Ann Coulter weighs in on Darwinism

uncommondescent.com ^ | William Dembski

[Tribune7]

I’m happy to report that I was in constant correspondence with Ann regarding her chapters on Darwinism — indeed, I take all responsibility for any errors in those chapters. :-)

[RunningWolf]

Maybe in an unintended & inverse way the ACLU ends up helping, because the people see what is going down and push back with strong positions that will stand the test of time-again.

What do you think?

Wolf

[AndrewC]

She explains that the evidence for evolution, such as Piltdown Man, is a hoax. She doesn't even know Jack Chick about science it would seem.

This is what your link states.

Writing with a keen appreciation for genuine science, Coulter reveals that the so-called "gaps" in the theory of evolution are all there is -- Darwinism is nothing but a gap. After 150 years of dedicated searching into the fossil record, evolution's proponents have failed utterly to substantiate its claims. And a long line of supposed evidence, from the infamous Piltdown Man to the "evolving" peppered moths of England, has been exposed as hoaxes. [sic]

The Piltdown Man was a hoax. It was a presented for a reason and used as evidence(and not as evidence against evolution) for a time.

[Virginia-American]

...If anything, you should be *glad* that some of them have come to the conclusion that not all conservatives are morons and that some conservatives actually have a brain.

This could be the crack in the door which might eventually lead them to consider that conservative positions or conservatism in general might not be as ridiculous as they had previously believed.

Many people have come to eventually become conservatives themselves via such a road.

Worth repeating.

But no, rather than take that as a potentially good thing, the first thing *you* can think of is to come running back here to beat some of your fellow conservatives over the head with it, in an attempt to excommunicate us from the flock and drive us out as not being "real" conservatives, begone foul posers who consort with demons!

Wow, way to make friends and influence people, jerkwad. Not only do you want to demean the few liberals who have found at least one reason to respect some conservatives, but you want to attack the conservatives whom they admire and denounce them!

Now *that's* a recipe for disastrous PR!

A DUmmy saying anything positive about FR is amazing to me; I think we should look at a potential conservative. A little dissent over at DU is good, dividing FR is bad.

I'm surprised there aren't more CRIDers at DU. After all, their platform is affirmative action so that minorities don't feel dissed by the standard curriculum, and, AFAIK, there are many demographics in the D*m*cr*t*c camp that reject ToE. (eg over 65, women with no college)

[DocRock]

"What do you think?"

I think you are correct. The building had overflow attendance without publicity. It was to be a simple, quiet ceremony with very little media. There were a dozen satellite trucks in the parking lot with hundreds of people standing outside the 3 story open air lobby where the monument was placed. The media was looking for a confrontation to film and the ACLU lawyers were trying to oblige them. There was nothing that evening on the national or local news. The locals prevailed in shear numbers and the media and ACLU just crept away...

[Ichneumon]

[I had no idea that a belief in evolution was incompatible with conservatism and a belief in God.]

It isnt. PERIOD

A great many of your anti-evolution buddies disagree with you on that one, very stridently. Why have I never seen you take issue with them when they say that? I'll be sure to tell them to take it up with you the next several hundred times they make that claim.

But it's... interesting that you would say this after you called someone espousing the compatibility of those beliefs "blasphemous" in this post...

But some on Fr will try and label you a victim of creationists anyways.

No need for any of us to "try and label" anything, the rabid "evolution is incompatible with Christianity/God/the Bible" folks do that all on their own:

Evolution and Christianity do not mix, like oil and water.

75 posted on 08/22/2005 8:53:36 AM CDT by Just mythoughts

---

But anyone who professes to be a Christian and a follower of Darwinism is affected by doublethink, or the concept of holding two contradictory ideas in one's mind and accepting both of them at the same time.

869 posted on 12/17/2005 11:36:55 PM CST by Baraonda

---

By calling into question that God did not create man in His own image (and don't give me the business that EvoThink and JudeoChristianity can live alongside one another -- they can't) -- [...]

100 posted on 04/01/2006 1:37:27 AM CST by Californiajones

---

Creationists are those who believe in God. Evolutionists are those who don't. The fence straddlers don't know what to believe, so they attempt to bridge the gap between two mutually exclusive theories.

227 posted on 12/28/2004 1:31:34 AM CST by Safrguns

---

You will never convince a Bible believing Christian that man is evolved from apes. A Christian will never convince an evolutionist that man is created by God without using the Bible.

297 posted on 03/09/2005 1:20:54 PM CST by taxesareforever

---

No person who has experienced the holy spirit has ever believed in the lie of evolution. Those who have not think that they can fake it, but they fake only themselves.

307 posted on 12/28/2005 10:47:40 PM CST by editor-surveyor

---

Again, you can't have it both ways. Those that claim belief are only fooling themselves if they also claim to believe in the religion of evolution. Either you believe what God states or you believe what the godless state.
I don't suppose I will get through to you. Being spiritually discerned is a burden ... that is taken on by choice.

113 posted on 03/10/2006 2:59:49 PM CST by nmh

Do let us know when you contact these folks to let them know they're wrong about evolution and God being incompatible, won't you?

[Just mythoughts]

Evolution and Christianity do not mix, like oil and water.

[Californiajones]

By calling into question that God did not create man in His own image (and don't give me the business that EvoThink and JudeoChristianity can live alongside one another -- they can't) -- [...]

[Safrguns]

Creationists are those who believe in God. Evolutionists are those who don't. The fence straddlers don't know what to believe, so they attempt to bridge the gap between two mutually exclusive theories.

[RunningWolf]

//The building had overflow attendance without publicity. It was to be a simple, quiet ceremony with very little media. There were a dozen satellite trucks in the parking lot with hundreds of people standing outside the 3 story open air lobby where the monument was placed. The media was looking for a confrontation to film and the ACLU lawyers were trying to oblige them. There was nothing that evening on the national or local news. The locals prevailed in shear numbers and the media and ACLU just crept away//

WooHoo!! WooHoo!! Way to go!

Take Care,

Wolf

[Ichneumon]

Here's a favorable review of her comments.

Holy crap... It sounds like a long litany of the usual anti-evolution misinformation, falsehoods, and fallacies...

Ann has just completely torpedoes her credibility among all science-literate people, conservative or otherwise... And by association, it will call all of her other work into question. She's going to become a laughingstock to anyone but the hardcore anti-evolution True Believers(tm).

This is *not* a good thing for conservatism, although the "anti-evolution over all else" folks will be overjoyed -- they won't care about the amount of damage to the conservative movement as long as more the lies of the anti-evolution propagandists get more press. Sigh.

[Ichneumon]

Ann has just completely torpedoes her credibility among all science-literate people, conservative or otherwise... And by association, it will call all of her other work into question. She's going to become a laughingstock to anyone but the hardcore anti-evolution True Believers(tm).

Ann, if you're reading this, and it's not too late to halt the book's release until its falsehoods which you have made the mistake of swallowing from misguided creationists can be corrected, *please* do so and then contact some first-class biologists to get the real scoop. You're going to shatter your credibility even among a vast number of conservatives if you go forward with this kind of improperly vetted nonsense, that has already been thoroughly debunked countless times already....

[Oztrich Boy]

AFAIK, there are many demographics in the D*m*cr*t*c camp that reject ToE. (eg over 65, women with no college)

Careful, pointing out that YECreationism only has more than 50% support in the demographics of the D*m*cr*t*c base can get you accused of racism (sorry RACISM)

[RunningWolf]

Ann,

Do you have a post history or profile page at the FR?

Wolf

[DocRock]

"Next year Virginia will lead the nation in commemorating the 400th anniversaty of the first Engllish speakers to make a go of it in North America. 14 years before the Puritans.

I don't know much about the Mayflower Compact, but I do know that the Virginia Legislature is the oldest such body in the New World."

I attended a class reunion in Jamestown in Sept. 2001, just after the terrorist attacks. My class reunion was from the Flint School aboard TeQuest and teVega. The attendees visited the replica tall ship that our original settlers sailed. In our school, we were made to work from 6 a.m. on Thanksgiving without food to drill into our minds the starvation from the "common store house" our founders erroneously set up. That is one reason I was a little touchy in this thread about my knowledge of history.

FReegards,
DocRock

[Dimensio]

Sorry, there's more to life than the functions of a cell.

Please support this claim with evidence.

[Dimensio]

And you've read Sir Arthur Keith's words on Hitler and Darwin.

Curious that Answers in Genesis presents the quote from Sir Aruthur Keith that begins with "The German Führer, as I have consistently maintained, is an evolutionist; he has consciously sought to make the practice of Germany conform to the theory of evolution", yet omits the following statement, "He has failed, not because the theory of evolution is false, but because he has made three fatal blunders in its application. The first was in forcing the pace of evolution among his own people; he raised their warlike passions to such a heat that the only relief possible was that of aggressive war. His second mistake lay in his misconception of the evolutionary value of power. All that a sane evolutionist demands of power is that it should be sufficient to guarantee the security of a nation; more than that is an evolutionary abuse of power. When Hitler set out to conquer Europe, he had entered on that course which brought about the evolutionary destruction of Genghis Khan and his Mongol hordes (see Chapter 34). His third and greatest mistake was his failure to realize that such a monopoly of power meant insecurity for Britain, Russia, and America. His three great antagonists, although they do not preach the doctrine of evolution, are very consistent exponents of its tenets."

It is clear that Sir Arthur Keith did not believe that Hitler actually understood anything about the theory of evolution. I am curious as to why Answers in Genesis omits this important bit of context. It is almost as though they want to give a false impression of Sir Arthur Keith's assessment of Hitler's actions.

[RunningWolf]

Please support this claim with evidence

Uuuhhhmm.., deny his claim with your evidence, or support your challenges with evidence.

By your own logic you have no evidence, and even worse, no argument, capeesh?.

Wolf

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[RunningWolf]

editor-surveyor's ping had a statement. Any comment to it?

Wolf

[Alamo-Girl]

IMHO, social conservatives would agree with editor-surveyor's statement. However, fiscal conservatives might not.

And most of the time both sides have to find some common ground to get legislation passed. When the two sides fight each other, everyone loses.

[dread78645]

RELIOUGS CONCERVATIVE ... IGNORENT ... IGGNORATE ... SCIENTS ... SUDOINTELLECTUAL SCIENE

Wow. And I thought I'd had too many beers tonight.
I guess not ...

[RunningWolf]

spell check ignores all caps you you IGNORENT ... IGGNORATE ... SCIENTS ... SUDOINTELLECTUAL SCIENE /thats a joke son!>

But really thanks for your service Dread,

Wolf

[Right Wing Professor]

Ah. I suspect it was quote mined. A million thanks, Dimensio!

Dave, you have disappointed me. I honestly thought you might have cleaned up your act. More fool me.

I am curious as to why Answers in Genesis omits this important bit of context. It is almost as though they want to give a false impression of Sir Arthur Keith's assessment of Hitler's actions.

Heh heh. Sarcasm much?