voting them in. Logic people, use it. :)
Invention of God is the worst curse on mankind. Religion conditions the virgin minds right from early impressionable age to get divorced from logical thinking so that it accepts any bullshit offered in the name of religious faith. More people have been killed in the name of religion than by all the other natural causes combined. Religious exposure needs to be banned till the age of 18 like adult movies/pornography.
+justin blackstone   Campaign funding is a little hard to figure out these days because so much these days is done by private PACs and aided by the "corporations are people" court ruling.
I would assume that Paul Broun's supporters are happy with his support of their corporatist interests and only care about social issues (or even such things as stances anti-big bang or favoring creationism) to the extent that that brings in voter support.
+Gaythia Weis Corporate personhood has been around for a long time. At least a couple hundred years, and I suspect a bit longer. It was originally introduced as a way to get a "corporation" as an entity into a court so that people could bring actions against them when wronged. The idea that is presented recently that corporations had never had legal "person" status until Citizens United is simply erroneous, even though it gets repeated a lot. 
not even the planet has been here in this galaxy for that long
Pretty sure it was 'SCIENCE' - that told us the earth was flat... You really going to bank on that your whole life?
Any state that sends these clowns to DC has to be ashamed of itself? I would be.
they don't even know god's name , provably means the other one.
+Gaythia Weis Yes, I agree completely. The speech/money issue is a tough one for me. I'm fiercely protective of the first amendment as applied to both people and to associations of people, whatever form those associations take. But by the same token, at some level it starts damaging the integrity of the system (assuming it ever had any). A conundrum.

Thanks for the link, btw.
Unfortunately, no one is running against my ignorant rep Paul C. Broun this election.
+Jay Norrod , science has never told us the earth was flat, because science is not an established set of beliefs, but a way of understanding the world.

Many cultural traditions have told us the earth was flat, but at all points in time the application of science has been able to disprove the theory of a flat earth.

So yes, you can bank on science your whole life because science means looking at the best possible data set at a given time, reaching the best possible explanation by discounting all other theories, and then (and this is the important part) being willing to completely disregard a once accepted theory if new data is inconsistent with it.
+Finnian Cheshire That's a simplistic and overly optimistic view of how science works. It is how it is supposed to work in theory, but you can look at various points in time and see where the scientific establishment has not only ignored data that conflicted with a majority viewpoint, but seriously harmed scientific careers over it. Look at Clovis-first, for example, and how long it took the scientific establishment to do anything other than outright ignore data and ruin careers over it. As a researcher, I saw on one occasion statements removed from a peer-reviewed article prior to publication for political reasons. People are people. Science is sound in its principles, in my view, but you can never forget the human element that is involved and always susceptible to human whims, passions, and so on.
+Lawrence Dean No, they don't. If you have one party building something, and the other bashing away at it with a hammer, they aren't "complementing" one another. Religion and science aren't non-overlapping magisteria. Science develops explanations and makes useful predictions, while religion encourages ignorance and fear. Fuck religion, seriously.
Problem is when science has no compliments for religion: Such as earth is not flat, or more modern version: Humans evolved like the rest of nature according to rules found only by looking at nature. No God required. 
These guys belong to the same party that believe in making cuts to education. 
+Patrick Ryan As a Christian, I believe that science is more of explaining HOW God did what he did, and find it interesting on how things written in the bible thousands of years ago are proven to be true by science (an example is that the earth is surrounded by outer space (nothing), or, as the bible says in Job 26:27 "He spreads out the northern skies over empty space; he suspends the earth over nothing." - that is just one example - there are a lot of Christian Scientists out there who are willing to give more examples of how religion and science overlap - one such website is ""
it z true that as christian we mst belive
As comedian Ron White said . . . "you can't fix stupid."
Honestly, what is wrong with the Republican Party? Are they idiots? Or are they just jerks?
Reasons to encourage natural example provided above. Thanks Philip
In a normal functioning society adults who talk to special imaginary friends, can support and medication. Who stopped there medication
Jim P
Its hard to believe we pay his salary, maybe Mitt would commit to cutting his salary and keep big bird who has more brains.
We need term limits for all elected officials. Maybe taking away lifelong careers in Congress will scare off the crazies.
And we wonder why America as a nation is falling behind other countries in science. This man is no leader.
Then we wonder why the rest of the world makes fun of America for being idiots. 
I'm a Canuck, I've spent a lot of time in the U.S. It's true that there are a lot of uninformed folks south of the borders, but: we've plenty of them up here too folks. Furthermore, I've had the pleasure and privilege of befriending some amazing people, that are gifted, warm-hearted and very intelligent, extremely well informed, and American to boot.
     Some of the biggest problems in the world today, in my opinion, are caused by people who make blanket statements about people and places they have never attempted to really understand. Whether the people come from America, Pakistan, or Miramichi N.B. is irrelevant. It is this line of thinking that has caused untold damage throughout the ages and will continue to do so. 
      Want to help effect change and make progress as a race (the Human one that is)? Then stop your mouth long enough to engage your brain before you help propagate this disease...please!
p.s.- this guy's a real piece of work.
Those are the man's views.  I respect them no matter how disconnected from truth I think they are
"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."
i respect everyone for their views too. But when you're governing, you have at least the responsibility of making sure that your information has accuracy and integrity, because many rely on your word. People like this governing is really sad. We need progress in science, we cant keep having people like this be stumping that progress. If it was a normal human being on the street who said that, i would just laugh and keep on moving. But this is someone who has impact in the world I live in. 
To me, relying on the word of your governing body, is scarier than having a yahoo like this in power.
They may have the right to whatever they want to believe - as long as it's not harming anyone.  These people are actively trying to harm not just me, but all of us.
well, politicians degenerate from an idealistic view to an ignorant one... a global phenomenon.
No politician should serve longer than 5 years, without pension! After that they should return to their original jobs.
If a politician is caught lying to the people, distorting facts, he/she must resign.
If a politician is instrumental in wasting money on projects which do not materialize in any kind of gain for the public, must be held responsible.
Any form of lobby-ism is in fact corruption, and therefore illegal.
It is scarier for me too. But when you have a world full of people who rely on god, and the powerful men win at the end of the day, then that's just the sad truth. That's when the responsibility kinda shifts to the people in power too. 
Yes,but Pooja; we the people who elect or allow these people to assume power have a responsibility to stay informed and challenge them when necessary, if we don't....
...this is what happens. lol. i totally agree with you. I just dont believe that the american voting populace does a good job in keeping informed. It's all about belonging to a party and supporting what your parents believe in. 
haha +Johnny Redcorn not at all actually.. i was just trying to have a pretty cool discussion with dave wilson. Im not mad at the world.. im mad at the people of the country that i live in, that i pay taxes in, and that im extremely proud of. So thanks for your ignorant comment but it was pure jugement. 
+Johnny Redcorn and i would appreciate it instead of attacking and trying to use names to insult me, you could come up with an educated response to the things that I had to say if you didnt agree with my opinion. better luck next time. thanks. 
+Oliver Brown Are you taking the position that a person who rejects established theories which are scientifically verifiable and instead gets his scientific understanding from a magic book he takes on faith to be correct with no logic or scientific tesing, someone that openly rejects science, is good selection directing funding for scientific development in the USA?  I apologize if I misunderstood you.  Please clarify your position if I am incorrect about it.
Thanks Pooja, and you too Johnny.  I'm not a judge, it's not my job. I just try to be open to new information and differing thoughts and ideals. Without this kind of discourse, I believe we are lost.
+R. Scott Kimsey I agree it was a simplistic description of scientific method, but I feel it is important to start with such a simple descriptor when refuting suggestions that science 'tells us' anything (let alone that the earth is flat). From there we can, and must, examine the ideas further as you have done. 

Do interpersonal dynamics and politics at times undermine scientific method, leading to false consensus, confirmation bias, and attempts to use a viel of science to hide unscientific arguments? Certainly. Does that detract from the notion that science is a way of understanding the world around us, a tool, and not a set of beliefs? Not at all.

Forgive me for an over simplistic approach, and doubly so if I was not clear in my first post; but I do not think you and I are at odds here.   
Yeah, this Guy in going to Burn in Hell for just being a Moron. Even 99% of Religions are able to deal with Evolution as the Truth now.
Every one has a right to an opinion no matter how they got there, to free speech ,popular or unpopular but I`m sorry I can`t be kind about this.These people think the Flintstones is a documentary.
+Benjamin Clark Outer space isn't "nothing", it isn't even a true vacuum. I'm always glad to see Christians accept science as truth, but what happens when science contradicts your beliefs? Creationists, for instance, they will not accept that the universe is greater than 6000 years old, and they are willing to disregard the sum of all human knowledge and substitute it with something that fits the scripture.

Galileo Galilei didn't receive an apology from the Vatican until 200 years after his death, but for a heretic, I guess he was lucky.
+Benjamin Clark I disagree. The more of the "how" that science answers, the smaller the role of religion. You're subscribing to belief in a "god of the gaps", who has ever-increasingly little relevance or capability. If, at the end of the day, the scientific method can reveal the fundamental workings of the universe, where is god? If we never observe anything supernatural, how can god have any power? Even if a deistic explanation (somehow) turns out to be correct, what's the purpose of worshipping a hands-off deity who wound up a clockwork universe and now does not involve himself in its operation?
The US seems to be heading back to the middle ages in their religious attitudes!
"Made of atoms that are 9000 years old" Maybe that's why they are so unstable.
brain dead nimrods like this should not be allowed to hold any office of any kind....EVER!!!!!!!!!
Lol! Americans have such great people leading them
Eric Z
What do you propose to replace him with? You honestly don't think there is a difference between dem's and rep's nowadays do you? There's even a word for it now , the "Bipartisan Singularity". I think now it is more than ever time to vote for the 3rd, 4th and even 5th party candidates.
Broun is running unopposed.
We live in an era where having an understanding of the science behind the various issues we face is not a luxury - it is a necessity if we are to make the right decisions that affect our way of life... our survival. The fact that backwards religious fundamentalists hold not only a position of power, but a position of power on the House Science committee depresses me more than I can say.
+James Trevail even if there should be the occasional, rare piece of matter in outer space, i think that it is a negligible amount, and I would say more on this topic, but it is not the heart of the issue;
I would like to make the clarification that while i accept most science as truth, i do NOT believe it to be absolute truth - the many times science has been wrong in history is proof of that

As for the creationist stuff; Firstly, as a creationist, I am more than happy to accept that the earth/universe is much older than 6000 years old - I do not believe that Gods timing is our timing in the biblical creation story (how could there have been a day, as we know it, without the sun).  
Secondly, I think that you go too far when you say that we "disregard the sum of all human knowledge" - what does the knowledge of electrons have to do with creationism/evolution?, and on a scientific level, I find the proofs for evolution to be rather sketchy (I personally believe that God created everything with the genes to adapt, as necessary)

Lastly, as for the Galileo and the Vatican stuff - As a Christian, I have many problems with the medieval catholic church, and will not defend their actions
+Patrick Ryan  First off, I do not believe in a "God of the gaps" - I believe that science just explains how / what God did to make stuff happen - in the example I gave earlier, The bible said that God "suspended the earth over nothing", and science says that he did it by using and/or creating the force of Gravity mixed with all the other factors that keep the earth from colliding with the sun; My point was simply to give an example of what I mean when I say that I believe science explains HOW God did what he did, and NOT that he is a "God of the gaps"  
Also, I believe that one question that science will never be able to answer is "where did all of the matter/energy in existence originate from" - Steven Hawking thinks that by taking the universe back in history to a certain point, it eliminates the need for it to come from somewhere, but there is still more to have happened BEFORE that (strictly following science), and does not answer that question

Secondly, in every case that God does something EVERY time (which is necessary for the scientific method), then it is not considered supernatural - it is just considered another part of science.

Thirdly, God still performs miracles on earth - just not the types of things that Science can predict (no human knows ALL of the will of God)
Fourthly, I have personally observed the presence of God, and strongly believe that he involves himself in its operation - whether directly through miracles, or through people, or in other ways that are known only to him

Fifthly, as a shorter answer to your question - "what's the purpose of worshiping a 'hands-off' deity", well there's always the afterlife to consider
I get to vote for the first time this year (I'm an immigrant, now naturalized).  I'm a liberal arts type who loves science and skepticism.  I'm a mom of an IVF baby (who just turned 7 and had a real life astronomer come speak at her birthday party today) working on adoption, yet I'm pro-choice.  I'm pro universal single payor health care and gay rights.  I'm a stay at home mom who actually bakes (including apple pie) and I'm a feminist.

I also know when I can early vote and where.

I'm the GOP's worst nightmare.

Oh.  And I live in Texas.

+P L Kumar God is not the problem. It is how people use God to forward their own interests that is the problem. Where would you have children learn morality, from society? That's how society got screwed up in the first place. I am not a big believer in religion, but i do believe that religion has its place in society. The bible does teach morality, but religion doesn't teach that aspect of the bible. Religion flows upon societal norms, but is still a base upon which you can build your own spirituality. Most of the people who cry out about the bible are hypocrites, they dont even follow the bible their hollering about. However, with a good guide and teacher, i believe that religion and the bible could still be relevant for todays youth.
+James Trevail the sad thing is, the bible doesn't say how old the earth is. It just says that god created the world in seven days. What is seven days to God though? I don't know and the Bible doesn't say. People just take what the Bible says and interpret it any way they want.
Go Texas! Good for you ! i'm not a feminist, I just look forward to the time when we don't need those kinds of labels. It is another example of some of the nonsense our societies suffer at the hands of men and women who seek to have control: disguised in the name of GOD
Evolution is one of the biggest hoaxes of our time. 150 years on, and it is still far from proven. Not one transitional fossil has been found and yet this garbage is promoted as "science".
Hey everyone, vote for Obama. Who cares if he'll deliver the US into national bankruptcy along with trillion dollar deficits? At least he's "pro-science". 
hard to fathom that there,s people out there who think the earth is flat,and has only been around for two thousand years....but there are,,,and we need them OUT OF OFFICE!!!!
I think you mean over 9000!
+Benjamin Clark Conversations I've had with other creationists DO disregard what we know about the universe. They would argue that the sun loses so much mass every year, and its radius would have been beyond the orbit of Jupiter if the universe were billions of years old. The simple answer is that Sol didn't always exist, but that notion isn't even considered.

Science is nothing more than the human understanding of the universe; people can be wrong, their understanding can be wrong, but science hasn't been proven wrong.

Evolution isn't even really debatable. If you want to debate evolution, start off with something easier. Gravity for instance, we don't even know what that shit is made of.

As for the big bang, the universe "being" after simply "not being", an omnipotent, omniscient spirit is a HUGE assumption, as is an afterlife.

And when the hell has god done something every time? I understand that you are trying to compare god to a repeatable experiment in order to satisfy the scientific method, but the scientific method has reasoning behind it; Occam's Razor. Occam's Razor is often misinterpreted as the simplest solution being the right one, but it is more accurate to say that the explanation with the fewest grandiose assumptions is probably the right one.

Hundreds of millions of people from various religions worshipping the same god as you is not proof, it is belief. Saying that your god is the only true god is like saying that most of the world, secular or otherwise, is wrong.

Worrying about the afterlife (punishment, reward) is no way to live, and as much as religions teach good lessons, doing the right thing is not restricted to those who believe.

Humans quantify, and categorize; we do so to understand. We have barely scratched the surface, and our current understanding of most of what we know will change as we learn more.
+Peter Priskas You don't seem to understand just how lucky we are to find ANY fossils, shit like that usually decomposes. There are plenty of transitional fossils on record, just not enough to satisfy naysayers. We aren't talking Pokémon here, evolution is a gradual process that may not show in any noticeable way where bone structure is concerned for tens or hundreds of thousands of years, especially when you consider that fossils are largely composed of rock, and that they are often an incomplete shadow of the tissues that they used to be.
It's 1 guy. I bet you libs don't even know how many people are on the science committee. For cryin out loud. Anyone who disagrees with you libs needs to be destroyed? 1 guy does not pass laws. 
Add a comment...