3597341 Views
472 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.



472 Responses to “Where is the evidence?”

1 14 15 16 17 18 27
  1. steve e abraham says:

    Evidence? The difference between science and creationists….. scientists can look at the evidence again and again and revise their conclusions based on new findings, or on learning of errors in their data, or on learning of errors in the method they use to get from hypothesis to conclusion. Science can adjust. Creationists cannot! It is all or none with creationists. Can you have “creation” without the use of “god”? It would not make any sense. when you think clearly, it is not evolution vs creationism…. it is about the concept of a god creating everything. If the concept of “god” is removed, there is NO creationism. Since we cannot prove or disprove the concept of god, then creationism can NEVER be proven. As such, it is relegated to a belief and not knowledge. It is relegated to the lower levels of truth, which a concept which cannot be proven or dis-proven. So we are arguing between something that can be questioned and revised, with something that can never be proven or revised. Conclusion: there is NO argument. They are such different concepts that they cannot be compared. By trying to disprove evolution, Wendy is acknowledging this .
    The real answer…. where does the flying spaghetti monster fit into this?

  2. steve e abraham says:

    Wendy has “The Buffalo Syndrome”. I am a physician and I make this diagnosis. Please look this up in medical literature. This is classic “Buffalo Syndrome” behavior. It is the answer to all of her thoughts and idea.
    Yes, the “Buffalo Syndrome”.
    ICD 10 diagnostic code: ID10T
    Hah.

  3. Perry says:

    It’s sad to see creationists, desperatly scramble for facts or actual science tidbits, to support their ignorance.
    I feel badly for this woman, living her sad life desperatly clutching a few snippets of propaganda, to try and reconcile the whole history of science, medicine, and research, to support her dogma. It makes her look like a fool, or worse, mentally unhinged.
    Sad.
    We are surrunded by The mentally ill.
    And theY get ton VOTE.

  4. Albert Nahnimmus says:

    I stopped watching after 20:26. She should have been introduced to Neil deGrasse Tyson, who would have torn her argument to shreds. Sure, it would have supported her argument that evolutionists won’t allow any evolution-opposition, but so what? It shouldn’t be allowed.

  5. Jo Bouchard says:

    This lady is an error of mother nature…

  6. Saucerer says:

    Remember, her god thoughtfully created her tainted and sin-ready. Only she knows what would happen if she wasn’t stuck in the tangled rigging (of her mind).
    Luckily, FSM gave the rest of us logic and the ability to live and navigate with mystery.

    Maroon her, I say. Aaaarghhhh

  7. Samthemighty says:

    A question to the regulars of this website: how do I create an account so I don’t have to put all this stuff in all the time.

  8. Irek says:

    Her believes apart, but am I the only one who finds Wendy quite attractive?

    • Pete Byrdie says:

      I would! But then I’ve got barrel-scrapingly low standards. She’s exactly my type; female, human, breathing. It’s not often I hook up with a prospect who fits all three of those criteria.

      • Rev. Wulff says:

        Pete, I think that’s a little bit more than we needed to know about you. :)

        • Pete Byrdie says:

          Are you sure? Cuz I’ve got some stories…

1 14 15 16 17 18 27

Leave a Reply