You gotta love headline writers. Even though I agree with this board that "intelligent design" isn't science, the headline is still funny:
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/metro/5080673.html
Religious America gives more in charity than secular countries, and conservatives more than liberals. This, says the author of the article, is a surprise and "ironic." Makes perfect sense to me, though. As the author explains, "liberals who give little or nothing to charity try to justify their selfishness by saying government is more effective than private charity at redistributing income."
As I said, no surprises here.
http://lfpress.ca/newsstand/News/Columnists/Leishman_Rory/2007/08/04/4393041.html
I wish I had made this up, but unfortunately it's true! Some guy -- who is a Green Party candidate in England, and not a right wing satirist -- has determined that humans who get exercise do more to damage the environment than if they drove a car instead. Turns out that the energy required to make the food you eat to replace the calories lost when walking puts more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than driving the same distance.
Of course, unspoken here is the fact that 1) the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is .0000001 percent, and the amount of carbon dioxide you make when you drive around the world twice in a diesel truck is .0000001 percent of that. But hey, who's counting?
Also unspoken is the true assumption behind the Green agenda: the world would be a better place if all the humans were dead. Anyway, enjoy the article. It is NOT from the Onion. Hard as that is to believe.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/science/article2195538.ece
