3289945 Views
444 Comments

Where is the evidence?

Published April 7th, 2013 by Bobby Henderson

Here’s a video that has been making the rounds.   Richard Dawkins shows great patience in interviewing Creationist Wendy Wright.  I find it painful to watch but also fascinating.



444 Responses to “Where is the evidence?”

1 2 3 25
  1. Jack says:

    dawkins is right, the museum is filled with physical evidence. every early human shown is an inbetween species. they have hundreds of fossils, particularly skulls that show how humans evolved. if you spend 10 minutes in the museum you will see more evidence than you could possibly need.
    of course, all the evidence was placed there as a test from fsm.

    • William says:

      Dawkins tries to prove a negative, i.e., that god does not exist, by using scientific evidence. That is a fallacy in itself. What ever happened to Aristotelian philosophy? Wait, I know, they started teaching Kant back in the day, which ruined the minds of all the people that are running our country now….look at the mess that has caused…..no reasoning or thinking. Kant’s morality is abject selflessness.

      • Keith says:

        Dawkins does not try to prove that a god does not exist. He tries to show that in evolution there is no requirement for a god. He is an atheist but I have never come across any incidence where he asserts that there is no god: just that he doesn’t believe in one.

        • William says:

          You can use semantics all you want, it is the same either way…..and Dawkings is a self-admitted agnostic. He specifically said, “I can’t be sure that God doesn’t exist.”

        • Keith says:

          Dawkins is an agnostic atheist. Look it up.

        • William says:

          This is in retort to below………”Agnostic Atheist”, because you can wiki it? That is weak dude. Agnosticism allows arbitrary into the thinking process. This is the “New Age Atheist” movement though. They had a reason rally in D.C., but Dawkins said, “show contempt” against christians, instead of discursive reasoning. Go Figure……

          Captain(Minister) Bill
          West Virginia

        • Keith says:

          I didn’t Wiki it. Go to this site http://freethinker.co.uk/2009/09/25/8419/

  2. Xander the pirate says:

    yes that is all true. i wish creationists would just look at evidence and form ridiculous arguments about something else.

  3. Rev. Wulff says:

    I tried.I honestly tried. I got through over half an hour of this, and this woman is just bat-crap crazy. She has *no* concept of scientific method, history, genetics, or evolutionary theory. She will not answer direct questions. She refuses to acknowledge that the fossil record even exists. And she repeatedly argues against her own points. I admire Richard’s restraint in not trying to slap some sense into her.

    I once knew a man who was raised in the Deep South as a devout Baptist. He was a brilliant engineer with hundreds of patents to his name, who refused to believe in evolution. When asked why, he said, and this is a direct quote, “there is no way for a butterfly to turn into a bird.” This is the level of ignorance that people like this woman are trying to maintain, and that we have to keep fighting against.

  4. Framptonm says:

    There’s none so blind…And while beauty may only be skin deep, stupid does go right to the core.

  5. SillyKiwiMan says:

    Fuck me, that was painful.

    There are too many retarded oxygen thieves like this. What strikes me most is what seems to be a conscious decision to embrace stupidity. What these sort of people fail to realise is that while everyone has a right to an opinion on whatever they like, nobody is under any obligation to respect said opinion. I have the right to an opinion on French literature. It would be a singularly unqualified opinion, as I know nothing of the subject.

    To stifle the voice of the dissident is wrong. History proves that all too often the holder of power dictates what is truth, but until there is a voice, or noodly appendage, to provide balance to the hysterical ravings of the moronic, we are all but forced into an us-and-them situation.

    Either way, I’d like to see this dopey cow relegated to the lunatic fringe where she & her ilk belong. Unfortunately I have seen groups like this (anti-vaccination campaigners) gaining undeserved credibility among the public at large, and frighteningly, among some who should know better.

    Yarrgh.

    • plusafdotcom says:

      KiwiMan… that’s not Silly at all.. in fact, Spot ON!
      Loons like her simply (VERY simply) use the tactic common in such ‘discussions’ of ‘I’m right and your data are invalid.’ Although they’ll usually say ‘your data is invalid,’ too.

      Critical Thinking, pretty much around the world, has died.

  6. TiltedHorizon says:

    I’ve lost count of how many times she avoids direct questions and ignores direct answers.

  7. PraiseThePenne says:

    What an ignorant, bigoted, C-U-Next-Tuesday.

    Repeatedly, she accuses Dawkins of Ad Hom attacks, while indulging in the same behavior herself.

    She speaks in a sugary sweet tone, adding a positively diabetes-inducing zest when she utters the name of God – yet, she peppers the entire interview with snide, passive-aggressive laughter.

    She claims to be capable of understanding evolution, but has no concept of basic truths: Her constant use of the phrase ‘evolved from slime’ shows precisely what kind of education she’s had in it – I’ll remind you, she wants to inflict that on others, namely children.

    ‘Show me the physical evidence’ x 124, ‘crea-TOR’, that completely irrelevant, deliberately loaded question about disabled/brain dead people…

    Oh yeah, about that ‘peaceful praying’? Lies, or at the very least, a deliberate distortion of the truth – http://www.goodasyou.org/good_as_you/2009/11/was-that-praying-or-preying-wendster.html

    • Belynda says:

      Absolutely she was exceedingly crafty with her words and presumably the video would be shown as “ammunition” for her fellows and their own agenda, pointing to what a nasty, aggressive, un-smiling person that Dawkins is! And look at that lovely lady, smiling so benevolently- he could SHE be wrong?! Urgh. Not to mention the same rehearsed phrases and lines she kept throwing around, ad nauseum. Makes me squirm, and then I realized it’s because she reminded me of the blinding faith and fervor with which a brain-washed victim will speak…

      Dawkins did magnificently to stay polite, calm, and hold his reserve in the face of such cloaked antagonism (disguised as being victimized.)

      All I can say for the face value of this interview, though, (and I quote Lord of the Rings) is that I think a servant of the enemy would look fairer and feel fouler. RAmen.

  8. TiltedHorizon says:

    ” Her constant use of the phrase ‘evolved from slime’ shows precisely what kind of education she’s had in it”

    Note how when she was repeatedly pulled back onto the subject of evolution she would switch the conversation from Darwinism to Social Darwinism. So biological evolution is wrong because it does not work in sociology and politics.

    Where is my shenanigans broom!?!

    • Keith says:

      If anyone wants to acquaint themselves with information about where humans probably came from I would recommend the book “Human Evolution” by Bernard Wood. It is only about 160 pages long and quite readable: even for me. The information in it will NOT convince any fundamentalists: no science lesson will; but it is a good primer to the way scientists determine the steps in an organism’s evolution.

1 2 3 25

Leave a Reply