Pat Robertson interviews evangelist Ray Comfort about about evolution. Comfort explains how Christians use their common sense to intuit intelligent design.
He loves to pick on high school and college students in the US who haven't had the benefit of even being taught evolution, due to the controversial nature. It's his own way of creating his straw man to tear down. He's been told how evolution works numerous times, and he continues to misstate it for his own purposes.
He is asking stupid people!
Call me optimistic but I'm pretty sure the ray Comforts of the world are fighting a losing battle, there is no stopping progress or a good education.
The sad thing is, Ray Comfort is not stupid. He absolutely knows beyond a shadow of a doubt that everything he says is a bold-faced intentional lie but he says it anyway and intentionally misguides people. I get the feeling if he asked me about evolution, I would not have made the beginning of this film. Why not film Aron-Ra's response and start out with it?
Ray comfort is trying to make a quick easy buck though his ministries. Just let him do it !!
Like many others here, I can't stomach much of Ray Comfort's interviewing crap without screaming at the screen. I absolutely believe he only shows the idiots he interviews - the ones he gets all twisted in his pseudo pretzel logic - and never shows the people who actually pwn his ass. When I watch these things I'm reminded of Jay Leno's "Jaywalking", where he goes on the street and asks common people questions, and shows their idiot answers. Obviously he only shows the truly stupid, not the people who actually have a clue.
I really do wish that he would man up and go against someone like Richard Dawkins. Hell, I think pretty much anyone on here could give him a run for his money.
Of course I'd really rather he go up against Christopher Hitchens, but that would seem like sending a lamb to the slaughter.
The blind talking to the deaf about rainbows.
The thing that bothers me most about Ray is that he consistently clearly misunderstands (or purposefully misrepresents) the central concepts of evolution. His idea that a dog and female dog must evolve at the same time is just silly. He suffers from the notion that evolution is a single force that might act on something randomly, rather than a combination of mutations and natural selection that causes speciation over time.
I agree with Kris.
I think what is important here is to give people the ability to answer his questions with reasoned answers. If we try to specifically answer his points, like that young woman, he can keep asking questions that can make the answers seem more and more like we are trying to so desperately answer that we are willing to stretch the truth. Again, in agreement with Kris, unless you are an evolutionary Biologist, answering his questions point for point would be difficult for anyone.Therefor, when we see videos like this, I think the best thing to do is provide a way of answering that would make every follow-up irrelenevant. For example in answer to the fish leaving the ocean with gills questions there are two ways to go:
1) Actually know the answer, which I don't but perhaps a couple of our TA scientists here can let us know. I am assuming the lungfish has something to do with it.
and if you do not have a clear cut answer the response could be:
2) I am not actually an evolutionary biologist, however I deduce my opinion based on years of well documented scientific evidence and studies that are accepted as common knowledge throughout the world. No, at this point and time I cannot sight a single study, but I'm sure you have the ability to research these studies as well I as I am. I have accepted the theory that the Earth revolves around the sun, but I cannot point to a specific study that I can show you. Do you feel the earth revolves around the sun?
The point is, do not get lured into an argument that makes you sound like you have no answers to simple questions. The questions are not simple but the idea of common knowledge is. And you must cut off someone like Comfort before he manipultes you into falling into a trap.
I would love some our or debaters and students of philosophy and logic to give us other ways to answer these questions.
As an engineer I have no problem with evoluton existing as a supposition. My problem as an engineer, is giving some aspects of evolution credibility.Only a fool would say that all aspects of evolution are incredible.I insist that given trillions of free parameters, mutations and survival of the fittest is insufficient to produced the mathematically will ordered designs, functionality, efficiency and nonlinear control systems. As engineers we go through painstaking calculations using matrix algebra to arrive at our designs. The mechanisms for evolution could conceively arrive at that which is minimal to survive but certaintly not with the beauty and elogence of that which is apparent in nature, to calibrate these trillions of parameters through helter skelter mutation is just incredulous
Join Think Atheist
Welcome toThink Atheist
Get Started Nowor Sign In
Or sign in with:
Started by Eric Andrist in Church & State 4 minutes ago.
Started by Katherine A Flowers in Small Talk. Last reply by Andrew Brown 4 hours ago.
Started by David Boots in Religion and the Religious, Atheism and Atheists. Last reply by Strega 6 hours ago.
Started by Violeta Babacan in Small Talk. Last reply by TJ yesterday.
Started by Unseen in Politics. Last reply by Gregg RThomas May 18.
Sunday School May 21st 2017
Sunday School May 14th 2017
Sunday School May 7th 2017
Posted by Brad Snowder on May 21, 2017 at 11:22am
Posted by Brad Snowder on May 13, 2017 at 6:52pm
© 2017 Created by Rebel.
Report an Issue |
Terms of Service
Please check your browser settings or contact your system administrator.