Video: South Park on evolution

posted at 10:49 pm on November 1, 2006 by Allahpundit

Ace IM’d to say this was the funniest two minutes (or 65 seconds) of South Park he’d ever seen.

Having watched it, I’m now a devout Creationist.

Gonna give you the content warning on this one. Nothing profane, exactly, but interspecies sodomy always warrants a courtesy holler.

Dedicated to my stalwart-Darwinist pal the Commissar, who’s doing his best these days to resist the siren song of full-blown Sullyism.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Oh gosh…I don’t think I can even watch it. I may never teach science again if I do!

Bob's Kid on November 1, 2006 at 10:55 PM

Man..intelligent design doesn’t sound so bad when you describe evolution like that…

Missing link indeed.

Rosetta on November 1, 2006 at 10:58 PM

I caught a squirrel today (it had invaded my attic). But I didn’t have butt-sex with it.

Vanya on November 1, 2006 at 10:58 PM

What’s terrible is not just that video, but that some despicable people chose to violate international copyright law and post each South Park episode on the Internet.

You can leave comments on the blog southparkvideos.blogspot.com, best viewed in Firefox or Opera because of a template error the owner hasn’t been able to troubleshoot yet, and let him know exactly how you feel about his posting every South Park video on the net for you to watch without paying for it or sitting through commercials.

I think you should complain in no uncertain terms.

Christoph on November 1, 2006 at 10:59 PM

Is that what they call a breifing on the Democrat constiuency?

sonnyspats1 on November 1, 2006 at 11:00 PM

How dare HotAir post this! This is not newsey!

First Foley videos and now this. Clearly, AP trying to subvert the Republican/Conservative agenda by posting this.
.
.
.
Or is that just crazy talk?

EFG on November 1, 2006 at 11:01 PM

And snap, snap, snap to you Darwin! LOL

SouthernGent on November 1, 2006 at 11:01 PM

That was hilarious!

Pam on November 1, 2006 at 11:01 PM

I have talked about this with a professor. I told him if we came from monkeys. What we are turning into next? Take a wild guess. Actually, he spinned the question without answering it. We debated semantics, instead.

Ouabam on November 1, 2006 at 11:05 PM

If you don’t have butt sex with squirrels, you are anti-science.

JohnJ on November 1, 2006 at 11:06 PM

The boobies reveal was…

Spectacular.

middleroad on November 1, 2006 at 11:11 PM

I caught a squirrel today (it had invaded my attic). But I didn’t have butt-sex with it.

You let us down. Think of the children.

DaveS on November 1, 2006 at 11:14 PM

Dedicated to my stalwart-Darwinist pal the Commissar, who’s doing his best these days to resist the siren song of full-blown Sullyism.

I’ve always enjoyed reading the Commissar, but he’s linking Kos.

Approvingly.

Not a good sign.

Slublog on November 1, 2006 at 11:16 PM

I caught a squirrel today (it had invaded my attic). But I didn’t have butt-sex with it.

Vanya, why do you hate squirrels?

mikeyboss on November 1, 2006 at 11:19 PM

Gonna give you the content warning on this one. Nothing profane, exactly, but interspecies sodomy always warrants a courtesy holler.

Oh come on. South Park always warrants a courtesy holler.

Esthier on November 1, 2006 at 11:22 PM

I love the fact that he’s a tranny in transition, but he’s totally conservative on evolution.

Trannies for Intelligent Design!

Nice Deb on November 1, 2006 at 11:24 PM

That’s a better explanation of evolution than I ever heard in school – and far more entertaining!

thedecider on November 1, 2006 at 11:24 PM

What’s terrible is not just that video, but that some despicable people chose to violate international copyright law and post each South Park episode on the Internet.

Christoph on November 1, 2006 at 10:59 PM

Christoph,

To quote Kyle talking to Cartman 4 min 20 sec into the same show mentioned in the clip. (2 sec before the clip Allah posted BTW).

“Will you shut up already.”

Take a look at Fair use laws

A 65 sec clip of a 22min show is not posting every South Park video on the net.

F15Mech on November 1, 2006 at 11:26 PM

I laughed so hard I de-evolved.

wrath187 on November 1, 2006 at 11:30 PM

If you don’t have butt sex with squirrels, you are anti-science.

…then they must be close to a cure for cancer in San Francisco….

Puritan1648 on November 1, 2006 at 11:30 PM

Huh-larious.

tdau1997 on November 1, 2006 at 11:31 PM

F15Mech, did you not see the reference to a different website?

Christoph on November 1, 2006 at 11:31 PM

Okay, now THAT was funny. I’m wiping away the tears as I type.

What an interesting and disturbing description of evolution.

Oh…and squirrels, according to my ex and his brother, are evil. ;)

tickleddragon on November 1, 2006 at 11:33 PM

Christoph,

To quote Kyle talking to Cartman 4 min 20 sec into the same show mentioned in the clip. (2 sec before the clip Allah posted BTW).

“Will you shut up already.”

Take a look at Fair use laws

A 65 sec clip of a 22min show is not posting every South Park video on the net.

Looking at the context, I think he was refering to the site that has every south park ever uploaded onto it.

And I think it was tongue in cheek.

Keljeck on November 1, 2006 at 11:34 PM

F15Mech, did you not see the reference to a different website?

Christoph on November 1, 2006 at 11:31 PM

Snap Christoph my bad.

I saw the link you posted but I did not click on it, or check it out.

I assumed you were some troll complaining that Hot Air/Ace were posting South Park shows.

Sorry about that my mistake.

F15Mech on November 1, 2006 at 11:36 PM

Since Mr. Garrison put it that way, intelligent design and divine creationism is looking at lot more appealing and a lot less implausible and unsavory than its Darwinian alternative!
Hilarious. Thanks, AP and Ace!

(Nice Deb, the tranny thing is gross but it somehow seems an improvement to Mr. Hand.)

Jen the Neocon on November 1, 2006 at 11:38 PM

That’s the second time I’ve spit water on my monitor
You simply MUST stop posting such funny stuff

Defector01 on November 1, 2006 at 11:42 PM

No worries, F15mech.

And what do you mean, “tongue in cheek,” Keljeck?

Christoph on November 1, 2006 at 11:44 PM

That is not the way I was taught in parochial school.

AndrewsDad on November 1, 2006 at 11:55 PM

Christoph,

So, let me get this straight… what you are saying is that it’s more likly that people who don’t have access to Comedy Central, have never had it, who have never seen South Park before, and have now caught a recent episode from the internet and are now fans are now steeling. I think that’s a little short sighted.

According to your reasoning, they would now rather go through the trouble to download a blurry copy an internet version at 320×240 resolution rather than watch it on a real tv screen in 720p or HD.

Those that are viewing it now would never have found it any other way. They were never a customer, never patronized comedy central commercials, never wanted to. Now they are fans because they saw an espidode or two. There is no real loss. You can’t take away from zero.

I have Comedy Central. I watch South Park every chance I get. I’m constantly on the road in shitty hotels that never have ComedyCental. The internet is the only way I can see it. I watch the commercials when I am at home.

When was the last time you viewed an episode of South Park and then aftier a commercial and then said to yourself “Hmm, maybe Pepsi is better than Coca Cola. I’m going out to buy some right now.” or Maybe you want to get the latest edition of ‘Girls Gone Wild’.

Becoming a fan of a produced show via any means possible has more far reaching more benefits than negatives.

Egfrow on November 1, 2006 at 11:57 PM

I’m still laughing about the sea otters…

frankj on November 2, 2006 at 12:00 AM

Superb. Parker and Stone said in an interview a few weeks back that they’d been mulling over an attack on atheists, apparently because they’ve developed a bit of an atheist following and, like scorpions, they simply must sting whoever carries them. Not that Darwinism is incompatible with theism, and not that I’ve watched this whole ep yet, but I just thought I’d throw this out there because I felt like responding to this stupendous clip. Also, they already mocked atheists in this great episode, so I kind of don’t know what they’re thinking.

P.S. Penn Jillette on Colber tonight.

Alex K on November 2, 2006 at 12:05 AM

Allah,

I do visit regularly – I just don’t post as often here as on Ace since I feel Hot Air is more serious minded. Not as many references to boobies or pooter. (And by boobies and pooter I don’t mean Kerry and Olbermann.)

However since Ace shadows you, I think the differences will diminish over time.

You are consistently the funniest mother on Hot Air.

Rosetta on November 2, 2006 at 12:06 AM

As for the Commissar’s most recent post on Iraq and Sadr City… Don’t we all know that that’s where Bush has brought us at this point? Of COURSE he’s sold out our soldiers to the Shiite rulers of Iraq. He’s had no idea what he’s doing ever since he discovered, but would not admit, that we didn’t liberate a bunch of Western liberals yearning to breathe free so much as kick up a third world tribalist hellstorm.

Alex K on November 2, 2006 at 12:08 AM

Heh. Thanks, Rosetta, I appreciate it.

Allahpundit on November 2, 2006 at 12:11 AM

Evolution….. Yeah, sure.

Evolution requires that BOTH of the following statement be true.

1) Life is so simple that it can happen by accident.

2) Given all the instruments and knowledge of modern science even the simplest life form is far too complex to be created by man.

As Mr. Spock might say: That my good doctor, is illogical !

Maxx on November 2, 2006 at 12:13 AM

So, let me get this straight… what you are saying is that it’s more likly that people who don’t have access to Comedy Central, have never had it, who have never seen South Park before, and have now caught a recent episode from the internet and are now fans are now steeling. I think that’s a little short sighted.

According to your reasoning, they would now rather go through the trouble to download a blurry copy an internet version at 320×240 resolution rather than watch it on a real tv screen in 720p or HD.

Egfrow, it’s the owner of the intellectual property’s right to make that decision.

And yes, we’re talking about South Park, with low production values, not Star Wars II: Attack of the Clones. They ain’t that blurry. I think a person is more likely to want to watch a relatively high quality (often full screen) version of South Park without commercials at a time of their choosing.

Christoph on November 2, 2006 at 12:25 AM

Christoph, as long as HA and AP aren’t selling it on the blog to make a profit and are using only snippets of an episode, it’s “fair use” according to known copyright laws, so STFU!

Are all you Libs slip-and-fall lawyers are what?!

Jen the Neocon on November 2, 2006 at 12:56 AM

Christoph is kidding. Geez.

Allahpundit on November 2, 2006 at 1:01 AM

It was the best part of Coulter’s “Godless”….

Halley on November 2, 2006 at 1:24 AM

I laughed so hard I now have an “outty” belly-button. Oh wait. All I had to do was push it back in.

It must have been some kind of mutation from my dormant retard monkey-fish-frog DNA.

Lone Star on November 2, 2006 at 1:25 AM

Still doesn’t top this episode

The Ugly American on November 2, 2006 at 2:02 AM

Sorry, AP…I didn’t know.
With lawyers or lawyer wannabes it’s hard to tell.

Jen the Neocon on November 2, 2006 at 3:09 AM

What’s sad is this mocking of evolution is even more believable than the bullshit story they would have you believe… and they even left out the part where nothing exploded in to everything and some time billions of years ago it rained on rocks on Earth and magically life started.

This area is extremely vast and I suggest anyone truly interested yet not deeply delved in start with the DVD’s Privileged Planet and Unlocking the Mystery of Life. I ran across them long after I’d been interested in this and still found them shockingly interesting.

I also recommend this as a daily reader.

RightWinged on November 2, 2006 at 3:10 AM

Classic South Park!

jeglinas on November 2, 2006 at 3:15 AM

…[L]ike scorpions, they simply must sting whoever carries them.–Alex K

Been watching The Crying Game much, Alex K.?

Kralizec on November 2, 2006 at 4:09 AM

Ooooooo,

That is FUNNYYYYYYY!!!!!!

Thanks for the laughs!

William

William2006 on November 2, 2006 at 4:54 AM

I almost woke the house up laughing.

Poor Squirrel thing. Has PETA made a statement yet?

iNeXuS on November 2, 2006 at 5:47 AM

The greatness of South Park cannot be denied. That was one of their funniest bits in a long, long time. It’s just too bad I didn’t wait longer to join up to HotAir, I could have had “Monkeyfishfrog” as my username.

Oh what could have been, what could have been.

Olbgasm on November 2, 2006 at 7:37 AM

1) Life is so simple that it can happen by accident.

A lot of weird accidents can happen in a few billion years.

kmcguire on November 2, 2006 at 7:37 AM

I am slowly becoming a fan of this show and for the past ten or so years, I really hated it. Not sure why I am liking it now, maybe it is the jab at everything and anything.

zerodamage on November 2, 2006 at 7:58 AM

“Mrs.” Garrison: Evolution is a theory – a harebrained theory that says I’m a monkey! I am not a monkey, I am a woman!

O.

M.

G.

Hillary-ous!

xardoz on November 2, 2006 at 8:08 AM

My twelve year old, who is somewhat sheltered from pop culture in a Christian school, will get a kick out of this. In about six years.

“Congratulations!”…love it!

seejanemom on November 2, 2006 at 8:27 AM

….and this is being taught to young children by a women with a mangina. Happening more and more in public schools. Maybe that’s the missing link?

Hening on November 2, 2006 at 8:40 AM

Why didn’t my comment show up last night?

RightWinged on November 2, 2006 at 9:09 AM

“the retard baby was different so it got to live” that was hysterical. My twelve year old hears that stuff right outside the front door. We both had a good laugh together. He knows my opinion on evolution.

jjjen on November 2, 2006 at 9:38 AM

ROFL. A tranny with earrings debunking evolution. Mr. Garrison is my hero(ine).

infidel4life on November 2, 2006 at 10:50 AM

They have the entire episode up on UToob. Watch it while you still can!

Mazztek on November 2, 2006 at 11:54 AM

I had a college professor who taught the same thing…. Except he used the term “challenged” versus retarded.

Fargus on November 2, 2006 at 12:21 PM

If our government really believes in the seperation of church & state, they really should consider taking evolution out of the school’s science books. It takes far more blind faith to believe in evolution than it does to believe anything written in the Bible. But if the scientific community can’t replace it with anything else, then why don’t they just start putting chapters into school textbooks like, “Things That We Don’t Know”?

Joshua P. Allem on November 2, 2006 at 12:38 PM

Best science lesson I ever got!!!

LOL!!!

Yakko77 on November 2, 2006 at 12:50 PM

Does this even begin to express Rosie O’Donnell?

Just a thought.

Emmett J. on November 2, 2006 at 1:27 PM

I really like the Commissar, he was one of my first online buddies. Which is why I don’t read him anymore.

I wanted to keep liking him.

Rightwingsparkle on November 2, 2006 at 1:53 PM

If our government really believes in the seperation of church & state, they really should consider taking evolution out of the school’s science books. It takes far more blind faith to believe in evolution than it does to believe anything written in the Bible. But if the scientific community can’t replace it with anything else, then why don’t they just start putting chapters into school textbooks like, “Things That We Don’t Know”?

Wow… I don’t even know where to start with this… I don’t know whether to laugh or cry…

So, Darwin’s theory of evolution is more blind faith then a book written by “man”. Technically the only difference between the bible and Bram Stoker’s Dracula is Bram Stoker and his editor are the only people who authored the book. The Bible has been altered a million times, plus the fact that it’s literally a collection of books written by people just like you or I. Is the Bible more political then religious? The Whole Church, (and I don’t care which denomination) is more political then religious.

Why are people so afraid of science, they will believe anything anyone tells them. You will take a book, written 1500+ years ago by… who knows… over scientific evidence?! Over reason?!

Now, just to clear things up, I’m non on a vendetta against the church, I’m not trying to destroy your beliefs, but why is scientific progress so “blasphemous”? The church has done many good things for civilization, I will give it that, but when it gets to the point that some fanatics refuse common sense for it, it gets dangerous.

–”This blog has been brought to you by the letter “j” and the number 5.”

R_Byrne on November 2, 2006 at 2:55 PM

If our government really believes in the seperation of church & state, they really should consider taking evolution out of the school’s science books. It takes far more blind faith to believe in evolution than it does to believe anything written in the Bible. But if the scientific community can’t replace it with anything else, then why don’t they just start putting chapters into school textbooks like, “Things That We Don’t Know”?

Joshua P. Allem on November 2, 2006 at 12:38 PM

Personally I agree. I mean maybe evolution is exactly how we all got to be here. Maybe we’re all just the results of millions of years of mutants getting together and having babies.

Or, maybe angels and demons came down here for a party, slept with each other and created a whole host of freakish animals, one being human beings.

Or… maybe we’re all just energy that is plugged into a giant machine that has sedated us into believing the world is real and not some dream.

Or even further, we’re all just inside the mind of one really messed up schizophrenic psychopath with billions of multiple personalities.

Esthier on November 2, 2006 at 3:04 PM

Why are people so afraid of science, they will believe anything anyone tells them. You will take a book, written 1500+ years ago by… who knows… over scientific evidence?! Over reason?!

That’s not what is being said. The point is that both ID and evolution are theories.

One believes that a series of very random events created ever species we have on this planet and will lead to further developments that we just cannot see since it is such a slow process.

The other just believes (and uses science might I add) that nothing in this world is random.

Esthier on November 2, 2006 at 3:07 PM

Now, just to clear things up, I’m non on a vendetta against the church, I’m not trying to destroy your beliefs, but why is scientific progress so “blasphemous”?

So far as I can see, he didn’t say that evolution was wrong or that it was heresy to believe in evolution but simply stated that it takes a degree of faith which is more difficult than the faith required to believe the world is not a random accident.

And you’re not doing a great job convincing me that you’re not on a “vendetta” against the church when you seem to be upset that one person thinks evolution is a fairy tale.

Esthier on November 2, 2006 at 3:09 PM

Darn! And all this time I had been hoping that our modern day offspring would evolve into higher life-forms. Have we been approaching this whole “reproduction thing” all wrong? Do you suppose that it’s too late to start over and make use of this new-found knowledge regarding the true workings of the evolutionary process? Perhaps it is time for us to say: BEHOLD!: The power of retard butt-sex.

Naaah! That’s how we ended-up with John Kerry.

CyberCipher on November 2, 2006 at 3:13 PM

So, Darwin’s theory of evolution is more blind faith then a book written by “man”.

And what’s this supposed to mean? Darwin was also a man (not even a heavily scientific man).

Technically the only difference between the bible and Bram Stoker’s Dracula is Bram Stoker and his editor are the only people who authored the book. The Bible has been altered a million times

And there are also relatively unaltered copies that many people translate from when authoring new versions. It’s not as though everyone got the King James version and decided to clean it up. We still have texts in the Greek and Hebrew the two Testiments were written in to use.

plus the fact that it’s literally a collection of books written by people just like you or I.

And what, it’s possible to believe that God exists but impossible to believe He is able to ensure that His word is sent to His people with its original intent without writing the book Himself?

That’s pretty weak for any god.

Is the Bible more political then religious? The Whole Church, (and I don’t care which denomination) is more political then religious.

Then you do not seem to know a lot about “the whole church”.

1. There is no such thing. There are practically hundreds of denominations.

2. By even liberal estimates, “church-goers” are about 40-60 when it comes to voting and aside from about four ministers, how many Reverends do you know clammoring for political power?

3. If Christians could agree on these things, they wouldn’t constantly bicker amoung themselves like bratty siblings. If Christians could agree on anything, we wouldn’t have as many denominations as we already do.

But I forget, you’re not actually writing against religion here. You just think we’re all zealots if we don’t buy into evolution.

Esthier on November 2, 2006 at 3:18 PM

hahaha hit a nerve…
yes!
someone’s gotta give you guys something to talk about, all you do is agree on this website…

R_Byrne on November 2, 2006 at 3:47 PM

Yeah, condescension usually upsets me.

And really, “all [we] we do is agree on this website”??? So now you’re proving you are not only ignorant of “the whole church” but also of the comments at this site as well.

Please, just read through a few of these comments. It shouldn’t take you long to find an argument. If you need some help, I disctinctly remember all of the comment sections about stem-cell research getting fairly heated.

Of course I’m saying this assuming you actually care about facts, an assumption I doubt is all that grounded in reality.

Esthier on November 2, 2006 at 3:56 PM

the blog has slowed down a bit… time to spice things up…
I was honest answers to these if you up for it. If you don’t want to honestly answer it, I will also take smartass quips:

If your god wants us to worship him through our own free will, why does he threaten us with Hell? If you have someone threatening you with a punishment, it isn’t free will.

R_Byrne on November 2, 2006 at 3:58 PM

If your god wants us to worship him through our own free will, why does he threaten us with Hell? If you have someone threatening you with a punishment, it isn’t free will.

So that means that since we have jails, fines and even capital punishment that Americans do not have free will when it comes to committing a crime?

free will 
1. free and independent choice; voluntary decision: You took on the responsibility of your own free will.
2. Philosophy. the doctrine that the conduct of human beings expresses personal choice and is not simply determined by physical or divine forces.

Yeah, the dictionary seems to disagree with you on that one. Free will does not mean there will be no consequences for your actions. It only means that you are willing to accept whatever those consequences may be.

And even though you’re question is off just by definition, I’ll go one further. It isn’t a threat for God to speak of hell. It is a warning.

See, it’s not a threat if I were to tell my child (my hypothetical child) that if he/she drinks poison, he/she will die. It’s me simply educating my child on the consequences of drinking poison.

But you’re coming at this question with a misunderstanding of what hell is, so I understand why you believe it is a threat.

Hell is not where God sends people. Hell is the only place where an individual can be complete devoid of God. Hell is literally nothing more than the complete absense of God.

And, if a person decides he/she does not want to worship God (He’s not “my” God by the way, I do not own Him), then it is the only place that person can be. People go to Hell because they do not wish to go where God is.

Hell is the ultimate proof of God’s grant of free will. Hell is the ultimate place where God finally says, “you don’t want Me, then fine, I’ll leave you alone.”

That is my honest answer.

I have no problem with these questions.

Esthier on November 2, 2006 at 4:29 PM

Keep it simple – you don’t get something from nothing.

Emmett J. on November 2, 2006 at 5:14 PM

Why are people so afraid of science, they will believe anything anyone tells them. You will take a book, written 1500+ years ago by… who knows… over scientific evidence?! Over reason?!

Who ever said I was afraid of science? It happens to be my understanding of modern science that gives me CAUSE to doubt the theory of evolution. The more we learn about DNA and cell division and atoms and (the list goes on), you find more scientific evidence that someone or something with extremely high intelligence is behind the scenes. To say that it happened by itself thru millions of years of evolving (or monkey buttsex) requires giant leaps of faith. Why should anyone put all of their trust in the almighty scientist who is also a mere human? Only a few months ago, scientists didn’t know what they were going to do with the planet Pluto. So they took a vote! How’s that for scientific research? It just so happens that there is another scientific theory that’s been abandoned by the scientists and they themselves now agree with the Biblical account. The theory that they abandoned over 500 years ago was the theory of a flat earth. During those days, there were people like me who just couldn’t accept that theory no matter how boldly the scientists demanded it was accurate.

Joshua P. Allem on November 2, 2006 at 5:37 PM

I think Howard Dean is the result of a monkey haveing butt-sex with a fish-squirrel.

I think there is a Divine Watchmaker…a first cause….and He’s pissed.

seejanemom on November 2, 2006 at 7:22 PM

Maybe I am the love child, because my typing is going South…thats “having”…no “e”..DUh…I think I’ll go pray to the Divine Watchmaker now.And go to bed.

seejanemom on November 2, 2006 at 7:30 PM

Why are people so afraid of science…..

R_Byrne on November 2, 2006 at 2:55 PM

I strongly suggest you ask your favorite Darwinist. It is they who has to continually spin science to try to force it in to their fairytale, while the Biblical creation story remains the same. This is the most perfect tiny example, but this happens on a daily basis lately – soft tissue was discovered (by mistake) intact in a T-Rex bone that “science” claimed was 70 million years old. The age of the bone was based on evolutionary time, and “science” never considered revising it, despite the fact that thought tissue wasn’t thought to be able to survive past a couple thousand years. Instead of saying “Shit! How could this soft tissue have survived in tact for 70 million years?” and let the evidence lead them where it may, they said “wow, soft tissue can last 70 million years!”

Again, that’s a tiny example that is easy to explain without writing an entire report for you here, but this is constantly happening. They continue to discover that evolutionary “left-overs” in DNA, etc. are not “junk”, but necessary. So many things are irreducably complex. Evidence in the active solar system continues to roll in as our capabilities grow, that would lead us to believe that the solar system was far younger. The problem is, “science” is so obsessed with the evolutionary timeline, that instead of taking the evidence for what it is, they instead have to figure a way to twist findings to fit their preconceived story.

Again, make this a daily reader. They constantly document and link to stories from all the top science publications and disect them. I particularly enjoy when the stories are on the insane complexity of things and don’t dare attempt to explain how they evolved. Or one similar articles when the member of the Church of Darwin say “prove it must have evolved much quicker”, etc. without actually having any science proving anything evolved… Instead the finding flies in the face of ToE, and these people are so brainwashed that they can’t help but throw in an obligatory comment on evolution where it totally doesn’t belong.

RightWinged on November 2, 2006 at 8:00 PM

Why are people so afraid of science, they will believe anything anyone tells them. You will take a book, written 1500+ years ago by… who knows… over scientific evidence?! Over reason?!

Yeah, I’ll follow Darwinism off a cliff as soon as the libtards start applying it to the global environment.

Sure, they believe in evolution, up until the earth’s atmosphere starts evolving due to things like methane bubbling up from plankton rotting at the bottom of the ocean, carbon from natural forest fires, sulfurous gases and PM10 (tiny rock particles) spewed naturally from volcanoes and leaked continously from active calderas like the one in Yellowstone, then they want to start playing God by trying to alter it all and having the hubris to believe that we actually are the major factor. Talk about bullshit.
We can’t even get a weather pattern right! HOW many deadly hurricanes did they predict Bush would conjure up to kill poor people this year?
And after they forced the water-poisoning MTBE into the gas here in CA-which most scientist KNEW was a lame thing to do, the environMENTALists have no scientific standing in my mind.

Einstein believed in God- the more advanced scientific research you conduct, the more sure you are that one dude couldn’t have wrapped it all up in a neat little package called evolution.

And Christoph has a point regarding copyrighting. The fascist leftists would love to torpedo South Park right out of existence by posting the episodes online, so as to avoid any ratings hike Comedy Central might receive during their time slot.

NTWR on November 2, 2006 at 8:01 PM

I strongly suggest you ask your favorite Darwinist. It is they who has to continually spin science to try to force it in to their fairytale, while the Biblical creation story remains the same.

Good point.

Only a few months ago, scientists didn’t know what they were going to do with the planet Pluto. So they took a vote! How’s that for scientific research?

In fact, aparently this was done at the end of a long convention when only a small portion of the scientists who had travelled there were still in attendence.

There were a few upset scientists who weren’t even able to vote.

To say that it happened by itself thru millions of years of evolving (or monkey buttsex) requires giant leaps of faith.

And let’s face it, many very specific things had to happen in evolution just for something as simple as the evolution of the eye.

And to fit the test of Darwin, all of these things had to not only aid to the survival of the species but also be able to attract a mate. So while yes, a person with six fingers would have an advantage, would they also be considered attractive by our standards, or would they just be a virgin freak?

Last, for any who have seen this entire episode, it goes one further to show a world without any religion. Apparently Garrison (the teacher) gets involved with a man who is an atheist and helps eradicate religion.

So instead of saying “Oh my God” when crying out in desperation, these future people say “Oh science”. If you don’t trust in God, then you’re still trusting in something. No one should be so condescending as to assume they are free of this to the point of mocking those who admit their faith.

Esthier on November 3, 2006 at 9:04 AM

So instead of saying “Oh my God” when crying out in desperation, these future people say “Oh science”. If you don’t trust in God, then you’re still trusting in something. No one should be so condescending as to assume they are free of this to the point of mocking those who admit their faith.

It doesn’t seem like many are coming back to this post anymore, but I just want to add that once you’ve endorsed evolution, we’re just animals and we shouldn’t be governed by “laws”. We should be able to kill and rape with impunity, until someone bigger kills us, right? Hey, we’re just animals, I don’t have to obey your laws.

Also, virtually every mass murderer the planet has ever seen has been a fan of Darwin. From Hitler, Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin right back to the biggest – Mao Zedong.

RightWinged on November 3, 2006 at 9:52 AM

Also, virtually every mass murderer the planet has ever seen has been a fan of Darwin. From Hitler, Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin right back to the biggest – Mao Zedong.

Exactly. Hitler was trying to force evolution. And if all we are is animals, it’s hard to make the argument that what he did was wrong.

In fact, it’s hard to make the argument that any murder is wrong seeing as it simply weeds out the “less fit”. People often try and use the “animals do it too” argument for homosexuality, but again, if we did everything animals did, we would have no use of any laws whatsoever.

Maybe there is an argument for normalizing homosexuality, but the animal kingdom one is not it.

Esthier on November 3, 2006 at 10:08 AM

If you can get through Mrs. Garrison having man sex, it’s quite a good episode!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9JXIAcMjD4

wdlp1965 on November 3, 2006 at 11:18 AM

And showing his man-boobs…

Esthier on November 3, 2006 at 11:42 AM

“Also, virtually every mass murderer the planet has ever seen has been a fan of Darwin. From Hitler, Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin right back to the biggest – Mao Zedong.”

Yes, and Hitler was also a Catholic. Does that make Catholics Nazis? Hitler was also a vegetarian. How about them?

That’s the most juvenile argument I’ve ever heard. Evolution is largely the best theory put forth thus far that can prove humanity’s origins, and if you’re going to refute, don’t rely on tactics that are largely a joke with most intelligent people who can debate these subjects, i.e. “Hurr evolution is bad because some guy who believed in it killed a lot of people.”

I’m a conservative and I absolutely believe in evolution. There’s nothing incompatible about evolution and Christ. Most creationist materials I’ve read rely on strawman arguments and ridiculous personal attacks against the motives of evolutionary proponents, and also needlessly attack discredited hominid remains, as though because a skeleton turns out not to be that of a hominid therefore every skeleton ever dug up from this time forward will NEVER be a hominid because scientists got a few wrong.

Grebrook on November 3, 2006 at 12:23 PM

It also amazes me that a lot of people are making fools out of themselves on this blog by claiming that South Park is “mocking” evolution. They’re not mocking evolution. They’re mocking YOU.

Grebrook on November 3, 2006 at 12:29 PM

because scientists got a few wrong.

The understatement of this century. And they haven’t “got a few wrong”, they lied and completely fabricated evidence.

There’s a reason people doubt evolution. They’ve been repeatedly lied to.

It also amazes me that a lot of people are making fools out of themselves on this blog by claiming that South Park is “mocking” evolution. They’re not mocking evolution. They’re mocking YOU.

Please, watch the whole episode. They’re mocking both sides, as usual. They’re mocking those who rely on evolution with such an ardent faith as to have it replace any religion, and they’re mocking those who cover their ears when science presents anything that might possibly conflict with their preconceived ideas.

I’m a conservative and I absolutely believe in evolution. There’s nothing incompatible about evolution and Christ.

Believe it or not, this is what most conservatives believe. Christians have no stake in proving that evolution is wrong, because it means nothing to us. Darwinians on the other hand, must fabricate evidence as a vain attempt to prove God does not exist.

Yes, and Hitler was also a Catholic. Does that make Catholics Nazis? Hitler was also a vegetarian. How about them?

Did Hitler try and plan his “superior” race because of something his priest told him at mass, or to make a race of white people who are all vegetarians?

From what I recall, he was trying to make a superior race to push forward evolution. That means something.

Esthier on November 3, 2006 at 12:45 PM

If evolution was the dynamic by which life began and a multitude of species arose, an indisputable physical record would exist. The fossil record would cover the earth and the evidence for evolution would be more compelling and undeniable than the proof of the Egyptians, as one stood before the pyramids.

Maxx on November 3, 2006 at 7:41 PM

1) Life is so simple that it can happen by accident.

A lot of weird accidents can happen in a few billion years.

kmcguire on November 2, 2006 at 7:37 AM

kmcguire, granting billions or even trillions of years for the process to occur doesn’t change the fact that it happened by accident.

And if the secret of life were so simple that it could happen by accident, man would have discovered the process centuries ago.

Maxx on November 4, 2006 at 1:13 AM