Ray Comfort Tries to Sneak Creationism into On the Origin of Species

I really don’t understand how Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron can claim to be Christians — can we assume they follow the Ten Commandments? — and then proceed to lie with every breath.

It’s not just their ignorance about evolution. I think they actually have deluded themselves into think it’s some evil conspiracy.

I’m talking about knowing, purposeful lies.

To “celebrate” the 150th anniversary of the publication of Charles Darwin‘s On the Origin of Species, Comfort is giving away 50,000 copies of the book at colleges across the country.

The catch is that he wrote a 50-page introduction that explains how evolution has no support, brainwashes people, and has a direct connection to Adolf Hitler.

Here’s the cover (we’ll get to the introduction in a moment):

See Comfort’s name on there?

No?

That’s because he left it off. Why? He wants to dupe people into reading his version of the book and the only way to do that is to deceive people about what he’s offering.

(I’m waiting for some atheist to try that tactic — give away free books which say “Holy Bible” on the cover but contain the entire Skeptic’s Annotated Bible on the inside.)

Comfort/Cameron even made a promotional video for the ruse:

I count four lies from Cameron in the first 22 seconds.

He doesn’t even get the name of Darwin’s book right.

And, of course, there’s this line at the 4:30 mark:

“Remember: This is America. It’s still the land of the free, the home of the brave… and this is a life and death issue.”

WTF?

Like the image shows, Comfort has posted his 50-page introduction online for all to read (PDF). I’m sure some 9th grader can parse through that and debunk everything.

I’ll take the easier way out and just direct everyone here.

How do we combat this?

Not by ignoring them. That’s what they want. We can do better.

One Facebook group has this suggestion:

… We can amass as many of these books as possible, remove the 50 page intro, and then donate perfectly good copies of ‘Origin of Species’ to schools, libraries, and Goodwill. We can actually make this into something positive.

If you are in college, then you are in a good position to help. Check your campus on November 19th, and if you see a group distributing copies of the book, then get as many as you can. Get a copy for yourself, ask if you can have extra copies for your friends, ask your friends to go ask for copies, and ask other people you see carrying the book if you can have their copy.

That’s non-intrusive and helpful. I like it! That is, if these books actually include the whole of On the Origin of Species and not some Comfort-ified selectively-edited version of it.

Oh… and while we’re on the subject:

(Thanks to Rebecca and Chuck for the links!)

  • Tom

    I’m really not that worried about this. College students have largely already made up their minds about evolution. I trust that our nation’s top students would view this as propaganda right off the bat. If they don’t, they’re probably already in agreement with Kirk and the Banana.

    Let them use up their money on printing out the Origin of Species. They’re really doing more for us than for themselves. 50,000 copies is a lot. I am rather happy they are spending it by printing out books that college students aren’t probably going to read anyways because they are too busy reading material for their own classes.

    Kirk and Ray don’t need our help to look like fools. They do a great job on their own, and I am confident our students will see right through their faked sincerity.

  • silver

    The only thing I’m worried about is what else they did besides showing us how many lies one can write in 50 pages.

    Is the intro the only thing they added, or did they ‘make corrections’? If they did, you might as well burn the book and use it to make smores. As a book lover I’ll at least have the consolation that the book was used for *something* good.

    If they didn’t touch the original material, then I say go ahead with the plan to donate the books after removing the junk in them!

  • Valdyr

    Yeah, I heard on Pharyngula that the content of the actual book was massively cut down by a minister. If this is true, the “take out the foreword and donate” strategy doesn’t work.

  • Staceyjw

    I love the idea of trading them for a real version, and be happy to participate if possible. I really want one of the books!

    I wonder how influential his preface even is? I also wo0nder how many people thought it was a joke when they read it.

    And I would totally do this with religious books/pamphlets.

    Staceyjw

  • TXatheist

    Cameron wants “them” to be able to hear the other view? Ok, let’s explain how Genesis is wrong. Not explain just evolution but why Genesis is wrong.

  • http://twitter.com/alansimpson Alan

    Ok first: this is just beyond stupid. The most insulting part of this is implying that Darwin’s ideas influenced Adolf Hitler. Have they even looked at Mein Kampf? Look at some of Hitler’s quotes.

    Before saying something that provocative perhaps do a little research into your claims. Wait, look who I’m talking to…

    But second: I’d like to know where they intend to draw their line in the sand. Ok, tell you what Mike Seaver, we’ll give you evolution. But there are mountains of evidence from other fields of science. Does this mean there are going to be 50 page introductions to books on geology? Paleontology? Zoology? Physics? Astronomy? I could go on…and on.

  • http://www.hawidu.com/ Brad Czerniak

    As a librarian, I must tell you that donating the book without the foreword to a library will not work. One of the Interpretations of the Library Bill of Rights has to do with the Expurgation of Library Materials.
    I don’t agree with the content of the first 50 pages of this edition of Origin, but that doesn’t mean I’m willing to censor it. The First Amendment is too important.

  • absent sway

    I’m loving the Kanye bit!

  • Joseph

    2:10

    It has information from “scientists.” Mr. Cameron is really excited about that. …and my keyboard has coffee on it now.

  • http://goodreasonnews.blogspot.com GoodReasonNews

    Here’s another idea, Hemant. College secular society’s should try to find out if this is going to happen on their campus and find a way to inform their classmates that they’re being duped. Maybe with flyers or bullhorns or emails.

  • llewelly

    Hemant:

    [Kirk Cameron:]

    “Remember: This is America. It’s still the land of the free, the home of the brave… and this is a life and death issue.”

    WTF?

    It’s part of promoting the belief that Darwin leads Hitler. It’s there to reinforce the belief that acceptance of evolution kills people. Standard Liars For Jesus fare.

  • Staceyjw

    This is not funny, we have to fight back and I have 2 solutions for this defamation.

    First, I think that atheists and scientists should get together and make a PR blitz saying:

    “In response to Ray Comforts underhanded adding ID to “Origin of Species”, we will be similarly modifying the Bible. Atheists and Evolution scientists have never deceived people into reading their ideas by adding them to xtian books, and consider Comfort’s act to be one of intellectual warfare.
    Are you a christian that values the bible, and don’t like the idea of bibles with an atheist “preface” being snuck into circulation? Please thank Roy Comfort- without him, we would not have done this project.

    Second- We need to make sure everyone realizes that these books are the work of a fundie whack job. Along with replacing/ modifying the books (there are SO MANY, we are sure to miss some), we need to alert college science and library departments to what these guys are doing. He has the right to print it, but we don’t have to have it on the shelves next to real science.

    I’m sure a better writer could make my first idea sound much better, but I think you get the point. I know I will hear people say not to stoop to their level, but I disagree. They will continue to do these things unless we hit them where it hurts.
    *I don’t care if we DON’T actually write and publish, if the backlash will stop him.*

    We need to do this ASAP. I would happily donate to PR OR an atheist version of the bible. The thought of this garbage being put into the want hands of the young/unlearned makes me cringe- esp xtians that want any excuse to deny evolution.

    Intellectual dishonesty at its worst. Disgusting.

    Staceyjw

  • Staceyjw

    Censorship is when you don’t allow a book to an be printed or read. Simply not stocking it is NOT censorship. Are libraries are required to shelve any book no matter the content? I know stores aren’t.

    This is not an attempt to stop them from putting their ideas of ID out there- this is an attempt to stop sneaky, underhanded intellectual dishonesty. Let him put his name on it, and then they can stock it- but printing it as if Darwin was the sole author is WRONG.

    Staceyjw

  • mcbender

    Hemant, it’s even worse than it looks. Not only are they inserting a nonsensical 50 page introduction before the actual text, they’ve also Bowdlerized it (the page count of the Darwin text in these books is substantially lower than that elsewhere).

    I suspect what their real goal is here is to trick people into trusting their quote-mining efforts (for instance, I’d be willing to bet they’ve removed the second half of his famous statement about the eye), because they’ll look up the mined quote in one of these edited versions and see that, indeed, it’s there.

    That is a travesty and a disgrace, and attention needs to be drawn to this.

  • Siamang

    Expurgation
    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Expurgation is a form of censorship by way of purging anything noxious, offensive, or erroneous, usually from an artistic work. It has also been called bowdlerization, after Thomas Bowdler, who in 1818 published an expurgated edition of William Shakespeare’s work that he considered to be more appropriate for women and children.

    I fully expect that Ray’s version of Origin will be bowdlerized. I wouldn’t respond by bowdlerizing his version.

    I’d respond by pointing to his lies. Ray has listed the schools they’ll be visiting. Show up with signboards with his lies printed big and bold. Show up with real copies of Origin, and give a free copy of the real Origin to each and every person who can find a place where truth went down the Memory Hole of Bananaman.

    Also, show up wearing these:

    http://farm1.static.flickr.com/43/76281979_3851b6923a.jpg

  • Tizzle

    How is this legal? Copyright has expired, so one can do anything with the words? Is that right?

    I think I would buy the Atheist-introduced bible. Seriously. Then it would look like I have the bible on my bookshelf. Awesome idea!

  • Turrboenvy

    I want one of these. Imagine how ridiculous it’ll be in 20, 30, 50 years to break out this time capsule of crazy.

    Also, it would be great if we could either take this crap in exchange for a real copy of On the Origin of Species, or an annotated Bible as suggested, or distribute 1-for-1 copies of them.

  • Siamang

    How is this legal? Copyright has expired, so one can do anything with the words? Is that right?

    Yes, I think it is right. It’s valid when used for criticism. The skeptics annotated Bible, for example.

    The problem is that if it does turn out to be expurgated, then there is the slight historical problem of inaccurate versions floating about. But I don’t have any fear that Ray’s version will crowd out one of the most widely published scientific books of all time.

  • Siamang

    Hemant, it’s even worse than it looks. Not only are they inserting a nonsensical 50 page introduction before the actual text, they’ve also Bowdlerized it (the page count of the Darwin text in these books is substantially lower than that elsewhere).

    Ray is now saying that it’s the entire text of the book.

    In which case, you cannot judge it by page count. It’s entirely possible that he used a small font in order to cut down on printing costs.

    We’ll have to wait and see if he cut the book up. If not, well then, we may have a wonderful Trojan Horse from Ray. Imagine, all these christian families with copies of Origin lying around. And one day junior decides to read past page 50…..

  • Anna

    People twisting things around makes me want to cry, then I want to bash their heads in, then I just feel drained. I’d never really bash anyone’s head in, I just feel like doing it. I hate liars. You can’t really fight them. What makes them so dangerous is that they can make anything sound right & logical, and anything they don’t like horrible & illogical.

    But . . . I do like the bible idea. But then, would that be just as sneaky?

  • Tizzle

    Siamang, my question was somewhat rhetorical. But, it seems like it shouldn’t be legal to put out a book without saying on the cover the name of the introducer, or something like that. What’s to stop someone from simply replacing the entire text? I only think about this issue when reading Cory Doctorow’s blog, so I am no expert.

    Will you have a list of the schools where they will be giving these books away? I could get one/many if it were in my city. I’m not always up for activism, but I was appalled by this video. The twinkle in his eye when he described the duplicity was intense somehow.

    *I’m not “over” my upbringing apparently. I am not yet dispassionate about this subject.

  • Tom

    I’m wondering: who here has read the Origin of Species? I haven’t, and honestly I think it would be a bore! I find evolution interesting enough without the read, though I might get around to perusing it. I don’t get the people who would want to hand out long boring books to create some political capital. It’s far less economical than coming up with a catchy campaign.

    Attention needs to be drawn away from this stunt. That’s all they’re looking for anyways. Don’t exchange their book for the legit one. Don’t issue a scalding reprimand. Don’t cut out the first 50 pages, it will only make people more curious.

    Do have a Darwin Fish Fry cookout. Do have an Origin of Species dance party. Do have an essay contest. Don’t fall into their trap. They want controversy. Beat them by simply having something more interesting going on that will present the real story. My fav idea is trying to get performances of “Darwin Remembers” at your school. It’s a great play!

    Out-Darwin them.

  • http://religiouscomics.net Jeff

    Wouldn’t it be funny if the printer used fading ink on the first 50 pages and archival ink on the remaining pages. Then in a few years, you can hardly see the words on Ray’s introduction.

    At any rate, I fully expect to see educational videos on you-tube on how to rip out those initial offending 50 pages.

  • Siamang

    Folks on Pharyngula are saying that this will likely be a reprint of the original edition, which doesn’t include a lot of Darwin’s work rebutting the arguments of his critics, and lots of evidence that he had accumulated after the first edition.

  • Tizzle

    OT question: How do I add a picture? I just registered, but don’t see a button for that.

  • Pingback: for a good laugh « COSTER^3

  • Siamang

    Tizzle,

    I think it’ll be clear to anyone cracking open the book that this was an edition published by someone with quite the axe to grind about Darwin.

    I actually would love a copy. I might nip on down to UCLA to see if I can pick up a copy.

    I view it as a specimen of propaganda. It may even have some historical value someday, like something a communist totalitarian state might publish to discredit Adam Smith or Thomas Jefferson.

  • JJR

    I’m also a librarian and, aside from the Library Bill of Rights issue my colleague raises, we simply won’t accept damaged books as donations. Sorry.

    So please don’t do this.

  • Siamang

    List of schools on this site:

    http://www.originintoschools.com/

  • Siamang

    Wait a minute.

    They’re going to CalTECH?!?!? Home of the Skeptics Society?!!?

    Oh…. this gonna be GOOD!

    Actually, that’s on a list of the schools they WANT to go to. I don’t know if anyone would have the courage to show up at CalTECH pushing Creationism. Talk about wanting to get your ass handed to you.

  • Shawn

    It is so frustrating debating people who lie so freely and are so intellectually sloppy. Are we gaining any ground? It’s after I see videos like this that I just want to scream … or give up.

    It’s like being in a boxing match against fog. The fog can never win, because it has no substance, but it can outlast you; it can wait until you’ve exhausted yourself and are sick of the gloom.

    I’m sick of the gloom.

  • Siamang

    Speaking of intellectual slop….

    He couldn’t even get the fucking title correct on the cover.

    It’s “On the Origin of Species” or “The Origin of Species” or even “On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life”,
    not “Origin of Species”.

    If you can’t get the fucking title of the book right, on the cover of the fucking book…. That speaks to an oversight beyond laziness. It’s nothing but bald, unashamed ‘I don’t give a fuck.’

  • http://3harpiesltd.org/ocb Judith Bandsma

    One worry I have is that you will find fundies replacing REAL copies of ‘Origins…’ with this one in public and school libraries.

    We’ve had an awful time here with fundies stealing books they disagree with, defacing or destroying them or even checking them out and then destroying them.

  • Siamang

    And I need to say fuck some more times in my posts.

    Fuck.

  • J B Tait

    I don’t approve of censorship, so instead of extracting the pages, add a label to the front, and an Introduction to the introduction, pointing out the most obvious lies and errors therein?

  • Reginald Selkirk

    I’m wondering: who here has read the Origin of Species? I haven’t, and honestly I think it would be a bore!

    I have read it. I agree that most modern readers would find it boring. Darwin went to great lengths to amass piles of data to support points which, in the light of more modern science, are taken for granted. For example, everyone who has ever taken a biology class knows the basis for inheritance of traits, and probably for variation in that inheritance.

    Biology has moved on, and has learned a great deal since the days of “Darwinism.” (For example, “Mendelism” has been successfully incorporated into the mix. And “Watson & Crickism.” etc.) The only reason I would recommend reading the original is for historical interest.

  • Richard Wade

    Tizzle,

    OT question: How do I add a picture? I just registered, but don’t see a button for that.

    If you mean the pictures to the left of our names, go to:

    http://en.gravatar.com/

  • TJ

    (I’m waiting for some atheist to try that tactic — give away free books which say “Holy Bible” on the cover but contain the entire Skeptic’s Annotated Bible on the inside.)

    Oooh, man. Could you imagine the whining and screaming and riots and protests? All in the name of free speech and teaching both sides of the”issue”.

    BTW, Kanye West is a jackass: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IO_QIMNRreg

    I didn’t say it. Obama did. ;)

  • http://rgzblog.blogspot.com rgz

    I’ve prepared a special signature for posting about these crooks

    lying?jesus

    Somebody make that into a T-shirt.

  • Siamang

    I love the part 2:20 into the video where Cameron starts listing the scientists who thought that God created the universe.

    After Einstein (which is a lie), the launch into a bunch of folks wearing Renaissance garb! AH YES, those eminent rocket scientists on the cutting edge of modern knowing!

    Seriously CAM/COM, take my advice. When name-checking scientists from four centuries ago, it hurts your case to actually show them. Here’s a hint: any scientist where you have to show them in a painting DOESN’T help you! This is the twenty-first century, you stooges.

    The frilly collar on Johannes Kepler though, is choice.

  • Siamang

    Reading about Kepler in Wikipedia, there was this note:

    In 1615, Ursula Reingold, a woman in a financial dispute with Kepler’s brother Cristoph, claimed Kepler’s mother Katharina had made her sick with an evil brew. The dispute escalated, and in 1617, Katharina was accused of witchcraft; witchcraft trials were relatively common in central Europe at this time. Beginning in August 1620 she was imprisoned for fourteen months. She was released in October 1621, thanks in part to the extensive legal defense drawn up by Kepler. The accusers had no stronger evidence than rumors, along with a distorted, second-hand version of Kepler’s Somnium, in which a woman mixes potions and enlists the aid of a demon.

    Emphasis mine. Hmm.

    And then there’s this:

    Katharina was subjected to territio verbalis, a graphic description of the torture awaiting her as a witch, in a final attempt to make her confess.

    Wow! Ray Comfort learns from the best, doesn’t he?

  • Laura Lou

    Tom,

    I’ve read it, and I actually really enjoyed it. The language it uses is modest (not what I expected) and it’s easy to follow. What I would recommend more than that, though, is Darwin’s Ghost: The Origin of Species Updated.

    More to the point though, I agree that most people aren’t going to read it even if they have a copy.

  • http://miketheinfidel.blogspot.com/ MikeTheInfidel

    Apparently Comfort is a plagiarist, too. According to Drosera over on Pharyngula:

    [Comfort used a poorly-translated version of Mein Kampf to support the idea that Hitler was Darwin's "famous student".]

    It remains slanderous, even if you give Comfort the benefit of the doubt.

    However, he doesn’t deserve this benefit when it comes to plagiary. A commenter at RichardDawkins.net noticed that some sentences in Comfort’s biography of Darwin were literally copied from an article by Dr. Stan Guffey. The article is called A brief history of Charles Darwin.

    It is quite a bit more than a few sentences.

    Comfort:

    On returning to England in 1836, Darwin set to work examining and disseminating the extensive collection of specimens he acquired during the voyage. He quickly established a reputation as an accomplished naturalist on the London scene.
    In 1839 he married his cousin, Emma Wedgwood. That same year he published his journal of the voyage of the Beagle, which brought him immediate celebrity among London’s intellectuals.

    Guffey:

    On returning to England in 1836, Darwin set to work examining and disseminating the extensive collection of natural history specimens acquired during the voyage. He quickly established a reputation as an accomplished naturalist on the London scene. In 1839 he married Emma Wedgwood, and saw his journal of the voyage of the Beagle published.

    And in case you missed it:

    That same year he published his journal of the voyage of the Beagle, which brought him immediate celebrity among London’s intellectuals.

    The second clause of this sentence, which Ray tacked onto the plagiarized paragraph, is a sneaky attack on both Britain and intellectualism. To a YEC who buys Comfort’s nonsense, tying Darwin to “London’s intellectuals” in a positive light is equivalent to saying that being an intellectual is on par with being a Nazi and an atheist. It’s also an attack on the increasing secularism of Great Britain.

  • Erik

    You can write reviews of this on their own website: http://www.livingwaters.com/index.php?page=shop.product_details&category_id=7&flypage=flypage.tpl&product_id=393&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=199

    Not surprisingly, all of the reviews they posted are positive. Think they’d post any negative reviews?

  • Alan E.

    Why the emphasis about UC Berkeley? Will he be there that day? If so, I want to take off work to go! I have so many questions. Such as, have you actually researched eye development, or did you just look at the model of the eye in the doctor’s office that comes apart and think “I have no idea how this works, but i bet god did it”?

  • AxeGrrl

    Tizzle wrote:

    OT question: How do I add a picture? I just registered, but don’t see a button for that.

    gravatar.com

    :)

  • Holly

    I just read the 50 page intro. It made me laugh. Do you think maybe he did it for the LOLs?

  • littlejohn

    In fairness, many years ago Isaac Asimov, an atheist, released an annotated Bible. He didn’t make fun of the Bible exactly, but he pointed out likely mistranslations and other problems. I doubt that it sold very well.
    I likewise doubt that Comfort’s “Origin” will sell well. Surely everyone who wants to read Darwin already has.
    It’s a scientific masterpiece, but it’s not an easy read.

    • Atemu1234

      True but you must remember, most people would get crap if it was free.

  • http://selfra.blogspot.com dantresomi

    Kirk Cameron should have been a comedian. This video is hilarious.

    I agree with Littlejohn. What Comfort and Cameron should have done was written a 50 page intro to Harry Potter, folks would have ate that up. But Darwin’s book? Tough read. I am still reading it for the 3rd time and it’s tough. Free is good but not that good.

    I don’t know what we should do but I hardly run into anyone who remembers Cameron. I know several fans of the Left Behind series who didn’t even know there was a series of movies with Cameron starring in them.

  • Alan E.

    Here’s the thing. If Darwin is hard to read, then what is the only thing the person will get from the free copies? The easier to read 50 page intro…

  • Siamang

    It can’t be as hard to read as the Bible!

  • http://www.hammatime.net Hamma

    I find it extremely amusing that he talks about brainwashing, considering that’s how religion obtains its followers especially young.

    It’s called education these kids are getting, education in science and history.

    What a joke!

  • Tony

    Reading Ray Comfort’s wholly egregious 50 page “introduction” to their abridged version of On the Origin of Species was certainly an eye opening exercise. It begins with a brief biography and timeline of Darwin’s life with few causes for complaint. Unfortunately on page 9 the breathtaking inanity begins.

    I was intending on doing a line by line refutation of this puerile toss but I got about four more pages and realized that I’d have to spend 50 pages myself in order to do so. Suffice to say it is the expected cacophony of logical irrelevance, ad hominem and quote mining, finishing up with a ridiculous “jump out of a plane” analogy and repeated threats of hellfire.If you are so inclined you can read it below:

    http://assets.livingwaters.com/pdf/OriginofSpecies.pdf

    I did want to include a couple of quotes from this introduction however.

    “All this proves is that some scientists are willing to lie in
    an attempt to prove their pet theories, and they have a huge
    incentive to lie.”

    IRONEEE!

    “How many lies do you think that you have told in your
    whole life? Have you ever stolen anything, regardless of its
    value? If you have, then you’re a lying thief. The Bible tells
    us, “Lying lips are abomination to the Lord,”4 because He
    is a God of truth and holiness.”

    Ahem.

    I’ve read Origin by the way. I found it heavy going. I would recommend reading Selfish Gene instead.

  • Staceyjw

    I know I already posted, but I am 100% serious about responding with a statement about atheists putting out an annotated bible, all because of Ray.

    Ray has gone far this time- I feel he just threw the gauntlet down, per se. What bothers me is the sneaky way the book is being presented- on his site, he even writes:
    “What are they (college admin)going to do? Ban ‘Origin of Species’? Its available at their bookstore for 29.99″
    If he put his name and subtitle on it, I wouldn’t bat an eye. This is the worst type of subversion- and in the name of “the lord”, UGH.

    Attention IS needed- if the books quietly slip into the shelves and displace the real ones (very possible with so many poorly funded libraries), more fundies will think its a good idea, and that they can get away with this.

    Remember- they are well funded, and have much of the nation on their side as far as ID goes. I don’t worry about scientists- I worry about public opinion, which can sway school boards………

    Staceyjw

  • anonymous

    what highschool kid would read the introduction?

  • Alec

    I’ll have you know, I’m a 9th grader, and I could *easily* debunk much of his introduction. :)

    I’ll also have you know that I proudly boasted a Scarlet ‘A’ pin and a shirt with a picture of Charles Darwin on it, that read, “¡Viva la evolución!” at school today. I did get a few odd looks and a few questions, followed by somewhat of a recoil on most occasions. But I did find out that one more student is an atheist as well! I believe that’s a total of 7 (including me) atheists or agnostics, in my class (grade 9) at my school (that I know of).

  • postsimian

    wow. Just wow.

  • Hazor

    http://www.livingwaters.com/index.php?page=shop.product_details&category_id=7&flypage=flypage.tpl&product_id=393&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=199

    Straight from their website:
    “This special 280-page edition not only contains an abridged Origin of Species but also has a 50-page Introduction that reveals the dangerous fruit of evolution, Hitler’s undeniable connections to the theory, Darwin’s racism, and his disdain for women …” [emphasis mine]

    So not only have they cut up the book, but they, if the above comments about Comfort saying it’s the whole book are true, have also lied about it. I lol at this.
    Then they go on to say Darwin was racist and sexist. I had to read it twice to be sure they weren’t talking about themselves.

  • Scott

    So, I just graduated with honors with a Bachelor of Science from a major state university in the College of Evolution, Ecology, and Organismal Biology. I’m now working on my doctorate of veterinary medicine at a tier-one institution.

    In my education, we never read On the Origin of Species because it’s outdated and has a few legitimate scientific problems. My point –> This is like reading Newton’s early writings on gravity to develop an understanding of quantum physics; too much of Darwin’s original work is pop-science, at best, nowadays, and it’s unsatisfactory for anyone who wants to know truth. A few things have changed in the last 150 years. Let’s just appreciate that it is an historic moment going back to a major shift in human thought.

    On an unrelated note, there are plenty of brilliant scientists who ARE faithful believers. I’m always disappointed to find how quickly I am sacrificed by so many fellow Christians who begrudge science, simply because I strive to understand my world.

    Regarding the “61% of atheist or agnostic professors” numbers, I’m feeling an urge to write a book titled On the Origin of Statistics. Let’s not pad numbers of any poll by including everyone who checked the box labeled “have not yet made a definitive decision on the subject” into the group we want to be numerically larger – that’s just unfair. It is a privilege to attend a university; if you don’t agree with the information they teach, there are plenty of other options for your learning needs, and numerous individuals who would gladly take your place.

    I believe that parts of the information being disseminated in this text are a stretch or are simply wrong. This doesn’t bother me too much. The only people that will read this book will be (a) scientists who think skeptically and usually read original works rather than abridged versions, or (b) people who are looking for information that supports previously determined beliefs. Any good scientist WELCOMES dissenting opinion. Let’s keep each other honest by working diligently to find legitimate evidence in support of hypotheses on either side.

  • Matt D

    @Alec the 9th grader.

    nice work champion! just be careful not to stick your head up too far – someone might try to kick it in.

    I admire your courage – high school is a tough place to wear your heart (or Scarlet A) on your sleeve.

    …and what are you doing reading atheist blogs at your age??? shouldnt you be looking up porn or something?

    • darkstar101

      Offending others never proves a point. Also, I have a nephew in ninth grade. You seriously need to at least try to not act like a uberchristian bigot.

  • ha

    This is crazy. I can’t believe these idiots are actively campaigning on university campuses to make america dumber and dumber. Don’t they realize that the whole world (except the part already idiotized by adnan oktar or harun yahya) will leave them behind? They really want people to believe their fairy tales and give up science? I just wonder how these people cannot see the long term ill effects of their stories!! *God* save america :)

  • ChameleonDave

    LOL@Kanye

  • The Other Tom

    @littlejohn: Asimov’s Guide to the Bible sells for about $22 used or $55 for an unused copy, so presumably it isn’t that incredibly much of a flop.

    I rather like the idea of printing up an atheist’s bible and handing it out without telling people. Preferably outside churches. But, The Skeptic’s Annotated Bible wouldn’t be suitable material, as it’s hypertext. Somebody would have to spend time editing it into a printable version, and dead tree media seems so passé.

  • Staceyjw

    Alec-
    I wish there were more 9th graders like you! I hope my kids turn out so cool :)
    Staceyjw

  • Jerad

    Rock on Alec, at your age I owned only two shirts that didn’t have a pro jesus message on them, so you’re way ahead of me!

  • Alec

    Haha, thanks guys. As you can see in my comment on the post about Frank Shaeffer on Rachel Maddow’s show, I wasn’t always so cool. Up until January 2009, I was a Christian. Very much so, actually. But maybe 6 or 7 months before I became an Agnostic Atheist, I developed an interest in science, which eventually collided with my religiosity, and obviously, science triumphed.

    I also have a shirt that reads Richard Dawkin’s “The God of the Old Testament is…” quote, but I don’t wear that to school. :)

    @Matt D: Well, since I’m an Atheist, I automatically look up LOADS of porn, do drugs, drink alcohol and treat homosexuals and women like people, because everyone knows that Atheists can’t be moral. ;)

  • Richard Wade

    Good for you, Alec. Welcome to the ranks of the sane.

    One suggestion, don’t capitalize “atheist” or “agnostic.” They’re not capitalized like “Catholic” or “Muslim,” because they are not religions.

  • Alec

    Thanks, Mr. Wade. I was wondering about that one, I never really knew if it should be kept undercase.

    One of my friends (who is a Christian) uses the terms ‘atheism’ and ‘atheist’ like that. For example, in an arguement, (He saw a picture of mine on my iPod, of a sign at a GLBT rights protest that read, “Jesus had two dads, why can’t I?”.) He said, “I thought you were atheist.” Sort of like “I thought you were Catholic”, indicating that he thinks that atheism is a religion. I didn’t correct him, as I thought I might come off as a bit of a jerk, but I probably should’ve.

    Anyway, thanks for the suggestion. I appreciate it!

  • Richard Wade

    Alec, please call me Richard. Anyone as grown up as you is my peer.

    Saying “I thought you were an atheist” would be the most clear and correct way for your Christian friend to say it, because it’s an improper noun, like plumber or pedestrian. Saying “I thought you were atheist” makes it sound like an adjective, as “Catholic” is used as either a proper noun or an adjective. I’m not sure if “atheist” has made its way into many dictionaries as an adjective yet, but language is a living, evolving thing.

    My main point of encouraging the use of small “a” atheist is to counter the annoying and silly argument from some theists that atheism is just another religion. People have written many pages on why that is a crock, but one way to briefly correct the misconception is to assert that it should not be capitalized.

    Sorry for the unsolicited English lesson. You’re definitely cooler and braver than I was at your age. I cant actually say I’m cool or brave even now. Nice that you’ve found seven others at your school with open eyes and demanding minds. I don’t want you to bring trouble your way, but maybe you should start a club.

  • Alec

    Hah, okay Richard. I admire and respect you so I wanted to say Mr. Wade, but Richard is great too, if you’re fine with it.

    I guess it really is a matter of grammar, but I still think he sees it as a religion of some sort. He just doesn’t really know a lot about it.

    I used to be best friends with him, but it didn’t really work out as he seemed to not respect my beliefs (or lack thereof). He is extremely conservative, (a birther at that) and I consider myself fiscally Centrist (should ‘centrist’ be capitalized?) and culturally liberal. I love talking about science, and he hates science. I’m a sci-fi geek, he doesn’t like it to say the least. And then there’s the atheist/Christian conflict. It shouldn’t have even been a conflict, but for reasons unknown, he always wanted to bring up the differences in religion and politics we had, and we were arguing a lot. I don’t spend time with him outside of school anymore, but we’re friends.

    I’d love to say that I’m cool, but I couldn’t. I guess I might be cool in a geeky sort of way, but you’re awesome! You, Hemant, PZ, Phil Plait, and Neil deGrasse Tyson that is!

    Over the summer, I went to my school’s website to see what kind of clubs they have. I was interested in a science club, or a debate team, and I saw that they have a club called “Eternal Flame”. It’s a Christian club. I actually thought I should start some sort of a “Students for Science and Skepticism (or Reason)” club. I could do something like the SSA or FFRF does, as in, I could let other skeptical students know that there is a larger community for them, that it should be okay to criticize religion, and that people can be good without God. I wish I could do that, but I don’t really have a lot of time. I’m already doing the Science Olympiad, Key Club, Earth Advocates, and I’m on the tennis team, all on top of my schoolwork. And, of course, I have to read this blog! (Not to mention Pharyngula, BadAstronomy, TrekMovie(Star Trek blog) and Digg.) Plus, book/magazine reading time. I would love to start a club, but I really don’t have enough time. :(

    While (somewhat) on the subject of books, I’ll say that in honor of Charles Darwin, I will re-read On The Origin of Species. That is, the original one that isn’t defiled with anti-science nonsense! ;)

  • Richard Wade

    Wow, Alec, I’m the one in awe. You have plenty of positive things to do already; don’t worry about starting a club. It’s clear that you’ll be making many contributions to the world. Just keep that brain pollution-free.

    I just realized that this thread has gone far off topic, and in a very good way. Ray who? How ironic that Ray Comfort, The Lord’s Liar, has inadvertently created this friendship.

    I look forward to talking with you more around here.

  • Alec

    Thank you. :) Don’t worry about my brain, I’ll keep it full of healthy skepticism.

    I definitely hope I can contribute to the world, particularly in the fields of science, mainly physics. I am also an environmentalist, and I hope to make an impact there, as well as the areas of skepticism and rational, free thought.

    Hah, yeah, this thread is far off topic, and yes, in an awesome way! It’s so cool that you take the time to talk to the readers here, and especially me! I also look forward to talking with you as well!

    By the way, I have a couple questions. Should “evolutionist” or “secular humanist” be capitalized? What about terms such as “anti-theist”?

    Oh yeah, I’m doing the Math Club as well.

  • muggle

    Well, there already is an “Atheist Bible” published. And there’s Elizabeth Cady Stanton’s “Women’s Bible”.

    I searched the site and couldn’t find the list of schools to see if my daughter’s is among them. They just may target it. The President is coming to her campus Monday! She has one class on Mondays and, of course, her asshole professor is throwing a test in the midst of all this mess. So can someone direct me or did they remove the list?

    Alec, welcome aboard. Not to confuse you further but I respectfully disagree with Richard. I always, but always, capitalize Atheist. Matter of pride with me.

    I was quite the little fundy at your age. It was a 10 year struggle to break free of my childhood indoctrination. I went from Christian, to Jewish, to Agnostic, to Atheist. I admire your fearlessness in assessing it more openly. Keep thinking things through.

    You’re gonna find us a mixed group who disagree about whether to capitalize or not or just sometimes. And each seem to have their own reason. Richard’s is a valid reason; my opposite conclusion is equally so.

    You’ll settle on what you like for your own reasons. I’m sure after hearing lots of opinions on the matter and taking them into due consideration.

    To use an old expression, trying to get Atheists to agree is like trying to herd cats. I don’t know if that’s entirely true but we do think for ourselves and don’t tend to have a herd mentality. When all’s said and done — since we’re not a cult, uh, I mean religion — there’s only one thing we all agree on.

  • Jalyth

    Thanks Richard and AxeGrrl. I guess it worked. :)

  • Richard Wade

    Jalyth, so you and Tizzle are one in the same?

  • Mark

    He doesn’t mention at what universities this is going to be held. I’d like to gram as many copies as I can. I have a feeling that they will be given out at bible colleges.

  • Jerad

    Lol Muggle, You said it perfectly, there’s nothing to tie us together aside from the fact that there’s nothing to tie us together.

  • Richard Wade

    Alec,

    By the way, I have a couple questions. Should “evolutionist” or “secular humanist” be capitalized? What about terms such as “anti-theist”?

    There are some black belt grammarians who lurk here, so they may chime in with more authoritative responses, but I think “evolutionist,” “secular humanist” and “anti-theist” are all improper nouns, like “seashell” or “neighbor,” so no caps.

    However, when “secular humanist” is used in the official name of a group, as is the New Orleans Secular Humanist Association, then it is capitalized, because it is the name of a group of specific people rather than a category. Yeah, it’s complicated.

    Religions have claimed proper noun status, as they claim all sorts of other status, deserved or not, and so we have “Islam, Muslim, Christianity, Christian, Wicca, Wiccan,” and on and on with their prideful capital letters. Yeah, whatever. Whether they’re a specific group or a category is yet another unresolvable debate.

    I think I understand muggle’s wanting to show pride with a capital letter for “Atheist,” because atheists have been trod upon for so long, and those who deconverted from a religion have often suffered terribly at the hands of their capitalized former brethren. That is no small thing, and being able to raise your chin up in any way you can find is very important. So knowing that, I don’t begrudge him or her the “A”.

    And muggle is also right, we are an independent bunch. It’s a good thing that we meet online rather than in a tavern or a coffee house. We’d probably be in more brawls than the Irish, (and I’m part Irish) hitting each other with mangled copies of Comfort’s idiotic book as we quarrel over some bit of esoteric trivia.

    Being such a disapproved minority, we’re often isolated and lonely, and wish for camaraderie, yet we’re generally suspicious of group mentality. It’s an interesting dynamic. I have gained some wonderful friendships in this odd mix of small and capital letters.

  • Alec

    Thanks again, Richard.

    I’ve met a number of atheists, online, who have various views. Since atheism isn’t a religion, but more like a rejection of religion, there are no strict guidelines as to what an atheist can believe, and I think that’s one of the better parts of the movement. It allows even more free thought.

    (I’m Irish as well. Only a small part though.)

  • http://jessicasideways.com Jessica Sideways

    I am laughing about how Comfort whines about the Gideons not being able to distribute the claptrap we all know as the Bible but I wonder if he would be equally as offended if they distributed the Koran, the Bhagavad Gita or Dianetics?

  • http://www.banalleakage.com martymankins

    Kirk Cameron is much crazier than I thought he was.

    Ray Comfort is no saint, but Kirk gets the vote for being the wackiest guy in the room.

  • Siamang

    I’m guessing because they having trouble gay-adopting that Cam/Com have no kids of their own.

    That’s got to be it, right? Otherwise surely Kirk would know that his kid can legally bring a Bible to school AND read it during recess. And that the kid can start his own Christian club at lunch.

    That’s got to be it, he’s just got to be ignorant because he’s not a parent. He couldn’t possibly be lying.

    Woah! Wait a minute!

    I just had a Yooo-Reeka moment.

    Cameron’s an atheist! Why ELSE would he lie to folks about not being able to bring a bible to school or pray in school?!?!

    He’s trying to get Christians to think it’s illegal to bring a Bible or Pray at school so they won’t even try! INSIDIOUS!

    Well-played, Kirk Cameron! Keep it up! (Everyone else chime in) “Ahem… everyone knows it’s ILLEGAL to go to church. Better not do it. You’ll get ARRESTED! And whatever you do, never, EVER give a preacher any money. That’s punishable by… um…. home incarceration, with one of those radio anklets. That’s what I heard.”

  • http://goodreasonnews.blogspot.com Good Reason News

    Anyone able to find out what the 50 Universities involved are?

  • Bill Lee Deggs

    I would suggest leaving the books intact and not ripping out the introduction. Yes, it was deceitful for Ray Comfort to not include his name on the cover. However, it would be even more deceitful to tear the introduction out and not allow people to read both sides of the argument. It is a question of freewill. Allow people to read both sides of the argument and make their own decision of who is right and who is wrong. It is not fair to simply make decisions for other people. If you so-called high minded scholars truly believe atheism and darwinism is correct, than allow people to make that decision on their own by giving them choices. To do otherwise would imply that you don’t really believe in darwinism or atheism because you are too scared people might actually believe what the introduction says is true. Now who can argue that point?

  • David

    I think it would be a great idea to hand out copies of the SkepticsAnnotatedBible (with only the words “Holy Bible” on the cover)… what Christian would argue handing out free copies of the bible?

  • http://religiouscomics.net Jeff

    In 50 years, these Ray Comfort editions will be a collector’s item. Get one for your future grandkids. They will marvel at how silly these turn-of-the century Christians were.

  • Amy

    Comfort is sadly behind the times. I’m a graduate student at a top school, and we’ve already received unsolicited anti-evolution literature.

    The Atlas of Creation was printed by Harun Yahya, a Muslim fundamentalist. And yet I really think these two should get together. Now, The Atlas of Creation is a lot more impressive looking than Comfort’s chopped up Origin- it has 840 glossy, 15X11 pages, and weighs 14 pounds. All to tell us what we already know, that the fossil record is not a perfect account of the species on this planet. Which, given the unlikely conditions that must be present for fossils to form, doesn’t seem to surprise anyone but Mr. Yahya, who feels that this proves that evolution is a hoax and Allah is the ultimate Creator.

    We use it as a doorstop.

    Given all they have in common, I don’t understand why there are not more pairings of fundamentalist Christians and Muslims.

    I would like to point out that my lab consists of an atheist, an agnostic, a Mormon, a Catholic (me), and my advisor, who converted 40 years ago from Methodist to Orthodox Jew. We all find no conflict between our work and our personal beliefs.

  • Jimmy

    A few observations:

    If everyone here is so convinced that the still UNPROVEN theory of evolution is truth, then why are you so upset about this? If Darwin was right, is there really a need to tear pages out of books? What about the 1st Amendment?

    After reading some of these comments, I’d also be interested in knowing how many people here have ACTUALLY READ the Bible in its entirety and given serious, objective consideration to both sides of the argument regardless of any previous notions or knowledge you bring to the table.

    I see criticism and joking about a God who is also a Creator that people have faith in, but I marvel that you yourself have put your faith in a process that science can’t prove…yet you claim it as scientific truth that the process brought such a complex and diverse universe into being. Interesting. BTW, if you click on the provided link to the introduction, Comfort specifically says that he is not leaving his name off the book.

    • Atemu1234

      If you believe that bull about evolution being an unproven theory you wouldn’t be believing in the theory of Gravity or the theory of creation as well. Discredit a word it loses meaning in its entirety, as does this wonderful book with that wad of toilet paper in the front of it

  • Thwonk121

    I think it’s telling how atheists tend to compare Darwin’s writings with the Bible. It is after all, their dogma.

    By the way, on the atheist point of view, why is lying wrong?

  • Siamang

    HA! I got one of those new Origin books today from Ray.

    The one he claimed would be unabridged. Liar. It’s missing four chapters!

    By the way, on the atheist point of view, why is lying wrong?

    Because it shows you to be the dick you are. Evolution favored liars being thrown out of the cave by the cavemen who could tell who was stealing the food. Lying is wrong because it harms the group. So the group punishes the liar.

    According to the Christian point of view, why is lying not such a big deal that you actually come on here to defend it?

    Ray Comfort wrote:

    How wonderful that 100,000 students will get a complete copy of Origin of Species with a full color cover.

    “The False Convert said…

    So this won’t be the abridged version that you’ve been hawking at living waters? Will it include Darwin’s introduction? Will you be restoring Chapters 9, 11, 12 and 13, which your website shows are missing?

    Could you please confirm this or admit you’re a admit you’re still lying for Jesus?”

    Comfort:

    False Convert…the entire book. All of it. Every jot and tittle.

    Liar!!!!!

  • Siamang

    Oh, and it also doesn’t include the introduction by Darwin.

    So that’s four chapters and an introduction it’s missing, which makes five lies for Ray.

    Of course, he’s got the “get out of jail free” card for lying, under his religion. Blood of Christ pays for all lies, so he can lie with impunity.

    On page 255 Ray says that the missing chapters can be downloaded at originextra dot com.

    Why not download the whole book at literature dot org??!

    The chapters he’s missing are:

    Chapter 10 – On The Geological Succession of Organic Beings
    Chapter 11 – Geographical Distribution
    Chapter 12 – Geographical Distribution continued
    Chapter 13 – Mutual Affinities of Organic Beings: Morphology: Embryology: Rudimentary Organs

    And also the introduction, and the glossary.

    But what’s really missing is Ray’s honesty here. You know, if you’re releasing an abridged version, just SAY you are. You know we’re going to catch you on it, ray-ray. Who do you think you’re fooling?

    Anyway, it’s isbn 9780882709192, 276 pages. Copyright 2009.

  • Richard Wade

    Who do you think you’re fooling?

    He’s fooling the people who already agree with him. He’s fooling those who only want their present beliefs confirmed, not challenged. He’s fooling those who only will read his introduction, and have no intention of reading even one page of Darwin. He’s fooling those who don’t actually read the Bible, just the parts their pastors tell them to. He’s fooling those who want certainty instead of knowledge.

    In other words, he’s fooling himself.

  • siamang

    But why did he lie on his blog?

  • Siamang

    What I really don’t get is why he lied and emphasized “every jot and tittle” when asked specifically if it would be abridged by the omission of several chapters and the introduction.

    What did he gain from claiming those would be in the volume?

    Why would he lie when he knew the lie would last at best a month before it was found out? What did he gain during that month that wasn’t dashed by yet another confirmation that he’s supremely dishonest?

    Anyway, I was at a swap meet at the Magic Castle, and I saw the books piled up on the table of the “Fellowship of Christian Magicians.” I asked if they were free, and they were. I asked (with barely-contained giddy glee) if they were the Ray Comfort version. They were!

    Collector’s item!!!

    I told my wife that I was disappointed that the “Fellowship of Christian Magicians” were weird extremist Ray Comfort types, and said “why couldn’t they be normal Christians that are a little less hellfire and a bit less science-denying?” She said, that if they were normal magicians who were normal Christians, they wouldn’t be in a group. They’d just be magicians who were also Christians.

    Good point.

  • Richard Wade

    Why would he lie when he knew the lie would last at best a month before it was found out? What did he gain during that month that wasn’t dashed by yet another confirmation that he’s supremely dishonest?

    Siamang, you need to understand his target.

    He’s not lying to people like you and me, he’s lying to the choir. To the hundreds of thousands of people who never check anything out, who listen to what they’re told and never look for themselves, who want to be told the same thing over and over, like a children’s story because they are children emotionally.

    Comfort doesn’t give a damn about people like you and me exposing his lies. Where are they exposed? Here. So what? Members of the choir don’t come here. There’s way too much reading, and they don’t want to bother with that. Most of them won’t even finish reading his 50 pages of guano.

    200 blogs and websites dedicated to proving that Ray Comfort is a lying con artist will have no effect because his followers don’t go there. For them, such lie exposes do not exist.

    Even if some of his lie disciples stumble in here, extremely few will believe you over him, and none, not one of them will go to the library, check out an unabridged copy of The Origin of Species, sit down at a desk with Comfort’s edition and go through the tables of contents side-by-side to see if anything is really missing.

    People who listen to Ray Comfort for more than five minutes never, ever do stuff like that. They’ll believe any lie that lulls them back to sleep, and the ones they heard when they were little work the best.

  • Siamang

    I guess you’re right.

    I can’t think of any other explanation.

  • Nick Fotopoulos

    “(I’m waiting for some atheist to try that tactic — give away free books which say “Holy Bible” on the cover but contain the entire Skeptic’s Annotated Bible on the inside.)”

    Already in the works. Except that there won’t be any trickery. The CD should be clearly labeled to show what they contain. I’ve been working with Steve @ The Skeptics Annotated Bible and Lyz @ Secular Students Alliance to make the CD version available to their affiliate campus groups. With any luck there will be copies of the Skeptics Annotated Bible being distributed on November 19th.

  • Eupraxsophy

    What you could use the first 50 pages for is butt-wipe. That’s right if you run out of toilet paper and have used up the Bible to wipe your ass with and are in a pinch, then there you go. It still can be useful.
    Don’t pollute the air with all that smoke.

  • Chris Diemel

    I got it and Roy’s name is on the cover and no chapters are missing (even the introduction by Darwin is there, and I’m an Evolution and Ecology major. This book doesn’t bother me; I’m actually glad I got a free copy of The Origin of Species. But I am disappointed that you guys are villifying Comfort by making false claims about the edition he put out; how does that elevate your position? It’s also worth noting that every scholarly edition of the bible comes with annontations calling its historical accuracy and origins into question. So, really loosen up.

  • Annonymous

    I just received this copy of the book today and just ripped out the introduction and gave it back to the them.

    It appears to be the Origin of Species in its entirety (except for the illustrations).

    I’m thinking about gluing the remainder of the book onto my copy of The God Delusion so I can get my fix all in one place.

  • Eupraxsophy

    First of all; Happy 150th On the Origins of Species. What is to me the most important book ever written. Charles Darwin was a genious.
    My last post might have been a little extreme, but when someone goes out of their way to disrespect what I belive in, then I think it’s only fair to disrepect what they believe in. If anything it does show just how far some nut-cases will go just to drive their point, even when it’s garbage.

    Banana Man and his side-kick Blunder Boy
    are prime examples of how some people are just plain ignorant. Do they really think that they’re doing their god any justice, by adding deception onto truth? If their god is a god of truth then why resort to deception? Deception dishonors truth.

    What ever a person chooses to believe is their right and I for one shall respect that choice as long as they respect my choice in what I choose to believe in. This is what is known as mutual respect for all.
    It doesn’t mean that you have to like it, but rather just to respect it. Freedom of religion also includes freedom from religion as well.

    Isn’t it ironic that Banana Man is comparing Darwin with Hitler, when Hitler used propaganda to his advantage, just like Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron are doing.
    I bet they didn’t think about that one did they.

    The destination of wisdom and the enlightenment of truth is traveled down the path of humility.

  • Nathan

    I was given this book by a man today walking to class and I was delighted to see Charles Darwin entitled upon the cover. I skimmed the back and cover and started to read the 50 pg.”Special Introduction by Ray Comfort”. I was very interested for the first 15 or so pages but soon I realized that I had been tricked into reading this garbage. This introduction alone proved to be one of the most biased schemed propaganda and I feel dumbfounded for even reading Comforts naive approach of falsifying Mr. Darwin’s work. His intro is not fooling anyone, I knew there had to be some kind of catch to this free book.

  • http://www.scribd.com/doc/22624278/Darwigin-of-Specieshttp:// IanB

    I have written a page-by-page counter essay to Comfort’s introduction. It is guaranteed to be both funnier and more factual. If you got a copy of his book, please check out my essay.

    Darwigin of Species

  • Eupraxsophy

    In response to Chris Diemel,

    What the f*ck are you talking about?
    Roy who? Do you mean Ray? As in Ray Comfort?

    Am I to believe that you are the only person on this entire blog that got a version of Comfort’s book that isn’t missing any chapters of On the Origins of Species including the introduction?

    So you’re an evolution and ecology major. What school do you attend? The school of FOOLS?

    So what historical accuracies are there in the Bible? Like a witness that was there when God created Heaven and Earth? These so called biblical scholars think it was Moses. So am I to believe that Moses was there as a witness when God created Heaven and Earth? Why not Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny? There are some questions that can’t be answered because it contradicts itself. Like how can it be a testimony without an actual witness?

    Here is something for you to think about truth.
    Knowledge and wisdom are the subjects to the nobility of truth, so if thy caution thyself not to be the FOOL yet thy have a boastful tongue, then let it be that which rest upon thy head the Crown of Truth. For the integrity of the wise is found in truth, so where shall it be found in that of the FOOL? And this above all things to thy own self be true.

    Truth has no weakness and integrity is it’s strength.

  • Bolero

    I read an interesting quote in the National Geographic the other day. “There used to be just one kind of a pollen, then ONE DAY thousands evolved.” I started laughing to myself. “One day they just evolved into something more complex?” I don’t know. Seems like a lot of smart people are parking their common sense in a long-term parking lot. There has to be some positive creative element involved here. How can things just get smarter and better without being programmed, designed or crafted by someone.

  • Eupraxsophy

    Here’s an even funnier one Bolero.

    I was reading this book that says Old Testiment implying testimonies from witnesses and in the first part it says “In the beginning God CREATED Heaven and Earth”, and my thought was; who is the witness to this event? Was it Moses that wrote the Torah? How can it be a testimony if you don’t have a witness?
    How can anyone know for certain that is how we came to be?

    And as far as Intelligent Design goes, it was proven to be a hoax in a supreme court of law in Dover Pennsylvania to be a substituted name for creationism.

    I laugh when some people believe that they were created or designed.

    Where’s your proof?

  • Anonymous

    Does this mean there are going to be 50 page introductions to books on geology? Brian

  • Jack Hansen

    As a good skeptic, I want to see the book for myself. Where can I find a copy of the “revised” Origin of the Species? I respect your approach to this constroversy!

  • JustSayin

    If you want to be so accurate, you shouldn’t manipulate pictures. It clearly says on the cover “special introduction by Ray Comfort” right under the “150th anniversary edition”. It says it on the book I bought (not even knowing who ray comfort is) and on various pictures of the book online.  It is just sorry and ironic to rant about manipulation when it has so obviously been done right in your article here. 

  • John Smith

    An anonymous “guest” engages in ad hominem lying about the targets of their ad hominem. I suppose that makes the “guest” a hypocrite too. Another stone thrower living in a glass house. Nothing more.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X