A reasonably educated person would not try to refute the ToE by way of asking why we can’t see monkeys evolving today. Agree or disagree with the science, such a person would know it presupposes change occurs on a broad time frame. Not just since last Friday.
All she did was present herself as as not very well informed, or generally very bright.
My guess is next week Maher will top this. Were I he, I’d save the best stuff for last and build up to it. I can only imagine what it will take to top herself.
You state that as fact? Yes or no!
“it presupposes change occurs on a broad time frame. Not just since last Friday.”
I look at this “deep time” element as a weakness of the evolutionary theory. I don’t know what’s correct, of course, but when defenders of the theory have to rely on the idea that “we have no concept of the amount of time necessary for all these changes to occur” they might as well say, “We have no idea at all of how these changes occurred.” It’s a weakness in a theory that can never be more than a theory (because we were not there and cannot conduct experiments to prove anything, one way or the other). However, the Maher audience, I’m sure, has no appetite for debate or critical thinking, and they, no doubt, have been taught that evolution is, in fact, fact. This will probably harm her among the crowd who wouldn’t vote for her anyway but will ridicule her more.