Creationists.... .. Anyone who bases their belief against creation on evolution is a moron. Biologist/chemist reporting in. Evolution is not a theory of creation-- a theory of the
Home Funny Pictures YouTube Funny Videos Funny GIFs Text/Links Channels Search

Creationists...

+2013
Views: 65747
Favorited: 89
Submitted: 12/07/2012
Share On Facebook
Add to favorites Subscribe to teranin Subscribe to fucking-science E-mail to friend submit to reddit
Share image on facebook Share on StumbleUpon Share on Tumblr Share on Pinterest Share on Google Plus E-mail to friend

Comments(366):

[ 366 comments ]
Show:   Top Rated Controversial Best Lowest Rated Newest Per page:
Order:

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Anonymous commenting is allowed
#336 - datgermanguy (12/08/2012) [-]
Oh come on, leave those poor creationists alone.
Creationism is only the half-assed attempt to force old and outdated biblical "facts" onto people by putting a new label on them. And because it sounds a little bit more modern to say "I'm a creationist" than to say "I'm religious", people are falling for that crap.
They desperatly try to make it some kind of "alternate" theory besides the scientific theories, like evolution, but as far as I know, no educated country seriously considers putting creationism on the same level as evolution.
User avatar #350 to #336 - satakas (12/09/2012) [-]
if only they would leave US alone.

unfortunately they don't! they want to ban teaching evolution in schools or at least teach creationism alongside with science.

so...WHY exactly should we leave them alone?
User avatar #362 to #350 - datgermanguy (12/09/2012) [-]
OK, perhaps you people in the US should become active and fight them.
But where I live, the idea of creationism is considered so absurd that these guys don't have any power. So basically leaving them alone is the better option.
User avatar #364 to #362 - satakas (12/09/2012) [-]
not U.S. but "US"! like we, our, us :-D

well, in u.s. its obviously much-much bigger problem than in europe but there are also people who fight against that debilism. some of them also christians but if the deciders themselves are creationists then yu know, whats the result :-D
User avatar #371 to #364 - datgermanguy (12/09/2012) [-]
Normally I don't have anything against religious beliefs. But if they try to mix it with normal science - like you said, teach it alongside evolution or things like that - even I can't stay neutral.
#327 - winniedawho (12/08/2012) [-]
I saw a documentary proving that everything about the bible is TRUE because they used CARBON DATING..... ahem... ahem... ahem....
User avatar #351 to #327 - satakas (12/09/2012) [-]
i once saw several seasons of a documentary, proving, that humans are puny impotents who cant even form a pile of stones, so aliens from another galaxy had to come and help them.

it was all proven because the authors of this documentary didn't understand, how humans were capable of forming those piles of stone. thus - ALIENS!
#367 to #351 - winniedawho (12/09/2012) [-]
I think I was misquoted.... if you use carbon dating to fossils, obviously will contradict their claim.
User avatar #368 to #367 - satakas (12/09/2012) [-]
what claim? that carbon dating can date early fossils? who has ever made that claim? i mean...besides creationists? NO real scientist has EVER claimed, that you can carbon-date fossils older that 50K years. 50K is total maximum. well, you can try, but the results are more than inaccurate.

so this carbon-dating-fallacy claim is just another myth from creationists.

good luck finding better arguments! if you happen to find just ONE, you''l win a Nobel Price and several millions of dollars prize money :-D
#387 to #368 - winniedawho (12/10/2012) [-]
oh dammit... the statement is against creationists.. wtf duuuuude.
#330 to #327 - walcorn (12/08/2012) [-]
10/10 would laugh again.

quality comedy.
User avatar #324 - bigmanfifty (12/08/2012) [-]
Americans are so confused when Eurofags call them stupid....

this is why. Creationists are the reason
User avatar #337 to #324 - supermegasherman (12/08/2012) [-]
they're stupid because they don't agree with you? oh well, can't please everyone
User avatar #352 to #337 - satakas (12/09/2012) [-]
if you can't please them on every level, please them at least on the level of intellect and knowledge.
User avatar #373 to #352 - supermegasherman (12/09/2012) [-]
implying that all creationists are stupid.

i've never heard a more ignorant thing in my life.
#322 - savyx (12/08/2012) [-]
**savyx rolled a random image posted in comment #54 at Family photo **
User avatar #319 - notwwlink (12/08/2012) [-]
Creationist believe that humans have only existed 6000 years
User avatar #314 - matskuman (12/08/2012) [-]
I've seen this so many times so I'm just going to point out this. Where in the Bible does it say that the earth is exactly 6000 years old? Or that the seven creation days are 24-hour days?
User avatar #316 to #314 - geebuss (12/08/2012) [-]
Catholics or Christians aren't creationists. Only a couple religions consider themselves creationists.
User avatar #353 to #316 - satakas (12/09/2012) [-]
this is a sneaky lie!

1) if you're whatever kind of christian, you have to believe in bible because bible is the "word of god" and thus it's true.
2) bible states clearly that the world was created and even if we could theoretically argue, that the "days" mentioned in genesis aren't the actual days (but they ARE and you can see it if you read it in the original language and understand the background of ancient jewish symbolism), the whole creation story is still full of **** , that could not have been happened even if we really try to reconcile it with what science knows.

so, every religious christian either supports a total ******** fairy-tale or is a heretic ;-)
User avatar #389 to #353 - geebuss (12/10/2012) [-]
Yes, we believe that God created everything - In the BEGINNING. And then he just let everything grow and evolve on it's own. Creationists believe everything is constantly being created by a Super Being. Like for example: "Tomorrow, there will be 100 new born butterflies, and a new wolf".

:)
#333 to #316 - anonymous (12/08/2012) [-]
That is a load of horse **** . Christians and Chatholicsmbelive that God created the universe, light, the sun, the moon, the stars, and every living thing that roams ths planet from us humans to the most seeming insignificant bacterium.

How, pray tell, is that NOT creationism. Is creationism the belief that a higher power made everything with a purpose and intent.
#306 - pheylan (12/08/2012) [-]
http://www.green-energy-news.com/arch/nrgs2008/20080064.html

Doesn't prove creationism, but it shows how well read the poster of this is. Militant atheists ftw!
User avatar #325 to #306 - repugnantpug ONLINE (12/08/2012) [-]
well to be fair, he doen't actually say that dinosaurs are what makes up fossile fuels, just that they are older than 6000 years.
#304 - aesis (12/08/2012) [-]
I thought that they believed the Earth to only be 6,000 years old, but during those years God brought the flood which killed the dinosaurs?

User avatar #320 to #304 - bigmanfifty (12/08/2012) [-]
yes, but it takes MILLIONS of years for organic material to become oil / coal etc
User avatar #300 - gmaxx (12/08/2012) [-]
Dude, i am a christian, but i belive god made the universe , he created the "big bang" then he just left us do things on our own.
I never said earth is 6000 years old.
But nice thing that you say " creationists"..
#354 to #300 - satakas (12/09/2012) [-]
"yeah, i'm a christian. i totally believe that jesus was the son of a god, he died for my sins, resurrected and went to heaven, because bible tells me so. but certain other passages in the bible must not to be taken too seriously because bible is all symbolic'n **** ...you know"

makes totally sense. in other words: i believe what i want to believe and i want to believe what is most comfortable for me.

puny human beings...
#355 to #354 - gmaxx (12/09/2012) [-]
That's the ideea.   
You belive in something that let you trust your own ideeas , and not just listen to everything.   
Some people just took Bible way too serious,even christians and atheist.
That's the ideea.
You belive in something that let you trust your own ideeas , and not just listen to everything.
Some people just took Bible way too serious,even christians and atheist.
User avatar #357 to #355 - satakas (12/09/2012) [-]
no atheist has ever taken the bible too serious. but you're totally missing my point!

there are two ways:
1) you are a believer and believe, what your scripture says or
2) you're NOT a believer.

in believing you cant be half-something. you either believe or you dont!
there actually IS a way around but it's still not a religious way. a person can be somewhat christian (or moslem or jewish or buddhist etc) without believing into that supernatural BS but the he has to admit, that hes just a philosophical believer, i.e. he finds the ideas of this or that teachings to be good to follow and thats pretty much it. but the he can also NEVER say that "im a crhristian but i dont believe in the creation story literally" because hes not a christian, he just likes the christian philosophy!!!
User avatar #318 to #300 - geebuss (12/08/2012) [-]
You are totally on the right path. And Catholics or Christians aren't creationists. Only a couple religions consider themselves creationists.
#315 to #300 - anonymous (12/08/2012) [-]
So you say you believe, but the first book in the Bible is bullocks?
Pretty sure that's not how it works.
#298 - repugnantpug ONLINE (12/08/2012) [-]
User avatar #294 - stanislaw (12/08/2012) [-]
i laugh at how insecure atheists are with their beliefs, that they HAVE to post about how hurr durr god doesent exist every day.
User avatar #356 to #294 - satakas (12/09/2012) [-]
usually its quite the opposite, by the way! mostly an atheist gets pissed off by some religious tillholes somewhere and he goes to a place, where he can make his post about what he feels and thinks. mostly an atheist cant post anything into a religious forum or thread because he gets deleted and banned (i have lots of experiences). thats why they develop their own webs sites and post their thoughts elsewhere.

but then a true believer steps in and sees, that someone is against god and religion and feels, that he is insulted. at the same time he NEVER thinks of ALL these believers who publicly rant about banning of teaching evolution, about " the god in the constitution", about how god hates fags and who thank god for dead soldiers etc.

believers seriously think, that freedom of religion means that THEY HAVE THE RIGHT to demand that everybody should believe the same **** they do. they are not ashamed of demanding this but if some atheist finally gets pissed off, the religionists suddenly become the ones who are harassed.

**** my **** ! i wouldnt EVER say anything about ANY religion if ANY religion wouldnt harass me. and to be honest, i dont say much about buddhism because i dont see much buddhists walking from door to door, asking people if they have some time to spare with Siddhārtha Gautama or wiccans or moslems or something else. but i see too much christinas doing the same. so EXCUSE ME if i mostly fight against christianity!
User avatar #361 to #356 - stanislaw (12/09/2012) [-]
ha, well ofcourse you are right in that sense, im not christian, far from it, im humanist. its just that if you dont like something, the best way to combat it is to embrace it and leave it, i see too many posts making fun of christians, yes, we get it, we all think that they are wrong, maybe some people need to get over that.
User avatar #365 to #361 - satakas (12/09/2012) [-]
yeah....if someone tries to strangle you and you fight back, from far away it may really look like an embrace :-D
User avatar #366 to #365 - stanislaw (12/09/2012) [-]
nah but fighting back, its like the saying, the more you hate it the stronger it becomes, you just forget about it, otherwise its influencing your life
User avatar #369 to #366 - satakas (12/09/2012) [-]
so...if someone is ******* you in the ass while you dont like it, just stop resisting?

nice...

eemm...what did you say, your address was?
User avatar #374 to #369 - stanislaw (12/09/2012) [-]
so are christinas disturbing your life so much?
i never hear anything about them, i dont know.
User avatar #393 to #374 - satakas (12/12/2012) [-]
yes, if i think, where things drive if they get to power, it disturbs me AL LOT and they do want to get to the power.

well, is it my problem, that you don't hear about them or they don't disturb you?

maybe today they don't disturb you yet but you should still know, what they want and what could be the consequences.
User avatar #285 - froshman (12/08/2012) [-]
We have been breeding dogs for millenniums. If evolution is real, we would of had some dogs changing into things that aren't dogs, but that isn't possible.
#323 to #285 - Zarakima ONLINE (12/08/2012) [-]
* millennia and no we ******* haven't, a millennia is a thousand years you ******* idiot. Also a species does not evolve into a new species instantaneously, no, when dogs (or any animal) are born, there will always be a minuscule chance of a mutation. This mutation is usually a difference of one gene or triploid code on the DNA. If the mutation causes something beneficial, such as harder teeth, then there is a higher chance the animal will survive to pass on the new mutation. When a species is geographically separated from another population of the same species, the mutations are not passed between the populations but only within one group. After many thousands of years (varies for the rate of mutation) the separate populations will be so genetically different that they can be classed as separate species. If evolution wasn't in action, we would still have a fully functioning second stomach (the appendix).
User avatar #326 to #323 - froshman (12/08/2012) [-]
Looking at that list, it seems that Eurasia is most likely where people first began domesticating & breeding dogs, about 15,000 years ago according to the study of fossils.
I think that is over a thousand years, you derp. SO, your the ******* idiot. You don't know everything, kid. It's alright, you might, someday... not really



suck my dick, hoe
User avatar #328 to #326 - Zarakima ONLINE (12/08/2012) [-]
Ah, yahoo answers copy/pasting served you well. Well yes, I guess we have then, but everything else I said still stands.
User avatar #331 to #328 - froshman (12/08/2012) [-]
If we have been breeding dogs, trying to make a new species. How would a monkey accidentally give birth to a humanoid, then so on. It can't. Monkeys dont even need to have an improvement from a random mutation, so why would homo-sapiens be such a superior species?
User avatar #338 to #331 - Zarakima ONLINE (12/08/2012) [-]
it's not always a case of need. It is speculated that the first humans came from Africa, The adaptations to our shared common ancestor (with the great apes) such as loss of bodily hair and elongation of limbs & spine took place separating our evolutionary path to that of apes.
#309 to #285 - muchasmarcos (12/08/2012) [-]
look at these two. one is a wild dog and the other a rat...
ps. they can't breed or have fertile offspring wich is the definition of 2 different species.
User avatar #321 to #309 - idoliam (12/08/2012) [-]
They are of the same species, but different breed. They could produce offspring but...

1) If the chihuahua were male and the other were female, the offspring would not survive in the environment because they are simply not adapted to it. Also, the offspring would either be killed by their mother at birth because of deformities, or be killed by larger enemies, or die of starvation because they would be outcasted and they wouldn't be able to kill the the local prey anyway.

2) If the chihuahua were female and the other were male, the fetuses would either die in the womb due to lack of space and nutrition from the mother's body or the mother would die giving birth because they are to big and will most likely cause hemorrhaging and internal bleeding causing the mother to die.
User avatar #299 to #285 - idoliam (12/08/2012) [-]
I think you misunderstand evolution. The idea is about adaptation and survival. Many creatures have not evolved because they don't need to adapt to their environment to survive. For example, people from hotter regions of the world have darker skin so they can withstand the heat and not burn. Whereas, lighter skinned people are from colder regions of the Earth.

Note: Some evolutionary theories are still being debated.
User avatar #358 to #299 - satakas (12/09/2012) [-]
Note: Some evolutionary theories are still being debated.

Note: NO evolutionary theory is being debated. there is only one general evolutionary theory although there are several different views of how does it exactly take place. for example: does it happen slowly in time or does it happen in short accelerated bursts.

but without deeper knowledge in biology it's quite hard to understand all the nuances.
User avatar #302 to #299 - froshman (12/08/2012) [-]
The theory also states that evolution happens accidentally, sometimes, from mating and creating off spring. You CAN'T make a new species. That's what I'm trying to say. You can't go from one species to another. The DNA will always be the same as the species.
#359 to #302 - satakas (12/09/2012) [-]
the theory NEVER stated, that evolution takes place accidentally! it's all about the natural selection and there's NOTHING accidental: you either fit and reproduce or you dont and yyou die.

ALSO! it may be quite shock to you, but generally there are NO DIFFERENT SPECIES! the term "species" is made up by humans to make it easier to tell the difference between horse and donkey, cat and lynx, deer and moose etc.

its best explained by comparison with color theory, that most people understand much better.

in general, all species are related to each other somehow. nowadays there may be gaps between some species, genus, families etc but in the fossils they all exist and if you could somehow put together the "family tree" of all species, you should get something similar to the picture on the left of this post: a color palette.

there are areas, that are definitely blue or green. but between those two, there are areas, that nobody can so simply identify. if you look closely at the color percentage, you can tell, if its more green or more blue. you can also agree upon with other people, if this or that percentage is green or blue (i.e. this or that species) but if you look the same areas in the evolutionary tree, you cant tell, where's the difference between god and cat or cow and elephant.
User avatar #308 to #302 - idoliam (12/08/2012) [-]
Similar DNA does not equal same species. We have similar DNA to pigs; Does this mean we are the same species?
The definition(s) of species:
(1) A group of living organisms consisting of similar individuals capable of exchanging genes or interbreeding. The species is the principal...
(2) A group subordinate to a genus and containing individuals agreeing in some common attributes and called by a common name. (Source: Dictionary..)

That being said, we could not breed with our early ancestors because our genetic make-up is too different. Therefore, we are classified as a different species. Also, we have many different traits and abilities than our predecessors.
Take the appendix for example, we don't need it anymore but the theory is that since our earliest of ancestors were to believed to be hunter-gatherers, they needed extra protection in case they ate something poisonous-thus the appendix worked as an extra filter for blood.

And as far as the dog thing goes, there is "Selective Breeding." Which explains why we have so many different breeds of dogs.

http://www.dog-names.org.uk/history-evolution-dogs.htm (this explains selective breeding in canines)

You need to login to view this link (selective breeding in general)
User avatar #313 to #308 - froshman (12/08/2012) [-]
That is not what i meant. Actually, i didn't mean to say DNA. I don't know how to describe it. **** ... haha I'm having a complete brainfart but i don't care. all you fags can judge me but you can all **** yourselves.
User avatar #360 to #313 - satakas (12/09/2012) [-]
no, thanks. we're all gonna **** you because you're a fail!
:-D
#295 to #285 - CircusFire (12/08/2012) [-]
I honestly can't tell if you're trolling, are just incredibly stupid.
User avatar #303 to #295 - froshman (12/08/2012) [-]
I don't belive you understood what i was trynig to get across.
User avatar #363 to #303 - satakas (12/09/2012) [-]
and who is to blame?
#305 to #303 - CircusFire (12/08/2012) [-]
I understood your comment as expressing your disbelief in evolution.
User avatar #278 - sanditroll (12/08/2012) [-]
Ok now this would be pretty true if I hadn't read that the guy who started all that "the world is running out of oil" confessed on his deathbed that it was all a scam and the oild companies use this to bring up the prices. He also said that there is far too much oil for humans to burn ever and that it doesn't come from dead dinosaurs.
Food for thought.
#317 to #278 - anonymous (12/08/2012) [-]
Yes, there is a lot of information to substantiate that. For the most part most of what people have been taught in public school and by the media for the last century is a great collection of half truth and lies. Oil has been found to be made by the earth and it is so abundant that they are pumping a lot back into the ground to hide it in order to maintain the artificial scarcity scam. Most of the kids here in this website know only what the school and the tv says, but a good look at real science and real history will show much intentionally hidden information. Some of them might be able to tell you how the Dupont family had hemp outlawed and they will acknowledge that true conspiracy, but only because they want to be able to smoke pot freely, on the other hand they will deny that all other true conspiracies exist. Why? Because they were not only taught to ridicule people who say things that oppose the propaganda abut also there is a level of personal responsibility that comes with taking the "red pill" and finding out the truth. Thumbs mean nothing, truth is truth.
User avatar #283 to #278 - zevran (12/08/2012) [-]
That isn't food for thought. It's ******** .
User avatar #370 to #283 - satakas (12/09/2012) [-]
when did you last take your pills?

(im not kidding, nor am i trying to insult you)
User avatar #375 to #370 - zevran (12/09/2012) [-]
Why I took them just this morning in fact :P

I really did.
User avatar #286 to #283 - froshman (12/08/2012) [-]
Are you going to explain, or are you just going say a random statement?
User avatar #287 to #286 - zevran (12/08/2012) [-]
Your statement is so stupid I wasn't going to bother. But I can if you wish.

You see, that the world is running out of oil is a scientific fact. Some guy didn't just invent it to spread panic. We know that our oil fields will deplete in time, and we know that at some point there will be no more left. Depending on improved production technology and undiscovered fields we may have a century or two left. But after that, no more oil.
As for oil not comming from dead dinasours... No, not always. For the most part it doesn't. It comes from all sorts of organic matter that has been put under pressure for millions of years. That fact ought to explain why it's a limited resource as well.
User avatar #288 to #287 - froshman (12/08/2012) [-]
"Your statement is so stupid" .... That was a question, not a statement, ******* .

That explanation was all i asked. Just stupid remarks with no reasoning on others claiming its ******** with no proof or anything, is just extremely annoying. An actual intelligent argument, or debate, is better. Have a nice day.
User avatar #291 to #288 - MudkipTomislav (12/08/2012) [-]
I used to argue and argument with a lot of Christians and overall stupid people. With at least 50 good arguments on my side that achieved nothing for the brain-dead people I personally gave up on extremely silly arguments such as religion or this.

Sorry for intruding into the conversation but I just had to share this sad fact. If the other person zealously believes in something that's very, very obviously retarded, logic most likely won't work on him.
User avatar #293 to #291 - froshman (12/08/2012) [-]
I welcome your intrusion. Even, though I'm getting red thumbs, i believe i am doing a good thing. lol. Some people need complete proof of something, but some people just believe you if you're trustworthy(like me). I am a very open minded person. I just hate seeing just "what you said is ******** , and what i think is true" type things.
User avatar #332 to #293 - sanditroll (12/08/2012) [-]
I feel you man, I tried to get a different viewpoint across and it seems some people are so beainwashed they start to get angry when you question theyr beliefs weather religious or not.
#274 - goodguygary ONLINE (12/08/2012) [-]
incoming 						*********					.
incoming ********* .
User avatar #272 - mrblueftw (12/08/2012) [-]
Boy i will now express and gather up my feelings and facts in a orderly manner, And tell them and have a small debate over religion in this thread. then i realized no one cares.
#268 - anonymous (12/08/2012) [-]
I'm a creationist. The thing is, most people don't realize that the chance of us humans becoming evolved to what we are, from a pre-mordial soup of DNA and RNA, is the same chances that a Boeing-747 would fly into a hurricane, become complete dissasembled to the nuts and screws, and being put back together again out at the end. Just isn't feasible. God put us here, and if you honestly believe we evolved from PURE DNA and RNA, then you are as nuts as me.
#292 to #268 - hailarty (12/08/2012) [-]
So idea of an airplane being taken apart and put back together by chance seems unlikely to you? but the idea of a magical invisible creature who has existed for ever and was not created and did not create him self, seams likely?

I personally think that the chances of an airplane being put back together by the hurricane is a bigger chance then the existence of a magical wizard who has decided to give a book to desert people in which he told to kill gays, and not to be around women when they are on their period...
#289 to #268 - newall (12/08/2012) [-]
you do realize that the universe is infinite, right?

the matter within the universe is not infinite, but the quantity is such that it may as well be for mathematical purposes.

now, lets take the chances of your imaginary scenario and give them a numerical factor, lets say 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% chance of happening.

now lets multiply that number by a number so insurmountable that it is nigh on infinite.

the resultant number is at-least 100%, in-fact it surpasses 100% and is likely replicated thousands of times throughout our infinite universe of almost infinite matter.


LT:DR - Multiply any number, no matter how small by infinity and you will inevitably get 1.
#266 - deliciousdee ONLINE (12/08/2012) [-]
*sigh* only the really stupid Christians believe this. Same as the whole "universe created in literal 6 days" BS. The days are symbolic you guys.
#265 - sirham (12/08/2012) [-]
You're such a ignorant ****** ! Very few christians believe that the world was created 6000 years ago, and a lot of christians believe in evolution as well.
themoreyouknow.jpg
#270 to #265 - carlsagouin (12/08/2012) [-]
He said "creationists", not "christians".
Who's a ****** now ?
#273 to #270 - crashbandicooter (12/08/2012) [-]
From Merriam-Webster's : Creationism: a doctrine or theory holding that matter, the various forms of life, and the world were created by God out of nothing and usually in the way described in Genesis


The timeline is not a relevant aspect of one's belief when defining a creationist.

All Christians are creationists, ****** .
#342 to #273 - carlsagouin (12/08/2012) [-]
That's right, keep the ******** going.
#297 to #273 - trickytrickster (12/08/2012) [-]
I'm a Christian and not a Creationist. Your argument is invalid, and it only took one.
User avatar #311 to #297 - chucknorrisTHEGAME (12/08/2012) [-]
So you believe Jesus was the son of God who doesn't exist?
#329 to #311 - trickytrickster (12/08/2012) [-]
You don't know what a creationist is do you? A creationist is not someone who believes that God created the world. A creationist is someone who believes in the literal interpretation of Genesis and that God created all things in the world as is.
#377 to #329 - crashbandicooter (12/09/2012) [-]
It's not defined that strictly. If you believe God or any omnipotent entity had any hand in creation you're a creationist.
#380 to #377 - trickytrickster (12/10/2012) [-]
If you feel like defining people who think the world is 6000 years old and that evolution is fake and Genesis is literal with people who believe in a higher being influencing evolution as both being creationists...I'm not even going to reply.
#379 to #377 - trickytrickster (12/10/2012) [-]
Let me google that for you dicktool. You need to login to view this link

herp derp "I'm an atheist and I know more than you about your religion".
[ 366 comments ]
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)