jump to navigation

Bill Maher Nails It 03 May 2009

Posted by Jessa in Humor, Religion, Science.
Tags: , , , ,
trackback

On last Friday’s episode of his show Real Time, Bill Maher urges Creationists to put their money where their mouth is:

Absolutely.

If you believe that evolution is untrue, you’ll stay away from modern medicine, since it is based on the theory of evolution.  Don’t rail as loudly as you can against science and then scurry to the doctor or pharmacy when you get the sniffles.

About these ads

Comments»

1. mcoville - 04 May 2009

Bill Maher is so far from nailing it. The swine flu started as a virus and guess what…. it is still a virus. No creationist denies that small changes happen over time, but you do not a virus become a bird.

The ignorance of Darwinists astounds me. I wounder if Bill Maher ever re-watches his own show and realizes how ignorant he sounds.

2. Jessa - 06 May 2009

So small changes happen, but not large changes? So, in other words, you believe in inches but not miles.

No “Darwinists” claim that viruses become birds. Please get your facts straight before spouting off on blog comments.

3. Kaessa - 06 May 2009

That’s kind of like saying “Well, I can see that this shrew-like creature “micro-evolved” into an elephant, but IT’S STILL A MAMMAL”!

Learn what evolution is before you criticize it.

4. Graham Rogers - 20 Feb 2010

The point that has been made which is totally valid, is that the so called examples of evolution given only involve a rearrangement of existing genetic data. There is no increase in the number of genes and therefore no possibility of evolution in the Darwinist sense. Darwinism is indeed Pseudo science and the evidence for design is so totally and completely overwhelming that only ignorance and bigotry stop people from accepting the obvious. Like it or not there is a creator.

Jessa - 13 Mar 2010

First of all, acceptance of the validity of the Theory of Evolution does not require one to be an atheist. There are plenty of examples of evolutionary biologists who are also deeply religious. A famous example is Ken Miller. So to frame this as “evolution vs. God” is a gigantic strawman argument.

Secondly:

The point that has been made which is totally valid, is that the so called examples of evolution given only involve a rearrangement of existing genetic data. There is no increase in the number of genes and therefore no possibility of evolution in the Darwinist sense.

What about gene duplication? Seems to me that if you duplicate a gene, you’re increasing the number of genes. And if one of the duplicates undergoes mutation and aquires a new function as a result, you end up with two different genes that arose from a single gene. A quick check of PubMed for “gene duplication” turns up over 13,000 results, so there are plenty of examples out there of increases in the number of genes.

Just wanted to point out that you might want to rethink using that argument.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: