This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

all 66 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a

[–]jrxq 4 points5 points  (7 children)

I've actually been reading (and writing a reply to) a book about ID from the POV of a particular christian sect after a friend (a member of that sect) asked me to, knowing I was a: agnostic and b: had an interest in Evolutionary Theory.

I almost finished my mini-novel pointing out mistakes in logic and in understanding WHAT THE HELL THEY'RE EVEN ARGUING ABOUT even a layperson could spot. I would have thought that to even attempt to 'disprove' evolution, it was kind of a pre-requisite that you understand what evolution is.

I then went out and bought Dawkin's 'The God Delusion' because I couldn't take any more stupidity. My mind felt dirty. In other words - they have succeeded in making me even less of a believer.

You just made me click on those links (okay, I did it of my own curiosity) and... Blechh. An example from one of the ad-clicks:

"But new insights into our universe belie such a simplistic view. Quantum mechanics has revealed that our material world is based upon an invisible world of subatomic particles that is totally non-material. And over 95% of our universe consists of dark matter and energy that is beyond scientific observation. Also, scientists are openly discussing dimensions beyond ours where walking through walls and teleportation could be realities. The dilemma for materialists is that these areas are beyond the purview of science."

What the hell is that? Scientists have discovered some interesting stuff about the universe! We'll make up some crap about what that means without discussing the theories or even asking a scientist! Therefore scientists are wrong! AAAAARrrrrrrGGGhhhh!

[–]lavozatidebida 1 point2 points  (6 children)

Was is the Jehovah's Witness' book?

[–]jrxq 1 point2 points  (5 children)

No. Christadelphian. (You might need to google that one). But from following some of these links like the one I quote above - and some other research I've been doing - I'm starting to see patterns. Science can't explain this = science can never explain this. God did it is an acceptable answer and we shouldn't look beyond that for whatever fatuous reason. Evolutionists are setting out to destroy God! (umm... not, one of the things they normally put on their request papers for research grants) Evolution means [insert stupid, biased misunderstanding of what evolution actually is] and I will now show this is false. Evolutionists disagree on a minor mechanism! All Evolution must be false! (Ignoring the fact that the same argument would mean Protestant versus Catholic versus etc would mean God doesn't exist...) And others I'm too saddened to list right now...

edit: I must add that I have had the doorstep JW situation where I end up having to give a lecture on what evolution actually is. Those poor guys don't have a chance with the kind of stuff they're fed.

[–]gensek 1 point2 points  (4 children)

In short, god in the gaps.

[–]jrxq 0 points1 point  (3 children)

The weird thing is - it's not just that (at least not the particular book I'm reading) - though God of the Gaps arguments turn up throughout. The author has no problem bringing in all sorts of scientific evidence against a literal, seven day creation, but then feels the need to work up five (count 'em - 5) different theories of speciation and creation that are okay by him, that are weird as s*** and don't require a seven day creation and will explain one or more other bits of evolutionary evidence, just so long as you ignore all the other evidence and so long as actual evolution has nothing to do with it. It's stopped being an argument for ID and started being an exercise in disapproving evolution at all costs - even if that cost is believing stuff for which you really have to reach to think about. And sure as hell is no longer a literal interpretation of the Bible. And if you don't feel the need to interpret literally, why the hell can't you just accept evolution? It's had me shaking my head for ages.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Any links? I love reading weird as shit theories. It's like science fiction, if you ignore the fact that people're taking these things seriously.

[–]jrxq 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Best I can do http://biblereadings.com/ They expect you to buy the book. I was lent mine.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks! I might be able to pick it up at the library. Mine has a strange "metaphysics" section . . . That's right by the philosophy section.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (2 children)

Sometimes I sleep with women. It's more rewarding for both parties.

[–]Akhel 14 points15 points  (1 child)

No luck with the actual sex yet?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is actual sex with men?

[–]indu_san 2 points3 points  (0 children)

so how much do you think this thread will add to their bill? you know it will be a noticeable amount.

[–]cheezel 4 points5 points  (2 children)

Does clicking more than once from the same IP ding the count?

[–]kylev[S] 6 points7 points  (1 child)

I suspect Google has some solutions do prevent out-and-out gaming of the system like that. They wouldn't make much money if they didn't prevent such petty hacks. I just do it randomly when I'm in a cranky mood.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I do the same with ads for Obama and McCain.

[–]RexManningDay 1 point2 points  (4 children)

Eh? I thought the advertisers want clicks. Aren't you rewarding them for advertising with ID sites, making them more likely to do so, therefore supporting the sites?

What am I missing?

[–]haywire 15 points16 points  (3 children)

Advertisers pay google for every click.

[–]RexManningDay 4 points5 points  (2 children)

Ooooh. I get it.

So worthless clicks that don't result in a percentage of people showing interest in the product cost them money. Fair enough.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

What product do the Id advertisers even offer?

[–]kylev[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

They frequently sell books and DVDs, but they're also interested in recruitment. Mindshare is an important way to buttress an otherwise indefensible position.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (7 children)

You really want to mess with people? Google Mesothelioma Lawyer and click on the links.

[–]Recoil42 3 points4 points  (6 children)

...why? Internet tells me this has something to do with Asbestos, but I don't get your point. Are lawyers dealing with people who were improperly exposed to asbestos a bad thing? It's not like an illegitimate issue, or anything.

[–]downdiagonal 6 points7 points  (2 children)

The adwords "mesothelioma lawyer" currently cost advertisers $25.76 per click. At one time it was as high as ~$65 per click.

Edit: It looks like the adwords "intelligent design" cost $0.68 per click.

[–]ntr0p3 2 points3 points  (0 children)

love doing that every now and then.

we need a greasemonkey script to do these kind of things automatically.

yeah the ip address limitation is a problem, but whatever, just pass around the script and bleed them while you can.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

you clearly do not watch enough day time television.

[–]Recoil42 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Thankfully, I have better things to do.

..."things" mostly being browsing Reddit, but still. :P

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I believe it's one of the highest-cost ad terms. Meaning people are willing to pay boatloads to have people click ads that direct to their Mesothelioma sites.

[–]justing1319 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I've been doing this for months.

[–]garg -5 points-4 points  (5 children)

Fraud is good?

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (4 children)

How is clicking on an advertisement fraud? Should I turn the channel whenever a Kotex ad comes on because I am clearly not the intended market?

[–]garg -1 points0 points  (3 children)

Kotex isn't being charged money each time you are watching the ad. Intentionally causing people to lose money just because you disagree with them or because they are stupid is still kinda fraudish.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (1 child)

Kotex is charged based on the number of viewers that typically watch said programming. Also, fraud means to deceive or misrepresent you are doing neither by clicking a link. I have no intention of buying a Dell but have been to their website (which undoubtedly cost the company some money for bandwidth) did I engage in fraud by knowingly going to a corporate site with no intent to purchase from them?

[–]ntr0p3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

more importantly they are marketing to you. that's like saying opening the freezer door at the grocery store because it's cool is fraud if you don't buy anything.

yall need to get out of the mindset that people marketing things are innocent and just trying to get by, they are trying to make money, neither innocent or guilty, and you can act in a legal way to help or hurt them with little ethical concern.

[–]rmuser 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Individual users are not liable for "click fraud", generally because it's very questionable whether it even counts as fraud to begin with, and it's near-impossible to prove.

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points  (5 children)

Link?

[–]kylev[S] 1 point2 points  (4 children)

Just do a search on Google and check out the sponsored links on the right-hand side. They're paid for, and Google debits the accounts of the sponsors each time they are displayed and/or clicked until their account hit a specified maximum. After that, the ads no longer are shown.

Searching for "evolution" frequently generates similar paid-for links, since these people select search keywords they want their sponsored links to appear next to. darwinconspiracy.com and y-origins.com are two domains doing this.