Coulter vs Darwin

Godless | 06/06 | Ann Coulter

[tomzz]

You can't help but notice that there is a very vocal sort of a little clique of evolutionists on FreeRepublic, and there has always been a question in a lot of people's minds as to whether or not the theory of evolution is in any way compatible with conservatism.

This new book ("Godless") of Ann Coulter's should pretty much settle the issue.

Ann does not mince words, and she has quite a lot to say about evolution:

"Liberals' creation myth is Charles Darwin's theory of evolution, which is about one notch above scientology in scientific rigor. It's a make-believe story, based on a theory which is a tautology, with no proof in the scientists laboratory or the fossil record, and that's after 150 years of very determined looking. We wouldn't still be talking about it but for the fact that liberals think evolution disproves God....

It gets better from there, in fact a lot better. Ann provides a context for viewing the liberal efforts to shut down everything resembling debate on the subject in courtrooms and makes a general case that it is the left and not the right, which is antithetical to science in general. Anybody interested in this question of American society and the so-called theory of evolution should have a copy of this book

[JamesP81]

You consider science to be your enemy

No, secular humanism is the enemy and science has swallowed their ideas hook, line, and sinker.

OTOH, anyone that compares Christians to islamic killers kind of makes himself my enemy.

As I said, in about 20 years it isn't going to matter anymore anyway.

[VadeRetro]

An objective, world wide record of sedimentary activity agrees with the biblical text which states the earth was primarily covered with water at first; more than enough to result in a world wide deluge when the "fountains of the deep durst forth."

No, it isn't. You are not addressing the evidence that geology does.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"As I said, in about 20 years it isn't going to matter anymore anyway."

What happens then?

[VadeRetro]

You're not facing how absurd it is for someone like you to think he should be adding material to science class.

[Fester Chugabrew]

Certainly the big fish means more than an odd episode contrary to man's typical experiences with aquatic life. I just wondered if the reticence in regarding the episode as historical is due to the notion it is impossible for such a thing to happen. As for myself, I see nothing in the text that would prevent one from understanding it as literally true, for which reason its lesson applies to reality at all levels, including the physical.

[VadeRetro]

As I said, in about 20 years it isn't going to matter anymore anyway.

Prostate cancer?

[JamesP81]

What happens then?

Public schools are slowly getting more and more insane every day. Before long, Christians, not wanting their children to be indoctrinated with lib ideas in government schools, will send their children to private schools or, God forbid, homeschool, at least those who can. Before long, people will be avoiding govt schools like the plague, then we won't have to worry about the FedGov feeding our children crap in the future.

When my children aren't being indoctrinated with such ideas against my will, then it doesn't matter a whole lot what activist judges mandate is taught in public school. My children won't be there.

[JamesP81]

You're not facing how absurd it is for someone like you to think he should be adding material to science class.

You're not facing how the scientific community has bought the secular humanist line.

[JamesP81]

Prostate cancer?

This didn't really help your credibility all that much.

[VadeRetro]

If we're going to have science class, science goes in it. If we're not going to have science class, "Ni shuo Jongguo hua ma?" [Do you speak Chinese?]

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"When my children aren't being indoctrinated with such ideas against my will, then it doesn't matter a whole lot what activist judges mandate is taught in public school. My children won't be there."

Excellent. There will always be a need for manual laborers and burger flippers. The scientifically illiterate will be more than capable of filling that role.

You really are looking out for the future! Thanks! :)

[Condorman]

I doubt if you can give a two or three sentence summary, in your own words, of evolution.

No replies. My theory predicted that result.

[JamesP81]

f we're going to have science class, science goes in it. If we're not going to have science class, "Ni shuo Jongguo hua ma?" [Do you speak Chinese?]

Science and indoctrination are two different things. It's one thing to teach ToE; it's quite another to teach it like it's some kind of fact and dissent is not allowed.

And no, I don't speak Chinese, although I've been learning Arabic. I suppose studying a foreign language raises someone's intellectual value in your eyes?

[Condorman]

take the anti-Christian bias out of scientific literature.

To which journals do you refer?

[JamesP81]

Excellent. There will always be a need for manual laborers and burger flippers. The scientifically illiterate will be more than capable of filling that role.

Indeed, a day may come when such things become the norm. Even now, graduate schools will reject the application of many science students if they don't profess a belief in evolution.

So yes, you may in fact succeed in getting things set up where as believers we are reviled, rejected, relegated to humiliating, low paying jobs and generally looked down upon as ignorant rednecks. If that makes you feel happy, then I feel profoundly sorry for you. As for us, there are more important things in life than worldly success.

[Right Wing Professor]

Even now, graduate schools will reject the application of many science students if they don't profess a belief in evolution.

Yeah, we even have a little box for 'Biblical Christian'. If you check it, you're rejected.

You should go back to your Arabic studies. Then, when you lie to the heathens, you can call it al Taqqiya.

[VadeRetro]

It's one thing to teach ToE; it's quite another to teach it like it's some kind of fact and dissent is not allowed.

The kind of material you would use to express your dissent would be recognized by real science as false or misleading, a cult literature.

[Mamzelle]

I think you'd like Ann's book. What you're saying, she's said. I'm surprised more aren't caterwauling over what she has to say about public school teachers.

Aren't the evos a trip, though? Cancer. Hahaha.

[Condorman]

They subscribe the Darwin world-view because it denies God.

Whatever the "Darwin world-view" is, it doesn't have much bearing on the scientific validity of evolution. The theory of evolution, like every other scientific theory, is utterly silent on the existence (one way or another) of a god or gods.

But please feel free to post the theory of evolution and highlight the anti-god sections.

[Fester Chugabrew]

Geology tends to have two schools of thought: Uniformitarianism and catastrophism. Both processes are evident. Neither affords the certitude we would like to have when attempting to understand its entire history. The stark delineations in the diagram you posted I tend to attribute to catastrophic processes. Almost all of the fossil record I would also attribute to catastrophic processes. Can you prove me wrong? No. But you can offer up some reasonable scenarios to counter my own understanding.