User Profile: scientiam


Member Since: March 31, 2013


123 To page: Go
  • [1] December 11, 2014 at 5:55pm

    Nobody would be “standing on their soap box” if gays weren’t trying to force everyone to consider their lifestyle normal by law. You don’t see anyone protesting polygamists, for example, because the vast majority of them recognize that most people won’t accept their lifestyle as normal. They’re fine with that arrangement, and we are too. Of course we think it’s wrong, but they don’t put anyone on the defensive. That’s true tolerance: two groups tolerating each other, not one group forcing the other to change its beliefs.

  • December 11, 2014 at 5:49pm

    Well, if you’d look at a few actual twin studies you’d find that most are funded by gay rights organizations, with an agenda of their own. And they still don’t consistently produce concordance rates over even 50%; if sexuality were determined genetically concordance rates would be expected to be much higher, near 100%.

  • [1] December 11, 2014 at 5:46pm

    I’ll never understand how liberals think that the more time passes, the more correct they become.

    Responses (2) +
  • April 19, 2014 at 8:50am

    “matter and energy are constantly created and destroyed… quantum physics has demonstrated this.”
    How ironic that you “suggest that arguing from ignorance is another logical fallacy,” because E^2 = (m(c^2))^2 + (pc)^2 is how we model all matter-energy conversions. It shows that you either have matter or you have energy, you don’t create or destroy either. They are two sides of the same coin, you only convert between the two.
    In addition, inorganic matter does not turn into organic matter in nature. Nowhere in the world can one find a “primordial organism,” which the secular theory of evolution relies so heavily on, that has been created because lightning struck the right combination of inorganic materials. As has been observed for centuries, not to mention restated in Darwin’s book “Origin of Species,” natura non facit saltus; nature does not make jumps. It seems that Itb was not the one arguing from ignorance in this instance.

  • April 11, 2014 at 7:26pm

    I’m disappointed in the Blaze’s poor editing job on every article. “Full-proof,” really? In what way are you proofing something against “full”? The term is “fool-proof,” meaning you have proofed it against fools, i.e. anybody can get it right. Come on, Blaze, people learn to correct mistakes like these in middle school, they shouldn’t be making them in a job that relies on writing proficiently. Hire some people with a decent knowledge of the English language, for your sake and ours.

    Responses (1) +
  • March 26, 2014 at 10:18am

    They don’t have to. They just have to make an artificial intelligence that *appears* to think like a human, so it will be hyped up by the media as the “first artificial intelligence” and accepted by the masses as a bona fide replication of a human in machine form. There are lots of people out there who have trouble holding on to their bountiful stores of money, and this company is going to make a killing off of them.

  • March 23, 2014 at 10:28pm

    This is sick. Since when has the ability to reproduce been optional in marriage? The answer, to the liberals I know are going to jump on this post, is never. A vocal minority wants to convince people that they’re better as people for supporting deviant “rights,” but as I have said elsewhere, simply wanting something really badly doesn’t give you a right to it.

    Responses (1) +
  • March 23, 2014 at 8:25pm

    “everyone who’s tired of hearing the other side talk smack”
    So, basically anyone who doesn’t agree with their exact political views. How open-minded and liberal…

  • March 23, 2014 at 8:22pm

    Hilarious how fickle liberals are about their stance on muslims. Half the time, muslims are a misogynistic people who hate women and live to keep women from having the rights they deserve. The other half, they’re an angelic, oppressed minority and saying anything against them is racism, or as the liberals love to call it, “Islamophobia.” Pick a side, libs!

    Responses (1) +
  • March 21, 2014 at 10:16pm

    This won’t convince many, because people want to hear people agree with them. They won’t go to see a movie they know they will disagree with. Not the majority of “open-minded” agnostics, at least.

    Responses (3) +
  • March 21, 2014 at 10:03pm

    Liberals love to take it one step at a time. Don’t let them take that first step towards spreading disinformation.

    Responses (20) +
  • March 21, 2014 at 6:19pm

    Blink, what gives them the right to claim federal benefits as a married couple? What are they supposedly being denied protection from? Everyone in the country is as free as everyone else to marry whomever he or she wants to, provided the spouse is of the opposite sex. I’m just as free as you are to use dollar bills with George Washington’s face on them. If I try to give you a dollar bill that has the statue of liberty on it, you don’t have to recognize that as legitimate payment for a good or service. You’re not denying me any rights, but it’s the same situation with gays.

  • March 21, 2014 at 6:11pm

    Wanting something really badly doesn’t give you a right to it.

    Responses (1) +
  • March 21, 2014 at 6:10pm

    It sure would be nice if judges wouldn’t be activists. You know, the whole “justice is blind” thing.

    Responses (2) +
  • March 20, 2014 at 11:21am


  • March 20, 2014 at 11:19am

    Sooooo… a big dehumidifier with a filter? Wow, that’s, uh… that’s something!

  • March 17, 2014 at 8:16pm

    Now, I’m no authority on this matter, considering I don’t know what ride it was or how prosthetic limbs are attached to the body, but I would assume that they are not attached as firmly as real limbs. That being said, it would be much more tragic for a vet to be flung off a roller coaster because his legs detached than it would be for his daughter to have to ride alone.

  • March 17, 2014 at 8:13pm

    Let’s see, switch lunch boxes, or go to the news station? Which is easier? Hm, this is a tough one… After many hours of deep pondering, I have found a solution! Switch the freaking lunch box and move on. If he likes my little pony so much, he can watch it on his own time, but he’s going to grow up to be an effeminate wimp who relies on other people for his protection. If you want to take such a gaudy lunch box, that’s on you, you can’t just expect people to tolerate it. In much the same way, I could only walk through Times Square wearing a “God hates ****” shirt without getting beat up if I could physically defend myself. Unpopular opinions sometimes require force to express them, and no artificial system of authority can effectively change this fact.

    Responses (2) +
  • March 17, 2014 at 7:42pm

    Led by “elders”? Sounds much more like a cult than a church.

    Responses (1) +
  • March 16, 2014 at 7:17pm

    I find it hard to believe that Maher actually hates Christianity that much that he devotes his life to persecuting Christians. More likely is that he likes the money atheists are paying him to be someone who agrees with them enough to continue finding new things to criticize. Have a fun life, Bill, it’s not going to be fun when it’s over.

    Responses (2) +
123 To page: Go