Michael Savage bashes those who question Evolution.(Terrible what Michael did.)

[jsullivan]

I believe that Savage is insincere. He says what he has to say to build and maintain an audience of several million listeners. Talk radio audiences are overwhelmingly white male conservatives who are anxious to hear real right-wing programs. Savage caters to them but the true Savage comes out when he says:

*Tiny Israel should create an independent PLO-Hamas Muslim terrorist state in Judea, Samaria and Gaza;

*He frequently blames little Israel for the conflict with the Muslim Nazis who want to exterminate the entire Jewish people and who openly say so;

*He praises the evil Islamic Nazi religion, and repeats the lie that the Muslim terrorists do not represent true Islam;

*He says that the Mexicans will save America when they and the other Third World immigrants become a majority of the population, and he looks forward to them taking over America;

*He devotes entire programs to playing Mexican and Spanish music because he says that that is America's future, and he is happy that America is becoming majority Third World.

ON THE BOTTOM LINE ISSUES OF SURVIVAL FOR AMERICA AND ISRAEL, SAVAGE ADVOCATES NATIONAL SUICIDE FOR BOTH NATIONS. BUT WHILE PUSHING HIS "FINAL SOLUTION" FOR BOTH NATIONS, ON MANY OF HIS PROGRAMS HE USES EMPTY RHETORIC THAT PLEASES "CONSERVATIVES".

SAVAGE IS THE ULTIMATE EXAMPLE OF AN ESTABLISHMENT "SAFETY VALVE" THAT ALLOWS MILLIONS OF JUSTIFIABLY ANGRY, FRIGHTENED AND CONCERNED CONSERVATIVES TO "LET OFF STEAM" ABOUT THE ISSUES BY LISTENING TO HIS PROGRAMS. THE CONSERVATIVES FEEL THAT AT LEAST SOMEONE IS "TELLING THE TRUTH" AND SO THEY BECOME LESS ALARMED ABOUT THE REAL THREATS THAT THEY SEE. AND AFTER LISTENING TO HIS SHOWS, THE CONSERVATIVES ARE LESS LIKELY TO FEEL THAT THEY MUST ACT AND ACT URGENTLY.

SAVAGE IS MORE DANGEROUS THAN ANY OF THE OTHER MEDIA FRAUDS.

[Shlomo]

Aish Hatorah in general Jeff says whatever is politically correct. They are very untrustworthy. They throw a few words in torah and instead of holding selifhness and greed and a 10 in importance they will hold it at 9.5 and for that .5 they think they are teaching Jews to be religious. The Israeli government supports Aish which should tell you enough about Aish. They would sell any Jew to get more money for themselves.

Ya, that frustrates me because they really do have some good instructional stuff on their site.

I had heard something like this before... so I know what you are saying is probably true.

[MarZutra]

Does it make sense whatsoever if I stated that a worm, given the proper "environmental" conditions can evolve (which means change) into a man in just a few seconds?  Of course you'd all laugh me out of the room because it is absurdity.  Now if I made the exact same statement leaving all exactly the same but just change the word "seconds" to million years....somehow it is acceptable as fact?   Anyone who knows anything about DNA can tell you that this entire theory is bunk and has one fatal flaw.  If DNA changes, altered, subtracted or added to the vital mix it destroys not improves the subject.  There is no evidence whatsoever of a change agent to "prove" this theory of evolution as fact.  Nothing. Not one deformed dinosaur.  If you speak to these "evolution" experts, they all state that the process happens over millions of years but when you ask them about the change agents they now say that the process, or split/change, is very rapid (hence my very first statement above) 

The fact of the matter is that ALL credible science to date stands behind the position that every animal, plant, insect, fish etc. species did not evolve but just came....  VERY similar to the book of Genesis...   Perhaps not literally 6 of our days but they did not seem to "evolve" whatsoever... 

[Shlomo]

I personally believe that evolution (baring micro-evolution which isn't really evolution) is a pile of excrement and an excuse to deny G-d and His commandments. Let me make that clear.

Micro-evolution is defined as the adaptations and changes within a species while macro-evolution is the addition of new traits or a transition to a new species. Micro-evolution is a fact that is plainly observable throughout nature. Macro-evolution is a theory that has NEVER, and I repeat, NEVER been observed in science in all of history - nor in any fossil record. These "scientists" (or so-called scientists) say it's a fact! It's as if they say it enough, the evolution fairy will come to them, leave a quarter under their pillow, and make it all true. What a joke.

[MassuhDGoodName]

Re:  "...I personally believe that evolution (baring micro-evolution which isn't really evolution) is a pile of excrement and an excuse to deny G-d and His commandments. Let me make that clear..."

Well, then...how about Devolution!

Does that exist?

If not, then why is there a band named DEVO?

[leo]

To be very fair to Michael Savage in this case it should be pointed out that I saw a video by a number of scientists that support intelligent design. One of them admitted that he was angry when it became obvious to him that what he learned in college becoming a scientist was garbage and it was hard to believe for him at first. He didn't start out as someone who supported intelligent design. Savage was a scientist so he clearly was taught evolution. So he believed it although he didn't have much to defend himself and it was pretty obvious that in this episode he really was trying to make up with noise and saying he has a PHD with the fact that he didn't have anything to defend his point of view although that is what he was taught. He did get a lot of criticism from that show and he backed off it. But from listening to a scientist who now embraces intelligent design who once didn't. Many of them are taught evolution so they really believe it even though many of the proofs that are given are not true.

[MarZutra]

I placed this quote before and I think it applies correctly to this subject as well... 

"But I think I detect today a certain public scepticism when intellectuals stand up to preach to us, a growing tendency among ordinary people to dispute the right of academics, writers and philosophers, eminent though they may be, to tell us how to behave and conduct our affairs.  The belief seems to be spreading that intellectuals are no wiser as mentors, or worthier as exemplars, than the witch doctors or priests of old.  I share that scepticism.  A dozen people picked at random on the street are at least as likely to offer sensible views on moral and political matters as a cross-section of the intelligentsia.  But I would go further.  One of the principal lessons of our tragic century, which has seen so many innocent lives sacrificed in schemes to improve the lot of humanity is - beware intellectuals.  Not merely should they be kept well away from the levers of power, they should also be objects of particular suspicion when they seek to offer collective advice.  Beware committees, conferences and leagues of intellectuals.  Distrust public statements issued from their serried ranks.  Discount their verdicts on political leaders and important events.  For intellectuals, far from being highly individualistic and non-conformist people, follow certain regular patterns of behaviour.  Taken as a group, they are often ultra-conformist within the circles formed by those whose approval they seek and value.  That is what makes them, en masse, so dangerous, for it enables them to create climates of opinion and prevailing orthodoxies, which themselves often generate irrational and destructive courses of action.  Above all, we must at all times remember what intellectuals habitually forget:  that people matter more than concepts and must come first.  The worst of all despotisms is the heartless tyranny of ideas." - Dr. Paul Johnson: "Intellectuals", Pg. 342