Comments on: Evolution and Swine Flu

By: Colin Purrington

Colin Purrington — Thu, 07 May 2009 14:34:11 +0000

If you'd like a graphic for this line of reasoning, here's something I made in 2005 or so: http://www.swarthmore.edu/NatSci/cpurrin1/evolk12/h5n1/avianflu.htm

By: Red

Red — Mon, 04 May 2009 01:39:12 +0000

I have a son with autism, and let me state for the record, that my son “WAS” developing quite normal until that dreaded vaccine. But that is another argument.

I love Bill Maher. I could listen to him for hours. And even if you don’t agree with him on everything, at least he gets you thinking.

By: NeuroLover

NeuroLover — Sun, 03 May 2009 20:55:18 +0000

TOTALLY agreed, Skeptico. Also all his “vaccines cause autism” bullshit.

By: Skeptico

Skeptico — Sun, 03 May 2009 17:03:26 +0000

Pretty good. Now all Bill needs to do is apply those same standards to himself when he’s talking about what he calls “western medicine”. If he’s going to insist that vaccines don’t prevent disease and that that Pasteur recanted on his deathbed, etc, as he has done on numerous occasions then Maher himself shouldn’t expect to go to a doctor if he gets sick.

By: Jeff

Jeff — Sun, 03 May 2009 14:52:40 +0000

Luther Weeks Says:
I’m all for teaching the evidence for and against evolution…That is a whole lot different than teaching the myth of creation in science class.

I agree. Science is all about self-criticism. Evolution theory should be critically examined. That is how science advances. Creationism falls outside science both in concept and in the methodologies of the practitioners. Creationism should definitely not be taught in science class.

By: Should Creationists Be Seeing A Doctor? | South Dakota Humanist

Should Creationists Be Seeing A Doctor? | South Dakota Humanist — Sun, 03 May 2009 13:57:22 +0000

[...] – Friendly Atheist) May 3rd, 2009 in Evolution | tags: bill maher, creationism, Evolution, swine [...]

By: Jaroslav Sveda

Jaroslav Sveda — Sun, 03 May 2009 13:12:44 +0000

@EndUnknown

But the ultimate problem is that changes in genome (like hox gene duplication) that enable completely new feature happen only rarely, and even then it’s probable that the change that will ultimately end up leveraging the potenital will take millions of years, therefore practically eliminating possibility to ever show an example of it.

By: SW

SW — Sun, 03 May 2009 12:22:28 +0000

No Luther, there is none against. Not in 150 years of worldwide research has anything been found that goes against it.

By: EndUnknown

EndUnknown — Sun, 03 May 2009 12:18:14 +0000

@Daniel

and the explanation ‘macro evolution is just a crapload of micro over millions of years’ cant penetrate their skull.

By: Luther Weeks

Luther Weeks — Sun, 03 May 2009 11:51:23 +0000

I’m all for teaching the evidence for and against evolution. I know there is a lot for. Perhaps there is some against.

That is a whole lot different than teaching the myth of creation in science class.