Monday, July 13, 2009

Ray Comfort on the Evils of Public Schools

It seems the ignoramus has never been to school. Because no-one who's so much as spent a few days at a public school can say such ludicrous things as he has.

First off, just a little snippet I found amusing:

"Evolution has been proven despite what your idiot homeskool ‘textbooks’ told you. The only questions are about the details." Ryk

Those who are home schooled usually excel at spelling (it would seem that you weren’t home schooled).

Anyone who doesn't recognize "skool" as a deliberate and exceedingly common misspelling doesn't have the credibility to write about anything.

Granted, by not being educated by the public system, their kids will miss out on learning how to communicate using filthy language. They will also miss out on the use of illegal drugs.

Right. No-one has ever passed through a public school without coming out a drug-addicted delinquent. That's all these public facilities are good for, you know.


Home schooled kids will also miss out on sexual promiscuity, contracting sexually transmitted diseases (one in four U.S. females has a sexually transmitted disease[2]), being bullied, and maybe being shot to death (to date, there have been shootings resulting in the deaths of students in 76 different U.S. public schools). According to the National Conference of State Legislatures an incredible one in five kids in public schools have seriously considered suicide: "19.3 percent of high school students have seriously considered killing themselves."

... What? So it's public schools that encourage teens to have sex (*GASP!*), force girls to contract STDs (so guys don't have STDs?), and force kids to bully others? Public schools encourage school shootings by raving psychopathic lunatics? And, least coherent and logical of all, it's public schools that drive kids to suicide? How deluded and deranged can this guy get?

The rest is just a long and irrational screed against teh Evilz of public schools, so I'll just skip to the very end:

Sadly, millions of impressionable young people have already been brainwashed into believing that evolution is a proven fact, and that all it lacks is "details." How could any theory be proven when there are no details to provide proof? The missing link (the details) is still missing. All evolution believers have is a blind faith in what they have been taught by other believers in the theory, and "evolution did it" isn't good science. It's a pseudo-science. And that’s a fact.

Wow, lots of faults in a single statement. Let's correct that, shall wel?

Sadly Thankfully, millions of impressionable young people have already been brainwashed educated into believing that evolution is a proven fact, and that all it lacks is "details." How could any theory not be proven when there are no details endless amounts and types of evidence to provide proof? The missing link (the details) is still missing a misconception, as there are no "missing links". All evolution believers have is a blind faith rational belief in what they have been taught by other believers in the theory fact, and "evolution did it" isn't good science. It's a pseudo-science statement of an undeniable and endlessly demonstrable reality. And that’s a fact.

Some of it's a little cheesy, but it's the best I can do with the material given, no? You can't turn mud into marble.


  • DJ


    Seems like you're knowledgeable enough to ask this question then: Where does life come from? By that I don't mean how did the first cell come about. I'm asking the bigger question. Where does each life come from for every insect, human, animal, etc. There are probably trillions and trillions of living things on this earth right now, with every day new life coming forth. Where does that life come from? I know where I believe it to come from, but am curious as to what an atheist's conclusions are.


  • Joé McKen

    Hey DJ,

    I'm not exactly certain what you mean there, but I understand it you mean "how does life appear/reproduce" rather than its origin on Earth? If so, well, to say that new life is created is really just a simplistic misconception, as in reality, no life ever is "created" (at least, that we know of). All life does, via reproduction, is basically split, divide, and prosper. Cells split, the new cells grow, they split again, etc.; do this a few billion (and trillion) times and you've got yourself a baby. (Again, that's just an extremely simplistic way of putting it.)

    Yet again, I'd like to remind you (just in passing) that one's beliefs in the origin of life (either abiogenesis – the appearance of life on Earth – or via reproduction) are not a result of one's atheism or religious beliefs (or lack of them), but mere science. Plenty of hardcore theists would say the exact same thing I'm saying here, simply because they've done their studying and research and have found out that's just how life works in this world.

    I hope I haven't written too long and bored you to death now. Have a nice day. =)

  • DJ


    Thanks for responding, but I think I wasn't specific enough earlier. What I'm getting at is something that most would call a "soul". Your explanation of cells splitting causing life might work for a tree or plant but that's not the life I am trying to get at. The life I mean is one that is there one minute and then gone the next, if an outside source comes along and squishes or kills it. The cells or body is still there but the "life" is gone. It's what we look for when we say something is dead, that used to be alive.
    Take for instance yourself. Your body isn't you. It houses you, but your personality, your likes and dislike, your soul, are what's inside. When you die, your body will still be here (for a while at least) but the "life" of you is gone. I won't debate on where it might have gone because what I'm wanting to know, is where you believe your life came from. And subsequently where all life continues to come from. As you said above a few trillion cells makes a baby, but what makes it alive?


  • BuffaloWilder

     I don't know that I'd say it was all 'chemical reactions.' That seems just a little bit of a simplification, really. This all seems a question of consciousness, and while I don't think there's necessarily a divine origin to it, it does seem to have a form.

  • Joé McKen

    Well, gross simplification is what I was going for anyway – if only because, quite frankly, I'm just not knowledgable enough in biology and such to elaborate all that much. It's not exactly my field. But yes, you can take any process going on in our bodies (and minds), and at the very very basic level, it's all just chemical reactions. But, as I said – "insanely complicated". And I mean that literally.

    I don't believe the consciousness has a "form" to it; unless or until we can demonstrate how the consciousness, or soul, is separate from the body, it'll be a part of metaphysics and the supernatural, which are things I just don't subscribe to. But that's just me.

  • Joé McKen

    And unrelatedly – I see you're using (as distinct from WordPress.<span style="text-decoration: underline;">org</span>). How satisfied are you with that platform, its flexibility, features, reliability, etc.? And if you've ever tried Blogger before, how would you compare them? I'm in the market for a new blogging platform, see. Just curious.

  • BuffaloWilder

     Wordpress is a lot more flexible, I think - I'd used blogger before, and it's very restricted, comparatively. It's almost completely bottom-up, and there's a larger amount of elbow room - as far as knick-knacks like polls and all of those things.

     The only real stickler is that there's a lack of freedom as to resizing and making room for pictures. That's a real bummer.

Post a Comment

You can post any sort of feedback or questions you like, just as long as you abide by the rules detailed in the About section. =)