I will pretty much always vote up a pretty girl being anti creationist.

Pretty much always...

Upvote for "God done did it!" /2 thumbs up

up vote for being Russian. go russians! and ye the anti creationist thing too

^ She's Romanian.

I must have her.

Pay attention or go to hell.

Did she do this in the 90's?

holy crap, upvote for dexters lab, I haven't seen that show in freaking AGES!

In Romania, theory explains you!

I think she's a smart girl and makes some valid points. But who is her audience suppose to be? Me? I'm already sold, so this is more entertainment than anything. If she's trying to convince people on the fence or those that are even further, she's doing a poor job with her sarcastic, condescending attitude. People tend to become defensive to that, rather than open-minded.

>> ^Unaccommodated:
Did she do this in the 90's?


It still is the 90's in Romania.

>> ^Majortomyorke:
^ She's Romanian.


Ok she lives in Romania, but that is not a Romanian accent.

would have upvoted if she had said "laboratory".. "lab" just wasn't enough.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

>> ^Unaccommodated:
Did she do this in the 90's?


Can't be 90s, she used the term "epic fail" which dates back to 2006.

M'eh - pretty easy to make fun of something if you present only one-sided, biased strawmen. It is sometimes amusing to watch a fool punching a mannequin... But it is ultimately fruitless unless (A) you like watching fools or (B) you really hate mannequins. If you like both A and B then this is the vid for you I guess.

smart russians.

>> ^ElessarJD:
I think she's a smart girl and makes some valid points. But who is her audience suppose to be? Me? I'm already sold, so this is more entertainment than anything. If she's trying to convince people on the fence or those that are even further, she's doing a poor job with her sarcastic, condescending attitude. People tend to become defensive to that, rather than open-minded.


Who is the audience for 99% of the similar heavily upvoted videos on the sift? Is everyone really that committed to changing Quantum Mushroom's (or whoever else represents the right) wrongly held beliefs? Or is it a neverending intellectual circle jerk?

Millions of generations have supposedly past to make me who I am. Each generation required procreation, which has generally involved the males of the species competing for the attention of the females, whose standards in choosing the most suitable mate mean the species grows in strength as the most impressive male specimens mate with the most desirable female specimens.

Today, that has the effect of me totally wanting to bone that chick. And her being grossed out by me.

Evolution sucks.

There are gradations each respective side of the debate refuse to acknowledge. Vid Chick epitomizes the 'religious people are idiots' side. Persons of such stripe refuse to discuss creationism as religious philosophy, instead recasting the matter as an unyielding test of evidenciary proofs. They probably do this because they feel goaded or vexed by 'certain' Creationists who try to recast religion as science (a fruitless endeavor). Ultimately both sides reject each other's basic premises and treat each other with insults, disrespect, mockery, and boorishness.

For a creationist, the origin of life is a matter of faith. If you are a believer, then it would seem eminantly possible that God would have to be a very intelligent fellow. Such a being would likely use or influence natural laws in ways not currently understood.

Could such a being, if existant, 'create' life? According to evolutionary theory, sure! Scientists in labs today can put primordial soup into electrical currents and plasma to 'create' amino acids. From that perspective, isn't evolutionary theory no more than the most basic, rudimentary, stumbling first step of humanity's attempt to grasp this God guy's far more advanced methodology?

But, there is no scientific evidence for that position because it starts with a faith-based premise that God exists. Accepting such a premise isn't in the cards for people like Vid Chick. It involves apriori thinking of a philosophical nature which goes into areas Vid-Chick would rather not. So it gets ignored in favor of far easier to wrangle strawmen.

Some creationists do the same thing the other way around and refuse to give any scientific evidence the time of day. The problem isn't one sided. Both sides refuse to acknowledge that they are coming from completely different viewpoints, and so both end up looking like intolerant bigots.

Grouping everyone into a single label sure makes things easy. Consider that some who believe in a creator can also fully accept evolution and embrace science.

>> ^enemycombatant:
Or is it a neverending intellectual circle jerk?


I want in! It'll be a way of celebrating our lack of religiously imposed sexual consciences!!!

I think I would be part of the target audience for this. I laugh when people make fun of hardline creationists. I also accept that there are reasons why these people are so steadfast in their beliefs and that some people are not quite so offensive in trying to deconstruct evolution with pseudofacts.

I still laugh at the jokes though