Tag Archives: creationism

markus-moestue-norway-dinosaur-bike-designboom-08 markus-moestue-norway-dinosaur-bike-designboom-09 markus-moestue-norway-dinosaur-bike-designboom-18 markus-moestue-norway-dinosaur-bike-designboom-101 markus-moestue-norway-dinosaur-bike-designboom-104
Norwegian artist Markus Moestue is currently travelling across Norway on his homemade Frankenbike complete with polystyrene-carved velociraptor chassis.  And were you to stop him and ask why, he would tell you that he’s built it…

…for a trip across the bible belt in Norway. it’s a protest against the dogmatic religious education of children, and the idea originated from the theme-parks of creationists that teach children that humans and dinosaurs used to live together.

See? Now you like him.


pootsybear(DUP’s Edwin Poots)

Some 40% of DUP activists believe that creationism should be taught in science classes, a Belfast Telegraph survey has found. Creationism is the belief that the world, animals and plants were created “by a supernatural being less than 10,000 years ago”.

Mainstream science holds that the earth is four and a half billion years old and that life evolved from one-celled organisms. Some 50% of DUP respondents believed creationism shouldn’t be taught in science class, with 10% not knowing and 40% believing it should be there as well as, or instead of, mainstream science.


Won’t someone think of the dinosaurs?

Party conference: Teach creationism in science class – 40% of DUP (Liam Clarke, Belfast Telegraph)

Previously: There’s Poots As Queer As Folk

Ryan Ulrich’s award-winning 2007 animation combines the Creationist take on the world (told in scientific terms) with the Big bang and evolution explained in Bible-speak.

The holy/unholy spawn of this union is wonderfully satisfying, horribly offensive or some combination of both those things, depending on your outlook.



Miss USA 2011 candidates answering the question ‘Should evolution be taught in schools?’ – not as dumb as they appear, sez Society Pages writer Gwen Sharp:

I suspect that some watching the video will see this as little more than an example of air-headed, dumb women not understanding science. But it’s important to remember that these women are carefully prepped for this competition; they have been through years of lower-level beauty pageant competitions and, to get to the Miss USA contest, they’ve clearly learned the rules of the beauty pageant circuit. They may or may not personally completely agree with what they’re saying; the point is to provide an answer that they believe is most likely to appeal to a group of judges who are looking for a candidate who will be palatable to a broad audience and unlikely to stir controversy. Whatever their personal opinions might be, the women are providing an answer based on a perception of what the most acceptable response is — and the discourse of choice is sufficiently normalized to be a viable, and perhaps the only viable, option they can give and hope to win.

Bonus lols:


Normalising Choice in discourses about Evolution (Society Pages)