|Bort - 2009-08-06 |
This woman gives me a headache.
"Ad hominid attacks" was cute, though. It's something Dolly from "The Family Circus" might have said.
And of course, the philosophies that can be drawn out of Christianity are pretty brutal too. The most prominent terrorist groups in America for nearly 150 years have all used a burning cross as their symbol -- Christianity is a huge part of their identity, and preserving Christianity (their version of it anyway) is a huge part of their mission.
|bacon-swiss - 2009-08-06 |
answer every question with there's not enough evidence and laugh at the scientist whenever he says something sciency. wow, i'm such a good debater!
|simon666 - 2009-08-06 |
Lady: "The way you have framed this, with your closed mindedness..."
Also, of course scientists are the only one's who can speak authoritatively about science! Just as the plumber is the authority on plumbing, the auto mechanic on cars, the historian on history.
|zerobackup - 2009-08-06 |
"We obviously have a different conception of what evidence is..." That's a great zinger. Also, religious people talking about censorship is hilarious.
|Billie_Joe_Buttfuck - 2009-08-06 |
Dawkins is a lot easier to swallow when he's got a good foil.
This bitch makes a good foil.
|grimetooth - 2009-08-06 |
This woman is nauseating.
|Iakchos - 2009-08-06 |
(I would just like to point out the existence of "cock-smile" and "shit eating grin" tags, the latter still painfully inactive)
It was mentioned in another comment but the fact that she accuses him of making an "ad hominid attack" is pretty much everything you need to know about this entire movement.
If you need a further example, a little later when he tries to cut her off before she brings up Haeckel's embryos and then she said "no actually I was going to talk about this other thing" and proceeds to describe Haeckel's embryos.
It's not hard to understand why they say "there's no evidence" when they don't approach biology with the sort of clarity and rigor required. Is it that much to ask that someone get the names of the logical fallacies right when what they do for a living is criticize hypotheses?
eh that was not meant to be a comment.
I was going to say in reply though that evolution-denial isn't a uniquely American sport. There are places in the world where they actually blame the "evils of evolution" on the existence of Christianity.
|Freeman Gordon - 2009-08-06 |
This should be interesting..
|HankFinch - 2009-08-06 |
This is why I don't bother anymore. Sure, almost everything you say supports me, but somehow you think you're right.
(I couldn't stop looking at her neck. It's grotesque yet fascinating)
would you hit it? i uh... yeah, i would. forgive me, poe!
|B. Weed - 2009-08-06 |
Nice facial expression in the preload. I can hear the "HURRR DURRR" from here.
|Yellow Lantern - 2009-08-06 |
She looks like a damn muppet.
|Not The Real Jacques Cousteau - 2009-08-06 |
This man has the patience of a saint
|Maggot Brain - 2009-08-06 |
She's an idiot and he's Melba toast. Right around 4:20 I thought Wright was going to tell us all about snowflakes.
|Cena_mark - 2009-08-06 |
You just wasted your time there Rick. I only saw 15 minutes of it, and I'm sure the next 50 are just like it.
|glasseye - 2009-08-06 |
The stupid just radiates from her.
She once said that people who were advocating teaching a broad sort of safe-sex education, as opposed to *only* teaching about abstinence, had a vested interest in seeing teens contract STDs or get pregnant. So that they could get more money for their evil social welfare programs. Clearly a case of Not Doing It Right, and by "it" I mean not having paranoid delusions.
What I'm saying is that she's not just stupid, but she's the kind of stupid where she makes other people stupid by being around them, and why she's going toe to toe with Mr. Selfish Gene is a mystery to me.
|halon - 2009-08-06 |
After the interview, they fucked so hard the earth cracked open.
|Keefu - 2009-08-06 |
No one is going to make it past part four?
uh, i did. it was just like part one, only four parts in. i think she kinda looks like martin short with a wig in the screen shot.
|MaybeAFatGuy - 2009-08-06 |
Five stars for convincing me never to try this.
|Walt Henderson - 2009-08-07 |
Couldn't stand watching this woman for more than a few minutes, but I skimmed the whole thing. Why don't they ever sit down?
|pastorofmuppets - 2009-08-07 |
Poe's law says you can't tell (on the internet) the difference between a troll and an actual fundamentalist. I submit that if you put them in a room with Darwin for an hour, you'll have your answer.
|William Burns - 2009-08-07 |
She suffers from Palinrrhea of the mouthhole.
|pastorofmuppets - 2009-08-07 |
Her beef with evolution is that it's incompatible with her idea of a soul. As is often pointed out, there's no reason why an omnipotent God couldn't have created something like evolution.
But she believes that each of us is given a ghost at conception. This idea has a couple of prerequisites in order to make sense: one is divine intervention, and the other is an insistence that we are fundamentally different from animals, who do not have such souls.
The only time she strays from the talking points is when she tries to explain this idea to Dawkins. At which point they both become incredibly confused about the other's position.
| Register or login To Post a Comment|