Chris Matthews to Mike Pence: Do you or don’t you believe in evolution?

posted at 8:50 pm on May 5, 2009 by Allahpundit

For your amusement or dismay, as the case may be, five minutes of increasingly awkward ducking o’ the question. “I think you believe in evolution,” says Matthews at one point, “but you’re afraid to say so because your conservative constituency might find that offensive.” Actually, my hunch is that he doesn’t believe in it but is afraid to say so lest he be deemed a total crank by the media. I thought the standard line for creationist Republican politicians when asked this question is to say yes, of course they accept Darwin, before quickly adding that that’s not strictly incompatible with belief in a Christian God. That way you get to have your cake and eat it too. Why would Pence decline to do so unless he couldn’t utter both parts of that rote answer in good faith?

Maybe Matthews is just grumpy because he knows that, despite the left’s best efforts, the public still doesn’t much care about global warming. Watch it all the way through, incidentally, or else you’ll miss his salute to the intellects of Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and, of course, Sarah Palin. And to think, I thought he misspoke that time when he accused her of not knowing how to read.


Related Posts:

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

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 7

Define “many.”

I sense that people are rather done with the far-right fundamentalism fad.

Alas, that all it really was.

It just was a fad.

AnninCA on May 5, 2009 at 9:40 PM

@ toliver on May 5, 2009 at 9:39 PM

The whole “gods word” thing was overblown anyway.

thphilli on May 5, 2009 at 9:41 PM

I don’t think either should be taught in science classes. Of course, I also don’t think that homosexuality should be taught in sex ed. I think every single republican who gets asked this question should say. . . ‘I haven’t quite reconciled how people born gay would have evolved.’

ThackerAgency on May 5, 2009 at 9:07 PM

I’ve looked into this issue a little, and the best evidence I can find is that there is a very strong genetic component to sexual orientation, more so for males than for females.

Of course, there are many conditions that don’t encourage procreation that remain prevalent in the population. Consider cystic fibrosis, which only recently has become a condition compatible with reaching adulthood, as just one example.

mikeyboss on May 5, 2009 at 9:41 PM

Yeah, the fossil record points to various speech capable lizards 6,000 years ago. Wait, you’re doing shtick, no?

toliver on May 5, 2009 at 9:28 PM

Looks like the whole thing went waaaaaaay over your head.

Let me put it this way. I was using what you evolutionist use. You know, assuming that you KNOW what animals did millions of years ago (look at any dinosaur or early mammal book). So maybe there were talking animals millions of years ago. I’m mean, scientist figure out the exact skeletal structure of a 10-foot animal but a 6-inch fossil, so who knows if they may find something thigh-bone that “proves” some animal could talk millions of years ago.

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 9:42 PM

thigh-bone that “proves” some animal could talk millions of years ago.

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 9:42 PM

Not only did it talk, but it attended school with humans and shared a common language.

lorien1973 on May 5, 2009 at 9:44 PM

Faith is interesting. I grew up agnostic. But I always envied those with faith.

It wasn’t until I really was devastated that I found it. I’m not Christian, and obviously…not interested in religion.

But faith?

That’s been the most fascinating journey of my lifetime. Trusting in something big…..without knowing……HUGE.

I love the journey.

Religious debates? *nah* not so much. They remind me of when I had no faith.

I was always into “rules.” then.

AnninCA on May 5, 2009 at 9:45 PM

AnninCA on May 5, 2009 at 9:33 PM

Yeah, it’s better to be a Democrat and keep saying “Obama’s going to save us all”. They believe that pretty “faithfully” and I think they are full of horse hockey. It’s all relative.

Cindy Munford on May 5, 2009 at 9:45 PM

@ DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 9:28 PM

Are you serious? We have MASSIVE amounts of evidence as to the creation of the earth and the formation of continents, etc. We know for an absolute fact that the continents are constantly shifting and have NEVER looked the way they do this instant before. We know the age of the earth to within a couple million years. NONE of this evidence works at all with the bible.

thphilli on May 5, 2009 at 9:32 PM

And this evidence would be…? Do you have a time machine proving that the dating methods indeed to work for something that’s 10,000 years old let only millions? Didn’t think so.

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 9:46 PM

@ DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 9:42 PM

No, scientists never figure out a full skeletal structure by a 6 inch fossil. They may make theories as to what the bone could be from, but they do something scary to you, they LOOK FOR MORE EVIDENCE before claiming they know the truth.

thphilli on May 5, 2009 at 9:46 PM

DethMetalCookieMonst have you ever read GK Chesterton’s The Everlasting Man? The first part of the book is all about demonstrating the absurdity of ascribing behavior based on archaeological(pre-written history era) finds. It is so pithy and insightful. Chesterton was an amazing writer.

daesleeper on May 5, 2009 at 9:46 PM

Looks like the whole thing went waaaaaaay over your head.

Let me put it this way. I was using what you evolutionist use. You know, assuming that you KNOW what animals did millions of years ago (look at any dinosaur or early mammal book). So maybe there were talking animals millions of years ago. I’m mean, scientist figure out the exact skeletal structure of a 10-foot animal but a 6-inch fossil, so who knows if they may find something thigh-bone that “proves” some animal could talk millions of years ago.

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 9:42 PM

Your sense of humor is not over my head, but I’m still getting a slight kick from it.

But seriously, it’s plain you’ve not studied what you decry.

toliver on May 5, 2009 at 9:47 PM

@ DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 9:46 PM

You don’t need to be there to know that the dating methods work. Certain elements have certain half lives, let alone the various other methods they use. After measuring them its just a simple math equation. Of course, for someone who believes in ghosts and invisible superheroes its a hard thing to understand constants.

thphilli on May 5, 2009 at 9:48 PM

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 9:46 PM

Half life. Look into it.

lorien1973 on May 5, 2009 at 9:48 PM

but they do something scary to you, they LOOK FOR MORE EVIDENCE before claiming they know the truth.

Leave Bible believing Christians out of this!

daesleeper on May 5, 2009 at 9:48 PM

@ DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 9:33 PM

You are hilariously moronic. Evidence as in several different dating techniques all confirming the same age. And yes, there are TONS of dating techniques that are accurate past 1000 years.

thphilli on May 5, 2009 at 9:36 PM

Their evidence that these methods actually work would be…?

Oh yeah, and if these multiple dating techniques all work, then how come after so many years they change the techniqued used? Then I hear that “well if it’s this old you use this technique and if it’s that old you use that technique”.

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 9:48 PM

Depends on who you ask. Many firmly believe that it does.

Hollowpoint on May 5, 2009 at 9:39 PM

Yes, that I can agree to be a fact. But what they believe is their business, is it not? Others believe there is no God, and that to is their business.

But if you just read what the Bible actually says, and not what you think it means, it says In the beginning God created the heavens and Earth. The Earth was without form, and void. So the Earth exists in some condition prior to the later creation of the things the Bible discribes being placed there after it was no longer without form.

Maybe it was all a big bang thing, or five million years of ozing swamp. But it was something, and then it was something else. If you want to call that evolution, I’m OK with that. If you want to claim it to all be false because you can’t get your mind around it, I don’t care. But what you belive is not in any way going to trump what I believe.

MikeA on May 5, 2009 at 9:49 PM

One can be a good Christian and not accept some of the myths in Genesis.

toliver on May 5, 2009 at 9:39 PM

first, there are no ‘myths’ in genesis. second, if you think there are, then how can you rely on any of the bible?

do you just pick and choose, be your own little god shall we say, and decide what is valid and invalid??

right4life on May 5, 2009 at 9:50 PM

right4life on May 5, 2009 at 9:50 PM

God didn’t write the bible, you know. So it’s okay to think some parts are just bull crap.

lorien1973 on May 5, 2009 at 9:51 PM

@ DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 9:48 PM

You seriously have not researched a SINGLE effing thing you think that you know have you?

Here you go:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Radiometric_dating

Do a LOT of reading, several hours worth, and then come back here with a SLIGHT understanding of how “science” works. You obviously don’t get discovery channel at your house do you, cause they explain this to children, and they have no problem understanding.

thphilli on May 5, 2009 at 9:51 PM

@ DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 9:38 PM

You do understand intelligent design as a theory has certain tenets right? You absolutely aren’t talking about the theory, you are talking about creationism with a fancy name. In none of your posts have you brought up any of the main three tenets of intelligent design, nor can you defend them.

thphilli on May 5, 2009 at 9:39 PM

Strange. I’ve given you an example of intelligent design and yet apparently I’m not talking about intelligent design. I noticed you couldn’t debunk that intelligent design has been shown to exist even today while macro evolution hasn’t been.

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 9:51 PM

God didn’t write the bible, you know. So it’s okay to think some parts are just bull crap.

lorien1973 on May 5, 2009 at 9:51 PM

really?? and you know this how???

explain the prophecies…just good guesses huh??

right4life on May 5, 2009 at 9:52 PM

God didn’t write the bible, you know. So it’s okay to think some parts are just bull crap.

lorien1973 on May 5, 2009 at 9:51 PM

Wonderful thing about freedom. You can decide if that is OK for you. But you can’t decide if that is OK for right4life, or anyone else.

MikeA on May 5, 2009 at 9:52 PM

I think we’ve just so gotten past the religious right stage.

I don’t think we’ve gotten past the fear of it.

Watching people burn Harry Potter books is traumatic to Americans. And no, I’m serious. We’re incredibly goofy.

Trauma is defined by Dr. Phil, etc.

But cap and trade is totally different. That’s a regressive tax. End of story.

Education policies that cut out locals entirely have been tried and have failed. End of story.

There’s political give-and-take here that’s obvious.

AnninCA on May 5, 2009 at 9:53 PM

thigh-bone that “proves” some animal could talk millions of years ago.

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 9:42 PM

Not only did it talk, but it attended school with humans and shared a common language.

lorien1973 on May 5, 2009 at 9:44 PM

Damn, you still don’t get it do you.

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 9:53 PM

Do a LOT of reading, several hours worth, and then come back here with a SLIGHT understanding of how “science” works. You obviously don’t get discovery channel at your house do you, cause they explain this to children, and they have no problem understanding.

thphilli on May 5, 2009 at 9:51 PM

oh good a ‘scientist’ here explain this then….

A dinosaur bone buried for 80 million years has yielded a mix of proteins and microstructures resembling cells. The finding is important because it should resolve doubts about a previous report that also claimed to have extracted dino tissue from fossils.

link

80 MILLION years…right, its not possible….

right4life on May 5, 2009 at 9:54 PM

right4life on May 5, 2009 at 9:52 PM

Well given that I doubt a non-corporeal being can hold a pencil, it’s impossible.

lorien1973 on May 5, 2009 at 9:54 PM

@ DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 9:51 PM

You haven’t given an example of intelligent design at all. You have ABSOLUTELY no idea what you are talking about. Intelligent design is a theory based on:

1. Irreducible complexity
2. Fine Tuned Universe
3. Specified complexity

which supposedly lead to evidence for the:

Intelligent Designer.

thphilli on May 5, 2009 at 9:54 PM

@ DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 9:42 PM

No, scientists never figure out a full skeletal structure by a 6 inch fossil. They may make theories as to what the bone could be from, but they do something scary to you, they LOOK FOR MORE EVIDENCE before claiming they know the truth.

thphilli on May 5, 2009 at 9:46 PM

And yet we’re constantly told that macro evolution is THE TRUTH.

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 9:55 PM

Damn, you still don’t get it do you.

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 9:53 PM

You’ll need to enlighten me, apparently.

lorien1973 on May 5, 2009 at 9:56 PM

Well given that I doubt a non-corporeal being can hold a pencil, it’s impossible.

lorien1973 on May 5, 2009 at 9:54 PM

you doubt it so that means it is impossible. There is a word for that, but I can’t recall what it is.

MikeA on May 5, 2009 at 9:56 PM

And to prove his point about evolution Chris Matthews show Mike Pence his tail….

Dr Evil on May 5, 2009 at 9:57 PM

Well given that I doubt a non-corporeal being can hold a pencil, it’s impossible.

lorien1973 on May 5, 2009 at 9:54 PM

please… :rolleyes:

The One who created everything, including you, can do anything He wants, and He does it QUITE WELL…

but we all know He used people to write the Bible..sigh….thanks for skipping the explanation of the prophecies….no surprise…

right4life on May 5, 2009 at 9:57 PM

@ right4life on May 5, 2009 at 9:54 PM

Don’t know what you want explanation on. Scientists didn’t expect what they found. They found what they didn’t expect. Now they are examining what they found to make sure what they found is what they think they found.

thphilli on May 5, 2009 at 9:57 PM

And to prove his point about evolution Chris Matthews show Mike Pence his tail….

Dr Evil on May 5, 2009 at 9:57 PM

very nice!

right4life on May 5, 2009 at 9:57 PM

Matthews has issues. What the hell is he even talking about?

“Republicans are anti science” is one of the dumbest strawman arguements around.

And I really don’t understand what the hell Mike Pence’s personal views about evolution vs. creationsim have to do with anything.

therightwinger on May 5, 2009 at 9:57 PM

Don’t know what you want explanation on. Scientists didn’t expect what they found. They found what they didn’t expect. Now they are examining what they found to make sure what they found is what they think they found.

thphilli on May 5, 2009 at 9:57 PM

hemoglobin cannot last 80 million years…no soft tissue can…

right4life on May 5, 2009 at 9:58 PM

but we all know He used people to write the Bible..sigh….thanks for skipping the explanation of the prophecies….no surprise…

right4life on May 5, 2009 at 9:57 PM

What kind of God possesses peoples’ mind to write stuff down? It’s bad enough he’ll send you to hell for thought crimes, but putting thoughts into your head. Man, that’s pretty crappy.

What prophecies do you speak of?

lorien1973 on May 5, 2009 at 9:58 PM

I thought the standard line for creationist Republican politicians when asked this question is to say yes, of course they accept Darwin, before quickly adding that that’s not strictly incompatible with belief in a Christian God. That way you get to have your cake and eat it too.

Oh, there are lots of ways of having your cake and eating it too. Like believing our “goodness” is just hard-wired evolutionary traits, while ascribing our “badness” to brain farts.

But unless the subject is school curricula, I couldn’t care less what a politician thinks about Darwin, or theistic evolution, or existentialism, or whatever.

ddrintn on May 5, 2009 at 9:59 PM

Oh yeah, and if these multiple dating techniques all work, then how come after so many years they change the techniqued used? Then I hear that “well if it’s this old you use this technique and if it’s that old you use that technique”.

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 9:48 PM

It’s the same reason you’re typing this on a computer and not chiseling on a stone tablet…

elgeneralisimo on May 5, 2009 at 9:59 PM

Deth..nobody gives a dang what you think about evolution.

Who cares?

None of us!

I assure you I don’t.

You could live for the rest of your life with differing beliefs than me, and we’d be quite dandy.

What matters is how this impacts cap-and-trade.

That’s all.

I call cap-and-trade an uncreative solution that is really nothing more than a regressive tax on people.

It’s trickle down change theory, if you will. Punish and people will change.

Well, I’d like for the liberals to explain to me how the basis of this is one whit different than trickle down economics.

Go ahead. I’m listening.

AnninCA on May 5, 2009 at 9:59 PM

@ DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 9:55 PM

The ONLY reason you claim its NOT true is that it hasn’t been observed happening. Due to the time scales involved, there would have to be observation of a species for MILLIONS of years to observe this evolution. Fossil records show MANY transitional species, all of which are not recognized to exist from people like you.

thphilli on May 5, 2009 at 9:59 PM

MikeA on May 5, 2009 at 9:56 PM

If you have an example of a noncorporeal being holding a pencil, I’d like to see it.

lorien1973 on May 5, 2009 at 9:59 PM

@ right4life on May 5, 2009 at 9:58 PM

Apparently it did, or the sample was contaminated.

thphilli on May 5, 2009 at 10:00 PM

Do a LOT of reading, several hours worth, and then come back here with a SLIGHT understanding of how “science” works.

Science, to my understanding is a methodology. There is a philosophical framework that is generally agreed upon for what a hypothesis is and what counts as data. A hypothesis must be testable and a theory must be falsifiable. Precepts cannot be tested and proven ad infinitum so all theories contain some assumptions. Confirmational holism says that data are not sufficient in making decisions between theories. This means no theory is more worthy than another when trying to explain some phenomena.

meh

daesleeper on May 5, 2009 at 10:00 PM

I’m usually loath to enter into evolution debates b/c they rarely go anywhere. But this is just too silly to let pass:

See, with evolution you don’t just get to make crap up like when you write a story in a book.

thphilli on May 5, 2009 at 9:27 PM

Please. That’s why Piltdown Man and Archaeoraptor weren’t hoaxes, right? And why Haeckel’s sketches are accurate representations of embryonic development. Etc, etc, ad nauseum.

And no, scientists exposing other scientists’ lies as lies does not prove any particular scientific theorum.

When you think up a theory, it fails experimental verification, and you then refuse to discard or rework the theory in light of the experimental results, you are no longer doing science; you’re writing fiction and hoping someone will believe it (usually long enough to write the grant check).

Harpazo on May 5, 2009 at 10:00 PM

This is just more of an effort to try to paint Republicans as people who want to jam thier religion down other peopleps throats. Those of us who do believe the Bible is the inerrant, inspired Word of God will believe what He tells us, which is in direct opposition to the theory of evolution (which has never been proved), and those who don’t believe in the Bible will wake up one day to find millions mysteriously gone from the earth. Those who want a world without God will get thier wish, but it won’t be the paradise they expect. What is happening now with everything good seen as evil and evil seen as good, with people worshipping the creation (earth, environment) rather than the Creator, people turning from the natural relationship between men and women and turning to homosexuality, has all been prophesied as a sign that things are about to end and the church is about to be taken. Smile, Christophobes, your wish will soon be granted.

jdawg on May 5, 2009 at 10:01 PM

AnninCA on May 5, 2009 at 9:59 PM

Any politician who believes in creation will not get a significant number of votes from people under 30. It’s pathetic that people believe in creation anymore. It’s just ignorant.

lorien1973 on May 5, 2009 at 10:01 PM

Why do Republicans appear on these shows?

AbaddonsReign on May 5, 2009 at 10:01 PM

therightwinger on May 5, 2009 at 9:57 PM

As successful tactic of the left, look at the thread. LGF as I live and breathe.

Cindy Munford on May 5, 2009 at 10:01 PM

BTW, religion trolls. I finally felt personally embarassed by the “baiting” I did with Mormons in my 20′s. Those guys were terribly sincere and just sweet. I was a bit of a cocky 70′s girl.

Let me pass along a bit of wisdom. Baiting those who believe is not going to be a moment you look back on and are proud about in the end.

AnninCA on May 5, 2009 at 10:01 PM

What kind of God possesses peoples’ mind to write stuff down? It’s bad enough he’ll send you to hell for thought crimes, but putting thoughts into your head. Man, that’s pretty crappy.

What prophecies do you speak of?

lorien1973 on May 5, 2009 at 9:58 PM

well its obvious what ‘god’ has been putting thoughts in your head….and he’s pretty horrifying…you’ll find out, probably the hard way…

lets start with Ezekiel’s prophecy of the establishment of israel as a nation again, toward the end of days, and the iranian/russian invasion that is prophecied…

right4life on May 5, 2009 at 10:02 PM

As successful tactic of the left, look at the thread. LGF as I live and breathe.

There’s no question it’s successful. It’s still wrong and dumb.

therightwinger on May 5, 2009 at 10:02 PM

Apparently it did, or the sample was contaminated.

thphilli on May 5, 2009 at 10:00 PM

of course because evolution HAS TO BE TRUE!!!!!

right.

check your common sense at the door for uncle charlie…

right4life on May 5, 2009 at 10:03 PM

Maybe it was all a big bang thing, or five million years of ozing swamp. But it was something, and then it was something else. If you want to call that evolution, I’m OK with that. If you want to claim it to all be false because you can’t get your mind around it, I don’t care. But what you belive is not in any way going to trump what I believe.

MikeA on May 5, 2009 at 9:49 PM

Where did I say what I believe?

It’s a matter of interpretation of the Bible. You feel yours is correct; others who believe that an Earth billions of years old contradicts the Bible believe their interpretation is correct- and there’s really no way to prove which is right in their interpretation.

Which is part of the reason I find the entire debate unwinnable, and thus pointless.

Hollowpoint on May 5, 2009 at 10:03 PM

@ DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 9:46 PM

You don’t need to be there to know that the dating methods work. Certain elements have certain half lives, let alone the various other methods they use. After measuring them its just a simple math equation. Of course, for someone who believes in ghosts and invisible superheroes its a hard thing to understand constants.

thphilli on May 5, 2009 at 9:48 PM

Anyone else notice how the atheists have to resort to insults? Usually that’s an act of a desperate person in an arguement. YOu know, like libs resorting to calling someone “racist”.

ertain elements have certain half lives, let alone the various other methods they use. After measuring them its just a simple math equation.

And the scientist, I take it, are 100% certain that depending on the age of something that certain factors may cause whatever it is (whether it be carbon or whatever the element used) to seem, errr….how do I put this……let’s just say, as with most everything else, huge margin of error. I mean, with all the many, many, many things that have happened on this planet (that’s what the evolutionists tell us), wouldn’t there be things that would cause something to, after putting in the numbers, seem older?

Where as something that’s actually been 100% scientists-will-swear-on-their-mothers-lives sure that is 1,000 years been tested to make sure the the methods work? How about 10,000?

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 10:04 PM

jdawg……I completely respect your right to worry.

But that has nothing to do with our politics.

This country was founded on religious freedom.

That is core.

And those of us who did not or do not appreciate the religious right influence are actually far more basic and back to rock-solid constitutional rights than otherwise.

This needs to be out of politics.

AnninCA on May 5, 2009 at 10:05 PM

lorien1973 on May 5, 2009 at 10:01 PM

I wish I was going to be around to see you change your mind about something. Maybe not this but something you are absolutely positive about will turn out to be false. You shouldn’t speak in absolutes for a rather large number of people.

Cindy Munford on May 5, 2009 at 10:05 PM

@ right4life on May 5, 2009 at 10:03 PM

One piece of evidence against absolutely millions. Sorry, I don’t buy it. If there isn’t a scientific explanation as to why it survived, then maybe the theory of evolution will need to change. Some person saying on a forum that it “cannot be” but is, isnt good enough for me.

thphilli on May 5, 2009 at 10:06 PM

lorien, what I think is pathetic is that you even think it’s an issue. LOL*

Such confused thinking in our country right now.

AnninCA on May 5, 2009 at 10:06 PM

therightwinger on May 5, 2009 at 10:02 PM

Agreed but it appears to be the hill they are willing to die on.

Cindy Munford on May 5, 2009 at 10:06 PM

cause they explain this man made global warming to children, and they have no problem understanding.

Are you sure you want to go with that?

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 10:06 PM

Nobody has answered the question as to why it matters what a Congressman believes regarding evolution vs. creationism.

It should not matter.

therightwinger on May 5, 2009 at 10:07 PM

As I Christian it doesn’t bother me that God used evolution or took billions of years.

aikidoka on May 5, 2009 at 10:07 PM

@ DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 10:04 PM

No, I resort to insults because your belief system is embarrassing to me, and you identify yourself similarly politically as me. I have no problem with christians at all, but seriously believing in creation science and ignoring millions of pieces of evidence for evolution, is embarrassing.

thphilli on May 5, 2009 at 10:08 PM

And those of us who did not or do not appreciate the religious right influence are actually far more basic and back to rock-solid constitutional rights than otherwise.

Better get to rewriting the preamble to all 50 state’s constitutions.

daesleeper on May 5, 2009 at 10:08 PM

therightwinger on May 5, 2009 at 10:07 PM

It shouldn’t but it does. You can’t hold an opinion, that is disprovably false, and expect people to take you seriously.

I mean really. Someone in here is suggesting that talking snakes existed? I mean. Come on. Really?

lorien1973 on May 5, 2009 at 10:09 PM

I have no problem with christians at all, but seriously believing in creation science and ignoring millions of pieces of evidence for evolution, is embarrassing.

I have no problem with christians as long as they don’t really believe. Sweet!

daesleeper on May 5, 2009 at 10:09 PM

If you have an example of a noncorporeal being holding a pencil, I’d like to see it.

lorien1973 on May 5, 2009 at 9:59 PM

You missed my point. I was refering to your perception that the only things that are possible are those that you understand.

Now I know it does not qualify as a pencil actually, but about as close as I can come is in John 8 5-11. That passage fits this thread very well too.

MikeA on May 5, 2009 at 10:10 PM

I think the usual arguments are between atheists and Christians.

Yawn.

Even back in my youth, atheist homes were as rigid as any fundamentalist home.

Oh boy, don’t you dare bring home a Christmas gift if you were a kid of an atheist. That would be the same as wearing lipstick if you were the daughter of a fundamentalist Christian group against make-up.

I was just glad my dad was a regular ole’ tolerant agnostic. LOL*

Thank goodness!

I’ve always gotten along with religious people, without having to buy into whatever.

Atheists? I gotta admit. They are usually just sort of scary types.

They love to file lawsuits. :)

AnninCA on May 5, 2009 at 10:10 PM

@ DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 10:06 PM

Sure I will. I don’t believe in man made global warming personally. The reason you don’t is because its been adopted by the political left because they see opportunities to advance their agenda in it. I deny man made global warming because I examined the evidence from temperature increased, CO2 increases, Sun activity, etc. I came to the conclusion after looking at the evidence that it was a natural occurrence. Just because some douchebag politician says the consensus is in scientifically, doesn’t mean anything. You are listening to politicians speak on the issue, and not scientists.

thphilli on May 5, 2009 at 10:11 PM

One piece of evidence against absolutely millions. Sorry, I don’t buy it. If there isn’t a scientific explanation as to why it survived, then maybe the theory of evolution will need to change. Some person saying on a forum that it “cannot be” but is, isnt good enough for me.

thphilli on May 5, 2009 at 10:06 PM

of course not!!!! no evidence would good enough for a darwinist…you have heard the ‘tree of life’ is false, haven’t you?

here you’ll get a kick out of this too..

Science Paper Admits Evolution Mechanism of “Adaptive Radiation” Lacks Empirical Evidence
A recent article in Science titled “Adaptive Radiation: Contrasting Theory with Data” admits that the evidence documenting the precise workings of a key macroevolutionary mechanism — “adaptive radiation” — is missing. The article concedes that “how exactly radiation occurs, and how it differs among taxa and in different settings, as well as why some lineages radiate and others do not, are still unclear.”

link

right4life on May 5, 2009 at 10:11 PM

MikeA on May 5, 2009 at 10:10 PM

So god wrote the bible, because the bible says he did?

lorien1973 on May 5, 2009 at 10:12 PM

@ AnninCA on May 5, 2009 at 10:10 PM

There is a difference between real life and a dumb forum online.

thphilli on May 5, 2009 at 10:12 PM

So stupid for anyone to be afraid to answer this, since the vast majority of the country are “creationists” whether they realize it or not.

RightWinged on May 5, 2009 at 10:12 PM

I mean really. Someone in here is suggesting that talking snakes existed? I mean. Come on. Really?

lorien1973 on May 5, 2009 at 10:09 PM

and your evidence to disprove the bible is???

right4life on May 5, 2009 at 10:12 PM

@ DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 9:51 PM

You haven’t given an example of intelligent design at all. You have ABSOLUTELY no idea what you are talking about. Intelligent design is a theory based on:

1. Irreducible complexity
2. Fine Tuned Universe
3. Specified complexity

which supposedly lead to evidence for the:

Intelligent Designer.

thphilli on May 5, 2009 at 9:54 PM

Please define “Irreducible complexity” and “specified what do you think a video game or complex simulator has? Deny it all you want but games like “The SIms” and the GTA series have finally universes.

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 10:13 PM

It shouldn’t but it does. You can’t hold an opinion, that is disprovably false, and expect people to take you seriously.

I mean really. Someone in here is suggesting that talking snakes existed? I mean. Come on. Really?

Some people think FDR was a good president…

Whether someone believes in evolution or creationism doesn’t matter.

therightwinger on May 5, 2009 at 10:13 PM

@ right4life on May 5, 2009 at 10:11 PM

Are you really serious? You throw one or two inconsistencies out as if they are supposed to disprove MILLIONS of pieces of evidence to the contrary.

thphilli on May 5, 2009 at 10:14 PM

You are hilariously moronic. Evidence as in several different dating techniques all confirming the same age. And yes, there are TONS of dating techniques that are accurate past 1000 years.

thphilli on May 5, 2009 at 9:36 PM

Their evidence that these methods actually work would be…?

Oh yeah, and if these multiple dating techniques all work, then how come after so many years they change the techniqued used? Then I hear that “well if it’s this old you use this technique and if it’s that old you use that technique”.

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 9:48 PM

I’m with thphilli on this one. Hilariously!

I started to type up a reply explaining the science behind radiocarbon dating, but then I went back and viewed some of your earlier posts in this thread. What you exhibit is not mere ignorance; it is contempt for knowledge. There’s a reason people like you are a laughingstock, and it’s not because godless scientists sold their souls to the devil to buy off the media.

hicsuget on May 5, 2009 at 10:14 PM

So god wrote the bible, because the bible says he did?

lorien1973 on May 5, 2009 at 10:12 PM

yes, and HE backs it up with prophecies…very precise, very accurate..and no one has been able to disprove the bible…

Voltaire tried…many others have tried…they are dust..the bible goes on…

learn to love it, cause its the best thing going!! (woooo) a little ric flair lingo there…

right4life on May 5, 2009 at 10:14 PM

right4life on May 5, 2009 at 10:12 PM

Common sense?

If a talking snake existed, how did it acquire the same language as the humans? Did it go to the same school?

lorien1973 on May 5, 2009 at 10:14 PM

Define “many.”

I sense that people are rather done with the far-right fundamentalism fad.

Alas, that all it really was.

It just was a fad.

AnninCA on May 5, 2009 at 9:40 PM

If by “far-right fundamentalism” you mean those that don’t believe in evolution but rather that God created man in more or less his current form within the last 10,000 years, you would be wrong.

Hollowpoint on May 5, 2009 at 10:14 PM

right4life on May 5, 2009 at 10:14 PM

I’m happy that you agree your reasoning is circular.

lorien1973 on May 5, 2009 at 10:15 PM

@ DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 10:13 PM

There is no need to define them. They have been disproven. Its as simple as that. If you actually knew anything about the theory, you would know that. Everything that has been claimed to be irreducibly complex, has been reduced.

thphilli on May 5, 2009 at 10:15 PM

Are you really serious? You throw one or two inconsistencies out as if they are supposed to disprove MILLIONS of pieces of evidence to the contrary.

thphilli on May 5, 2009 at 10:14 PM

millions of pieces??? laughable…you mean millions of STORIES…thats it…

you extrapolate micro evolution to macro…without a SHRED OF EVIDENCE…you cannot duplicate it in the lab, and cannot observe it in the fossil record…ya got nothing but faith…sorry.

right4life on May 5, 2009 at 10:15 PM

I’m happy that you agree your reasoning is circular.

lorien1973 on May 5, 2009 at 10:15 PM

you’re just clueless…and unable to disprove the bible..

you’ll find out, the hard way, the bible is true…

right4life on May 5, 2009 at 10:16 PM

How can you believe in evolution when a guy like Obama is president and Chris Matthews passes as a journalist? If these guys are “evolved” then I’m a monkey’s uncle.

RandyChandler on May 5, 2009 at 10:16 PM

Which is part of the reason I find the entire debate unwinnable, and thus pointless.

Hollowpoint on May 5, 2009 at 10:03 PM

I’m sorry, and I did not mean to offend you, or even direct those words to you specifically. But what you have said here is important to understand. Faith is not ABOUT a debate, and it is not ABOUT winning an arguement.

God either is or is not, and beliving it or not beliving it will not change what is. Neither will changing what someone else believes.

MikeA on May 5, 2009 at 10:16 PM

Oh yeah, and if these multiple dating techniques all work, then how come after so many years they change the techniqued used? Then I hear that “well if it’s this old you use this technique and if it’s that old you use that technique”.

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 9:48 PM

It’s the same reason you’re typing this on a computer and not chiseling on a stone tablet…

elgeneralisimo on May 5, 2009 at 9:59 PM

If I chisel on a stone tablet words it still gives me the same result as writing stuff on paper or typing on a computer. That is, they all result on words that I want to be seen being seen. Meanwhile, the dating methods constantly changing is “oh shit, when I use it on this item it doesn’t give me the result that I want so let’s try to find another method”.

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 10:16 PM

Common sense?

If a talking snake existed, how did it acquire the same language as the humans? Did it go to the same school?

lorien1973 on May 5, 2009 at 10:14 PM

I’m sure you think you’re very clever…but you prove the truth of the bible…professing to be wise, they have become fools…

right4life on May 5, 2009 at 10:17 PM

Science is the abstract concept that sounds irrefutable, especially when it is your only appeal. The horrors of science are manifest. The benefits of science are manifest. Logical Positivism enjoyed a short life about 80 years ago. thpilli, you need to abandon your antiquated world view. It isn’t tenable and most scientists and philosophers have moved on.

daesleeper on May 5, 2009 at 10:18 PM

@ right4life on May 5, 2009 at 10:15 PM

literally millions of fossils have been uncovered. We have discovered fossils of the same type on two seperate continents. We know that the continents drift and move. Yes, MILLIONS of pieces of evidence, none of which are inconsistent with the theory of evolution. Either its the biggest coincidence ever, or the theory of evolution is fact.

thphilli on May 5, 2009 at 10:18 PM

This needs to be out of politics.

AnninCA on May 5, 2009 at 10:05 PM

Read the founders – they had a much different take:

John Adams and John Hancock:
We Recognize No Sovereign but God, and no King but Jesus! [April 18, 1775]

John Adams:
“ The general principles upon which the Fathers achieved independence were the general principals of Christianity… I will avow that I believed and now believe that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.”
• “[July 4th] ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty.”
–John Adams in a letter written to Abigail on the day the Declaration was approved by Congress

“We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” –October 11, 1798

I can go on and on and on, but I think the point is clear.

jdawg on May 5, 2009 at 10:18 PM

Darwin founded MSNBC 150 years ago. That’s evolution. Chris’ mother was a monkey. That’s evolution. Chris smells like a lizard. That’s evolution. Chris gets a thrill up his leg when Barry walks by. That’s evolution. no. strike that. Chris gets a boner when Barry walks by smelling like a lizard. That’s homosexuality.

Griz on May 5, 2009 at 10:18 PM

AnninCA on May 5, 2009 at 9:59 PM

Well let me just ask you this.

If Christianity dies, do you think taxes will go as high as they ever had? I do. Why? Because we would all be made to pay for all the stuff that until that time christian organizations have been footing the bill for. Salvation army, missions, feeding the homeless.

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 5, 2009 at 10:19 PM

the other thing thats amusing about evolution, is that the theory is racist as hell…and has given us the ‘wonders’ of eugenics…margaret sanger, hitler..etc.

oh yeah ‘applied evolution’ has killed tens of millions…

here’s the hairy one himself….

“At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.” (Darwin, Charles R. [English naturalist and founder of the modern theory of evolution], “The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex,” [1871], John Murray: London, Second Edition, 1922, reprint, pp.241-242).

right4life on May 5, 2009 at 10:20 PM

I mean really. Someone in here is suggesting that talking snakes existed? I mean. Come on. Really?

Why not? I just heard an asshole talking. Anything is possible.

RandyChandler on May 5, 2009 at 10:20 PM

This needs to be out of politics.

AnninCA on May 5, 2009 at 10:05 PM

And this one really speaks to the state of things today:

Charles Carroll – signer of the Declaration of Independence | Portrait of Charles Carroll
” Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure…are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments.” [Source: To James McHenry on November 4, 1800.]

jdawg on May 5, 2009 at 10:20 PM

Is this HotAir or LGF? It hurts to see CJ dementia on this website.

kingsjester on May 5, 2009 at 10:20 PM

Oh, and BTW. To all of you religious folk, if you refer to people who believe in evolution as “darwinists” you are simply showing that you continue to argue as if science was stuck in the 19th century. Damn embarrassing to be associated in any way with you.

thphilli on May 5, 2009 at 10:21 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 7