Ok I've been thinking of making a list of common misconceptions used on the board and well elsewhere (hence why they turn up on the board.
Please add any ideas.
1. Evolution, creationism and intelligent design.
Evolution does not state that Humans evolved from Chimpanzees it states we evolved from a common ancestor.
Evolution makes no claims as to the origins of life itself, it simply states that we all descended from a universal common ancestor about 4 billion years ago.
Creationism comes in 2 main forms, young earth, old earth.
They are not able to be combined with evolution, the whole creationist stance is one that does not allow for evolution via natural selection.
Young earth creationism is the belief that life was formed 6000 years ago by God, in all its present form, any animals such as dinosaurs went extinct after 6000 years, mostly due to Noah's flood.
It is not reconcilable with evolution as we know for a fact that Humans existed 100000 years ago.
Old earth creationism believes that the earth is old but life began recently at-least in the gap form of old earth creationism.
There is also the progressive form which is still not reconcilable with evolution, but states god interfered at times during history while mutations and natural selection play a minor role.
There is the last form which is not creationism which is theistic evolution which is more like a prime mover theory and states that God simply began life.
Evolution does not state that one animal gave birth to a completely different species, it states that over thousands of years of small genetic changes a species can change gradually to the point of having incredibly different characteristics to its early ancestors, thus being a new species, the best way to make this point, A T-rex did not give birth to a chicken, A dinosaur (raptors last time I checked) formed a lineage that changed over millions of years with each passing generation growing feathers etc till the point that it was smaller and could take flight (in lots of cases, not all obviously, think of the Emu or the Ostrich)
Evolution has no game plan, it works via a blind process of mutation a beneficial change would be kept, as well as any subsequent improvements.
For example think of the flying squirrel it has flaps under its arms that allow it to glide, any increase in the size or a beneficial change in shape will allow it to glide more, even with barely any flap it would glide better than with none at all, like its ancestors which would likely jump, much like normal squirrels.
In fact, while not actually a transitional form, it's similar in a way to what you'd expect between non winged rodents and bats, over millennia these flaps got bigger eventually becoming wings like on the bats, giving true flight.
Oh also, theory in science does not mean a hunch like when you use it colloquially, so stop with the "it's just a theory" nonsense, otherwise I'd like to point out that gravity is still a theory, but you're still attached to the ground.
Abiogenesis does not say life formed from a puddle, stating this shows ignorance and an attempt to belittle the hard work by scientists, Abiogenesis is simply the study of how the earliest protocell formed from inorganic matter.
There are many good theories as to how this could happen.
It can be summed up incredibly well by this video, and is based on strong research by a scientist at Harvard university.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6QYDdgP9eg
I recommend the rest of the videos.
Not all Christians have a problem with homosexuality, some churches even have gay clergy.
The bible itself however does condemn homosexuality.
However that itself is interpreted differently, some believe those with homosexual feelings are sinful, and this is why they have those homosexual conversion camps, some only believe that the actions are sinful.
The founding fathers did not found america on christian tradition. Thomas Paine found religion abhorrent, Jefferson wrote his own bible where he removed any mention of Jesus being divine, Adams fought strongly for separation of church and state.
And even then, none of them wanted a state church, even the christians among them.
You may want prayer in schools, or the pledge of allegiance to have the words under god in it, or the 10 commandments outside the courts etc, but do not state that the founding fathers did, especially on a federal level.
There is a reason why they wrote the first amendment.
Interestingly Jefferson etc had no problems with it being done on a state basis.
So yeah, cut that out.
Fatwas are not death sentences, this isn't common on the boards but I've seen it said so I've taken this one from the wiki page on common misconceptions, it is an edict, a fatwa could actually be a pardon (as long as the religious leader has the authority to pardon, like the ayatollah).
Obama has shown his birth certificate people, there is even a newspaper clipping from the day he was born, I wish I actually had the power to ban people for that nonsense (which I KNOW will appear when the board becomes more active)
Bush did not plan 9/11, Clinton and Bush may have known SOMETHING, but do you really think that Bush or any political leader actually has the power to plan something that big without anyone knowing?
Also don't argue back with the holocaust, people knew about the camps, they just didn't know to what extent it was being implemented, the reason nothing was done about that was due to the power of the SS and the Gestapo, plus the whole war thing.
Yes those aren't misconceptions those are just stupid, but it has to be said.
Obama is not a communist or a socialist or a muslim or a fascist.
For 3 main reasons.
1. You would know if he was a communist or socialist.
2. He goes to Church, ya know the Jesus building.
3. Fascists are the opposites of communist, so you're just clutching at straws.
Stop saying "I don't want the government getting involved with my medicare" (this is to anyone on this board or not), they run it already you morons.
Stop saying "Under Obama my care would be controlled, UNLIKE NOW", no-one has insurance that good, plus you can list so many counter-arguments... Ever heard of pre existing conditions.
No stop with the death panel crap. Seriously.
Stop bringing out Hannan when mentioning the horrible healthcare system that is the NHS, the man is a privately educated man who didn't even live in Britain until college. He is as ivory tower as you can get, of course he'd think standard healthcare is awful, he can afford the absolute best.
If you're going to argue healthcare, argue actual issues, like cost.... PLEASE, I and others may not agree with you.. but at least it has a resemblance to coherence.
Left wing does not equal communism.
Right wing does not equal fascism.
Those are the extremes.
But socialism does not equal communism.
Socialism has a broad spectrum, there is even a branch of socialism which is Christians only.
Get that through your head.
"communism has been shown not to work"
Stop with that, it's not true, no political system is doomed to failure, and they all come with compromises.
Cuba has been communist for a long time now, and it has the best health system in the world.
It comes with the downside of only just being allowed to own personal computers.
"socialism has been shown not to work"
Hello, I would like to introduce you to Europe, say hello to Ireland specifically.
5. The death penalty.
The death penalty is cheaper than keeping people alive.
It costs A LOT less.
Thats the only one on that....
6. Global warming.
Your local weather does no equal climate, oh you had an unusually cold winter you say? wow! That clearly means all this research is false!
1 year thats colder than the last also does not equal global warming defeated.
It is not simply a fight between the natural lobby and the CO2 lobby, in fact they do these things called parallel Climate models, I posted one in an old thread, yes solar changes do affect climate as do natural co2 emissions, but no way near as much as when you add in the anthropogenic greenhouse gases.
Add more please.
Additions: sustainability is not as easy as people believe, only 1 nation comes out as sustainable
And thats Cuba, unfortunately I can't source it just now as the image is on my normal pc.
Added via traps request.
The US is not the most charitable nation in the world, it may give large amounts of aids, but as a proportion is much less.
This basically is a common branch off the "I grew up to believe my country is awesome, that means it must be more awesome than yours"
This misconception only appears in debates between 2 nationalities.
Theres also a fallacy which comes up a lot which is the "I've never heard of it being done, therefore it's new" also coupled with "I've only heard of bad implementations, therefore no-one has done it right" Which are admittedly arguments from ignorance.