JTF.ORG Forum
Save Western Civilization => Save America => Topic started by: adam613 on November 29, 2006, 11:01:13 PM
-
I was very disturbed that on Tuesday November 28th, 2006 Michael Savage basically called anyone who questions evolution as uneducated and ignorant. He spent a whole 2 hours trying to prove that evolution is not against g-d. He had a "Rabbi" on who basically said he is an expert on Hebrew and science that evolution is true but worse went along with Michael Savage in calling those that question evolution as uneducated and on the same side as the taliban and other evil forces. What a disgrace this so called Rabbi is.
I have discussed this before and will discuss it again. Christian Zionist also has good threads on this and some others too who I am not aware of at this point who had good posts on this and thank you for you posts and why we should question evolution?
It is impossible for me to believe a man was once an ape and evolved from an ape to a man. Michael was saying how the environment affects the way people look but I don't know anywhere on earth where apes are becoming human's. Furthermore, the idea that men could have evolved from an ape to a human we have aspects to being a human that apes don't have at all so it is impossible to believer we evolved for example to be able to speak or read.
Many scientists also have studied parts of the body and many human processes are so complex it is impossible that they evolved (the scientists concluded) because if one part is missing that whole human process cannot work at all so it could not have evolved gradually.
As a Jew, I also have to say that there is nowhere in the Talmud (I am not an expert on the Talmud but no Rabbi has ever quoted the Talmud to support evolution) that it explains the 7 days of creation in terms of evolution. If the bible really meant that the 7 days of creation were evolution we would have this as a tradition and proof from the bible that this is what g-d really meant. But Jews do not have this. They only followed the Political Correct evolution theory after it become popular under the very disturbed (thank you, Christian Zionist for that thread) Charles Darwin.
-
Savage is correct. And you are wrong in thinking that evolution is not compatable with the Torah. Quite the contrary is true when you read carefully the Torah and study the commentaries. There is clear biblical proof that the seven days are not literal because before the sun was created and seasons were created, the days are menchaned. How is this possible if a day means a 24 hour day? I believe in inteligent design which is basically the same as evolution but instead of attributing everything as happening through chance, which is impossible, I attribute the process as obviously occuring through G-d's hands. There is so much evidence supporting that the earth is billions of years old that I can't see how you can question it. Ever heard of carbon dating? How more objective can you get than that that the earth is over 6000 years old?
-
Savage is correct. And you are wrong in thinking that evolution is not compatable with the Torah. Quite the contrary is true when you read carefully the Torah and study the commentaries. There is clear biblical proof that the seven days are not literal because before the sun was created and seasons were created, the days are menchaned. How is this possible if a day means a 24 hour day? I believe in inteligent design which is basically the same as evolution but instead of attributing everything as happening through chance, which is impossible, I attribute the process as obviously occuring through G-d's hands. There is so much evidence supporting that the earth is billions of years old that I can't see how you can question it. Ever heard of carbon dating? How more objective can you get than that that the earth is over 6000 years old?
I happen to agree with your view, jdl4ever, but I detest Savage. He is such a fraud, such a rude, egotistical bore, just like O'Reilly. After I listen to either one, I feel an urgent need to take a shower...
-
> I believe in intelligent design which is basically the same as evolution but instead of attributing everything as happening through chance, which is impossible
JDL, the two are not the same. The most intellectually dishonest way of dealing with this problem is to say any new evidence that comes really was what Darwin and evolution meant to say. Well, evolution believe we gradually evolved which is not what intelligent design says because certain parts of the body could not have "evolved" because if one part of that system (vision for example) is missing the whole system does not work at all. This is like saying a computer slowly evolved from nothing. If one piece of the computer is missing the whole computer is useless.
In terms of the age of the earth, JDL, that is not the question or issue here and you are mixing issues up? The question is" Did man evolve from an ape?
My answer: No!
I know in no part of the world where ape's are becoming human. Do you, JDL? There are parts of being human that are completely unique to a human and again how did speech evolve from an ape since ape's don't speak any words.
Nowhere in Jewish tradition does the Talmud talk about man evolving from apes. Jews only took the THEORY of evolution from Darwin and claimed it agreed with the Torah which I don't think it does. Some Rabbi's don't support evolution including Rabbi Moshe Tendler who is a biologist in addition to being a Rabbi.
-
>He is such a fraud, such a rude, egotistical bore
And you are Mr. Perfect.
-
I believe that modern man is DESCENDING towards the level of the ape.
Nietzsche called it the 'great cosmic farce'. That was my outlook on life too before G-d allowed me to start reading His Tanakh.
-
I believe that modern man is DESCENDING towards the level of the ape.
Nietzsche called it the 'great cosmic farce'. That was my outlook on life too before G-d allowed me to start reading His Tanakh.
I tend to agree with you there. What I got out of Savage's lecture is that the Rabbi did not agree with Savage's perception of "evolution". The Rabbi agreed with Savage that Man does evolve to his/her environment around them but did not agree with Darwinism; that Man was the evolutionary byproduct of a billion years "progressing" slim floating in hot water or that man evolved from monkeys. Might I also add, or ask, that with the embracing of homosexuality, same sex marriage by the Reform, and subsequently the "Conservative" so-called "Jewish" movements would this be a form of social evolution or digression? I believe, if one researches the acceptance and promulgation of Darwinism you will find notable "Jewish" Reform leaders at the forefront of such molestations. I am not sure on this but it most deffinately fits into both their Social and Political agendas for "Reform" Judaism as advocated by the Abraham Geiger and his Communist Bund.
Savage seems to neglect the fact that the failed Scopes (Monkey) Trial presented by Communist Clarence Darrow backed by the British Fabian Society's ACLU (Which was established to undermine the American Constitution, provide legal support for exposed Socialist/Communists and to promulgate Socialism throughout America) to legalize/legislate the promulgation of Darwinist Theology: Darwinism in place of intelligent design. From my research, Darwin's Theory only attained noteriety after Marx and Engles learned that the teachings of Darwin's "logic" and reasoning lended the very much needed "creditablity" to their Communist socio-political goals within Dialectical Materialism allowing both to be further researched, accepted and further advocated by the "Utopian" Univeristy Intelligencia.
Personally, I do not know, but I will tend to disagree because I do know the goals and am well knowledged in Marxism, Socialism and Dialectical Materialism....which are all out to vanquish G-d and religion. Too, Savage said "Evolution" is "fact". Sadly those same leftist individuals who state emphatically that Global Warming is too "Fact" are the vast majority of Chomskites and Marxists. Since these peoples are one and the same to an immense degree, does that not signal alarm bells that something is questionable when Marxists unite ideologically with "Conservatives" knowing that the former ideology was solely brought about to distroy the latter? Savage is a "Biblical Absolutist" when it fits his side of an arguement but if anyone else, as was the disagreeing Christian man who educationally deffended himself last night against Homosexuality stating both Sodom and Gomorah and the founding fathers views on the subject, which Savage also quotes endlessly and repetitivly on his show. Thus, in my sincere opinion, defeating Savage at his own arguements while ending off laughing at the fellows comment; "any Christian living on my street would do a much better job then Bush, Clinton, Carter or any other knuckle heads in Government today". Savage knew he was beaten and cut this knowledged non-Ph.D. from driving in the nail to establish an unconditional surrender in that particular debate. Now that was one righteous Gentile. Savage too praises Rev. John Hagy who has been on his show many times but Rev. Hagy doesn't beleive in Evolution. My friend John, a Christian Zionist who follows The World Wide Church of G-d, tried to call in and tell Savage that fact, but Savage wouldn't accept his call.... What does that say?
Savage then says anyone without a PhD is ignorant, then slamming those from "Yale" who are developing American policies both internally and externally..... Are they all not PhD's as well?
Savage, in many cases is good promoting morality but is an egotistical fraud. I'll close with a very good and applicable quote to Dr. Savage's arrogance.
"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
-
>He is such a fraud, such a rude, egotistical bore
And you are Mr. Perfect.
I'm not perfect, but I don't have a radio show and talk for hours about my dog, either.
-
I'd like to add that Michael Savage accuses, and rightly so, politicians of "flip flopping" when Savage does the exact same.
I've heard Savage many times state: "Islam is a religion of peace", "Ilam and Muslims are tolerant", "Islam has been highjacked by the radicals" and "All religions lead to G-d".
I have also have heard him state on one hand that he beleives in a, in actual fact another, "Two State Solution" while on the other hand condemning Olmert and writing Olmert emails expressing his condemnation for doing the exact thing he formerly advocated.
Most Muslims that call, Savage kisses their bottoms and will never confront their farsical claim to "Palestine" or the truth of the purely fabricated "Palestinian Poeple". Savage says he is knowledged in the "history" of, admires and holds great respect for "The Palestinian People". (Which of course, again, in all actuality.....do not exist)
I feel Michael Savage is a good entertainer and does sometimes bring out good facts and topics that need addressing: Dubai Ports Deal, ACLU, CFR, Big Business/Big Government and Big Religion, Homosexuality, Marxism and in some cases Islam. But in all reality is an arrogant hypocrite, an opportunist and a flip flopping fraud if one has listened to him long enough to never admit his mistakes but always his arrogance. Sadly, he is the best thing "conservatives" can have on mainstream media. It is sad that he doesn't read real Conservative sites for some constructive criticism. He is now, with millions of listeners, at a position with Sean Hannity and Bill O'Riley to really do some good DEEDS and change America before it declines. Holding, funding and assisting in the coordination of MASS rallies/protests, strikes and if things get bad enough truly use his FREE SPEECH as that Nazi Hal Turner attempted to do with the anti-racism rallies held against blacks in New York. Michael Savage could really do some good if he had the stones to do deeds instead of mere words.
Can you imagine the reprocussions if someone with 10-25 million or more listeners started advocating and arranging DEEDS and not only words. Immigration would be stopped, Foreign Policy would be changed, CFR, ACLU and the UN would be burned to the ground with its members on trial for treason etc. Savage could do much more if his arrogance and conceit didn't cloud his acceptance of honest self criticism.
-
Can you imagine the reprocussions if someone with 10-25 million or more listeners started advocating and arranging DEEDS and not only words. Immigration would be stopped, Foreign Policy would be changed, CFR, ACLU and the UN would be burned to the ground with its members on trial for treason etc. Savage could do much more if his arrogance and conceit didn't cloud his acceptance of honest self criticism.
Savage just wants his easy money.
Deeds are far too risky and too much effort.
-
Savage just wants his easy money.
Deeds are far too risky and too much effort.
Very much agreed...
-
Interesting response Marzutra. I got the same sense that in this debate he kept on highlighting the fact that he has a PHD and anyone that disagreed was uneducated as if not having a PHD makes you unable to contribuue to the discussion. That is the ultimate of arrogance. That also is interesting that he had a caller who knew Heinke, the Christian minister he had on his show and refused to take a call from somebody who disagreed with evolution who he had on his show and who he respected.
I wrote to WOR to complain as he can't be contacted on his web site. He did say on his show today that many people did not like his show supporting evolution.
Having said that though, I generally don't see him as a fraud. For one thing he isn't liked on either side the democrats or republicans power brokers and therefore is more honest then the other talk show hosts and has to be since he has little support by other big shots. He also does need to appeal to the normal guy or gal for his show to continue to have good ratings. Limbaugh and Hannity I'm sure get most of the fat cat type republicans that only want to hear Republican's are good. I rarely listen to these 2 partly because of my schedule but even when I can listen to them I never do. I also think he does put a lot of work into his show to come up with information that the other hosts don't come up with.
I do respect the fact that he has been married for over 25 years to the same women and has 2 adult children and his daughter is married. From what I understand she isn't Jewish but I don't see what Savage can do about that now. It is obvious that at some point in his life he was a very Liberal Guy and he also did not have a great family from what I get because he admits he was a lousy student until he went for PHD later on in which he did very well. He obviously has changed a lot but he can't undo what was already done and certainlly has renounced many of his old views which I give him credit for. Hopefully, he will renounce Darwin too although it does seem this may be one area that he may have some financial stake or prior fincial benefit from in supporting Darwin which we know bribes and money can corrupt a person.
In terms of Savage having a lot of money I don't feel (other then taking brides) that it is really a negative in that other people JTF have praised (like Ann Coulter) who also make a lot of money.
Is his show the complete truth? No, it isn't. But I think with the constraints he is under with the EEOC he does try to bring a lot of good stuff out. He also has said things that have caused many groups not to support him including many FOX news and many conservative hosts. Savage has his flaws but being that both conservatives and liberal establishment type including talk show hosts dislike Savage if he got on the radio and told people to block roads or started them getting ready to do this as he couldn't just say this on the air and for it to happen in one day he would likely be thrown off the air before anything could be done anyway. In my case, I may not be a conservative if it wasn't for Savage as the other fat cat rich type republicans have always turned me off. I don't know how I would be able to take Chaim if I didn't hear Savage because it would be such a shock to the system although now I need Chaim much more then Savage but listen to him when I'm on the bus sometimes. Just sharing some thoughs here. I am taking a break from this thread for at least a couple of days though as I think I should contribute in other area's.
t
-
Ya... I heard part of that program... I was surprised.
Actually... I didn't have a problem with evolution until I got ahold of Ann Coulter's book "Godless" (http://www.amazon.com/Godless-Church-Liberalism-Ann-Coulter/dp/1400054206) (actually I bought the audio CDs).
Also, check out the free video "Lies in the Textbooks" by Dr. Hovined. I don't agree with some of his Christian views but I will tell ya that he will make you question evolution in a major way.
http://www.drdino.com/downloads.php
-
Savage is Jewish but he is not a model Jew since he only believes in G-d and does not practice Judaism.
-
Correction:
The full context of Savage's presentation was that both Biblical Creation AND Evolution were both facts, and both mutually complimentary concepts rather than diametrically opposed.
I, MassuhDGoodName, concur 100% with his message, and once again must insist that those who deny the idea of Darwin's "Natural Selection" are very much misinformed.
Torah, Talmud, and Kabbalah are in complete accord with modern day science and cutting-edge physics.
Perhaps you missed the portion of that show in which Savage spent a full 20 minutes interviewing an Orthodox Brooklyn mohel with several advanced university degrees in addition to his being an ordained Rabbi. He explained fully his own full embrace of both science and Torah.
In addition; look elsewhere on this site for the Torah section dealing with Talmudic & Kabbalistic semantics & etymology; there you can read the words of another JTF member far more educated and knowledgeable in Torah than am I, who thoroughly explains Ha'Shem's Creating an infinite Universe in constant evolution both spiritually as well as physically.
Don't like it?
Meet me in the most dangerous negro neighborhood of my choosing at 3:30am this coming Sunday morning, and we can discuss it further.
MassuhDGoodName
-
Correction:
The full context of Savage's presentation was that both Biblical Creation AND Evolution were both facts, and both mutually complimentary concepts rather than diametrically opposed.
I, MassuhDGoodName, concur 100% with his message, and once again must insist that those who deny the idea of Darwin's "Natural Selection" are very much misinformed.
I'm not saying that Evolution is not possible with Torah. Here are some brilliant teachers on the very subject: The Case for Evolution by Gans, Mr. Harold (http://www.aishaudio.com/search/results.php?directkw=science&catlink=Science&sid=c5kwu83772166do)
What I AM saying is that one who insists that evolution is 100% fact are very much misinformed.
I am not sure where I stand with it exactly. Research both sides.
-
I'm not saying that Evolution is not possible with Torah. Here are some brilliant teachers on the very subject: The Case for Evolution by Gans, Mr. Harold (http://www.aishaudio.com/search/results.php?directkw=science&catlink=Science&sid=c5kwu83772166do)
What I AM saying is that one who insists that evolution is 100% fact are very much misinformed.
I am not sure where I stand with it exactly. Research both sides.
I agree with you. I too have posted on the previous page a book countering this Darwinian logic. Another one is as follows...
-
>I'm not saying that Evolution is not possible with Torah. Here are some brilliant teachers on the very subject: The Case for Evolution by Gans, Mr. Harold
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.
-
whom will you like if not Savage? You can't get much more right wing than him.
-
"It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid or insane (or wicked, but I'd rather not consider that)."
----Richard Dawkins
....of course i disagree.....
-
great website
http://www.answersingenesis.org/
-
Interesting response Marzutra. I got the same sense that in this debate he kept on highlighting the fact that he has a PHD and anyone that disagreed was uneducated as if not having a PHD makes you unable to contribuue to the discussion. That is the ultimate of arrogance. That also is interesting that he had a caller who knew Heinke, the Christian minister he had on his show and refused to take a call from somebody who disagreed with evolution who he had on his show and who he respected.
Yup, I remember this episode I was shocked at the way he was talking about his audience.
-
As long as one never forgets that they are listening to a "Radio Entertainer / Talk Show Host", they won't be set up for the inevitable "disappointment" & "disillusionment" when Savage exhibits his all too human personality flaws.
I view Savage in this way:
He's the best of the mass media talk show hosts.
He speaks the truth 99% of the time.
Because he runs an actual business which depends on advertising revenue, station ratings, etc... . he occassionally takes "the other side" so as not to offend needed listeners & supporters who are basically conservative, but perhaps biased in ways of which we might disapprove.
I always make a "friends" list vs an "enemies" list; each list of personalities judged in light of their value to JTF "should push come to shove".
Savage without question must be considered a friend.
-
Savage is garbage. He is more dangerous than the lefties because you think he is right wing, but then he goes on a tirade saying there must be two state solution.
-
Savage is garbage. He is more dangerous than the lefties because you think he is right wing, but then he goes on a tirade saying there must be two state solution.
I agree here, 100%. Savage is good on most issues except Israel and the Bolistinians. I disagreed with Savage's views on "evolution being a "fact"" because those same "PhD.'s" pushing Darwinism/Evolution since Darwin and Marx presented their works are ALWAYS used specifically to negate G-d and the Bible. The Scopes Monkey trial is a specific example of Savage's Ph.D's in the ACLU tried to attack intelligent design in the American School System. Of course John Dewey, another PhD like Noam Chomsky and Ward Churchill, progressed Darwinistic Evolution onto the masses.
I conversed with Dr. Eugene Narrett, from Www.IsraelEndTimes.Com, last week and he holds the same views. When it comes to the basics of Conservatism and Nationalism, Savage is more often than not, correct. BUT, when it comes to Israel, Islam, Judaism and Evolution he fails miserably. He is a "Biblical Absolutist" only when it fits his opinions and attacks or insults anyone who attempts the same logic and moral conclusions based on Torah teachings.
Last, week Savage stated, after months of bashing Olmert for giving away Gaza, that Israel must give the Bolistinians their own state and further blamed Israel solely for their "occupation" and keeping the Ancient Bolistinian Beoble enclosed in "camps". Previously, Savage stated that the Bolistinians were descendants from the Philistines....
To that, I haven't listened to Savage since and asked Chaim to openly challenge Dr. Savage to a debate. I feel Savage to be a 50-50 split. Good on border issues and political corruption issues but appalling when it comes to supporting the moral, logical and factual position directly relating to his own people and HIS own Land should his, or his family's, life ever become threatened during his stay in the wealthy and comforting exile. My 2 cents...
-
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.
-
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.
-
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...
-
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.
-
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?
-
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.
-
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