No Evolution Deniers in the White House

The Huffington Post's The Blog ^ | February 19, 2015 | Law Professor Charles J. Reid, Jr., University of St. Thomas

[2ndDivisionVet]

The 2016 presidential campaign is already upon us and the debate is heating up over an unexpected issue -- the theory of evolution. Of course, in an ideal world, evolution would never really become a campaign issue. But the anti-science wing of the Republican Party continues to voice skepticism. Apologists for this wing would dearly like to distract the media and the voting public from what is, frankly, a national if not a global embarrassment.

In truth, the President of the United States needs to be scientifically literate. For the federal government has an important role to play and it is a role that will only grow larger and more complex in the next president's term. It has been a century since the theory of evolution has become settled, incontrovertible science. To doubt evolution at this late date is to reveal oneself to be willfully, invincibly ignorant of basic scientific principles. And there is no room in the Oval Office -- none -- for the scientifically illiterate.

Just consider some of the issues the federal government has recently addressed and is likely to address in the next few years. Let's begin with some recent history -- the Human Genome Project. In 1990, the National Institutes of Health, the Department of Energy and some international groups and organizations commenced work on mapping the human genome -- the intricately-wrought genetic pattern that we all inherit from our ancestors and that makes human life possible. In 2003, the Project was brought to successful completion....

[JoanneSD]

Give obamas answer on when life begins and abortion.. Obama says pointed abortion query “above his pay grade

[wbarmy]

Of course, in an ideal world, evolution would never really become a campaign issue.

OF COURSE
In an ideal world, we would all know that global warming is real and there would be no deniers.

We would all know that a fetus is not a person and no one should be cursed with a baby.

We would all know that white males are responsible for all the worlds ills.

And we would all know that President Obama is the greatest President this country has ever had and will ever have.

Is a sarcasm tag really necessary.

[DoodleDawg]

You can have one or the other, but you can’t have both.

Why not?

[a fool in paradise]

The science deniers are those on the Left who insist that a fetus is not alive. They believe that it is all a woman’s body and that she now possesses two hearts, two brains, etc.

[Paladin2]

Plenty of Jihad deniers in the White Mosque though.

[NorthMountain]

Science is a method of systematic learning by observation, prediction, and experiment.

God is not a scientist. He already knows, eternally, the things we scientists are trying to learn.

[cripplecreek]

I personally believe evolutionary theory is largely correct but have no problem voting for a strict creationist.

It simply doesn’t have anything to do with running the country.

[colorado tanker]

No Republican politician or candidate I'm aware of is trying to start a "debate" on evolution. The Democrats are trying to goad us into debating an absolutely irrelevant issue. Because NONE of their policies are working and they are desperate to change the subject.

Problem is, some in the stupid party will take the bait.

[Politicalkiddo]

Of course their aren’t. Just those who deny the true nature of Islam.

[tanknetter]

Correct. It’s just one of the first red squirrels of the 2016 campaign.

[NorthMountain]

Give obamas answer on when life begins and abortion.. Obama says pointed abortion query “above his pay grade

I'm not clear on what is Barry Soetoro's field of expertise (jihad? destruction of America?) but it's clearly not biology.

[Politicalkiddo]

I agree. I am more interested in a canadidate’s foreign policy, economic plans, etc.

[onedoug]

There are still a lot of open questions, especially regarding the Cambrian Explosion.

One thing is certain. I sure wouldn’t seek any science news from the Huffington Post.

[ConservativeInPA]

Law Professor Charles J. Reid, Jr., University of St. Thomas

I see that the distinguished professor of law is qualified in scientific matters, after all, he has a law degree. Never mind that he doesn't have or espouse to have a degree in biology or related sciences.

To: Esquire Reid, stupid, mental midget:

There is not a theory of evolution. That's right, you political hack. There are multiple theories of evolution and amongst scientists with real degrees there is debate to which theory is correct. Perhaps you refer to Darwinism, one of the oldest theories of evolution. Darwinism is considered by most scientists as obsolete.

So, shut your liberal trap.

[2ndDivisionVet]

[jonno]

As I was heading out into another sub-zero morning, I was pondering the gravitational pull of the our sun.

Now perhaps I’m naive, but it seems remarkable to me that we have maintained an optimal distance from our sun - for supposedly billions of years.

I’ve never seen one, but if someone is a aware of a chart or graphic showing the livable min-max zone in which human life on this planet is possible - I’d like to see it.

The reason it it interesting to me is that if there is an increase - or decay - of the our sun’s gravitational pull - of just a small amount, before two long (an eon or two), we would drift outside the livable zone...

[Secret Agent Man]

The left is the one that doesn’t care about science.

They were for abortion when “science” believed during pregnancy the baby “evolved” through different non-humna stages of beign other things until near the end it looked like a person, so you could abort up until that time and you were not killing a person.

Science has not supported any of the crazy rationalized arguments pro-aborts have had to retreat to over the years. Having no scientific basis for any of their arguments hasn’t stopped them from lusting after abortion. They have been proven wrong in every scientific defense they’ve offered for abortion. They claimed it’s safer for women than childbirth. It is not. They’ve said it has no harmful effects to women physically after one. It has multiple harmful effects. They said they baby wasn’t human before x weeks so abort it. DNA shows it is from conception. They claimed it wasn’t a separate person. By DNA it is. They claim it cannot feel pain so it’s okay to do it. Science has shown they do feel pain and fight against being torn apart. They don’t care science does not support any of their positions even though early on in the pro-abort movement they claimed science would prove their beliefs were right. they ignore science when it doesn’t fit the bill. Today many are willing to admit it’s murder but they do not care, it is now a “legal” “right” to commit such murder.

Tell me Republicans don’t care about science because we believe the Bible. I believe the Bible because mankind is flawed, fallible, and makes assumptions about things that cloud the worldview people have. Our greatest scientific minds see harmony between science and the Creator, who is the greatest engineer, the greatest scientist, the greatest mathematical genius, the greatest architect and planner, the greatest logic intelligence, ever. As do I.

[Amendment10]

Does indicting that you believe in evolution on your résumé qualify you for higher pay if you get a job?

[kaehurowing]

A core part of the theory of evolution is that genetic traits that do not enhance reproduction will be bred out over generations. Since homosexuals do not reproduce, if there was a “homosexual gene” it should have disappeared long ago.

[MrB]

Call it what it is -

a religious test by the left.