Added: 4 years ago
From: godbegone
Views: 10,411
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (423)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • It's scary to see how many are dumb enough to claim that "evolution is in question", that it's "not proven", when there is massive amounts of evidence supporting it, that it HAS been proven to occur, and that there is zero evidence at all for any "creation".

    Arguments from ignorance only make you look ignorant. A quick search will reveal to you the reams and reams of evidence for evolution.Try actually looking, instead of being proud of your ignorance. You're an embarrassment to your species.

  • Anyone should be able to deny a theory without ridicule. He didn't deny the law. The theory is unproven, so what’s wrong with him not accepting it? Not accepting common theories is how we make breakthroughs in science. He also said creationists don't have absolute proof either. Who cares if he doesn't accept the theory? Like he said, Its not a political issue. There is a separation of church and state and he respects that. I'm sure he wont make creationism our national theory of existence.

  • I didn't see him deny evolution. The current theory is in question... which is true and loogical.

    He also mentions: At this point in history, there isn't absolute truth on either side. To deny science is to deny god and vice versa. :D

    Praise Jesus! He makes my tacos!!!

  • It's a THEOLOGICAL discussion! At this point in America, there are bigger problems facing us than "Ron Paul doesn't support evolution".

  • I disagree with ron paul about the evolution but i greatly respect his answer. he distanced himself from the idea of evolution entirely. we need more of that in public office. stop letting politicians make scientific decisions. It's not their area of knowledge.

  • @DrNHand1994 They will always have experts in their fields advising them. How you could assume that having a scientifically illiterate president is better then a scientifically literate president is beyond me.

  • @xythx No one wants a scientific president, there hasn't been one since Jefferson. I don't think Ron Paul is as stupid as he makes himself seem in this video, he must realize that he has 0% chance unless he applies to Christian stupidity. Pathetic, but true.

  • @xythx I'm just working with what we have already got. Most politicians do not have any type of scientific or medical background. If they recognize that and don't make decisions based on their poor understanding, it's ok. Of course I would rather all politicians be scientifically literate but that is pretty unrealistic... especially for republicans

  • This is why I do not like or support Ron Paul. Many people say that Ron Paul is one of the few honest politicians in the USA but I don't buy it. How can you be a practicing physician yet deny the theory of evolution? You cant, and this is a pathetic stage by Dr. Paul.

  • You're a fucking doctor, you moron! A doctor of medicine! Your job is to understand (human) biology... How the -fuck- did you pass the MCATs and the fucking national certification boards? Dumbass.mother.fuckers!

  • The theory of evolution is a Theological question, he said?

    This is what the nutjob over and over shows he is wrong on everything.

  • It is a THEORY. Ok ?

    ALL scientists will tell you that any theorie can be proven wrong, in fact it is one of the major reasons for why many scientists who used to be atheist start to believe in religion.

    It could be proven wrong at any time since it is a THEORY.

    Just like God is. Or gravity or whatever else.

    Theories have become widely accepted and then refuted MANY times before.

    (I think it's a good theory by the way!)

  • Its called playing the fence you fucks. whens the last time you heard of a presidential candidate thats atheist? You can't win without getting the vote of the jesus lovers.

  • "It is best to be silent and be thought dumb, than to speak and remove all doubt"

    -Abraham Lincoln

  • This is the only time I have heard someone dismiss the theory of evolution in a completely sensible and fair-minded way. Even with the scientific facts that are present today the story is still incomplete. The theory of evolution cannot be accepted as the concrete truth. History shows that science has been wrong in the past, in fact, in the 5,000 years of RECORDED history we have been wrong MUCH more than we have been correct. Skepticism and freedom of speech are invaluable. Ron Paul 2012!

  • @ch09h Will you please jump off a bridge and test the theory of gravity? You know, just to be skeptical...

  • @ch09h

    Your right Science has been wrong but science moves forwards and then corrects theories that are wrong untilo they are right! you dont see religion doing that, do you?

  • I'm mighty glad to find a good solid reason for not voting for Ron Paul. He's a deluded person. He may be a closet atheist, but as long as he plays to religion addicted folks I sure won't vote for him. Religion is comforting and crippling.

  • @lancethrustworthy Nice try. Fail.

  • Not everyone is a scientist or needs to give a crap about the theory of evolution. The general known idea of evolution, is man evolved from apes, and that is not a fact and is still not proven. Saying he's saying this to pander to some group is just stupid.

  • @TrippingTheTube I guess you don't agree with or benefit from modern medicine. The likes of which, Biology, Chemistry and Physics makes possible to extend your average lifespan beyond the 35 years we as homo sapiens (or at least some of us fall into the "thinking ape" category) were statistically bound to not long ago. Without the "theory" of evolution, there is** no Biology, etc. Heres' hoping your prayers aren't answered with, "No."

  • @basquino You can't possibly believe modern medicine and our extended life span is credited to the theory of evolution. That's beyond ridiculous.

  • There is no doubt that men and animals evolved from cruder forms. Everyone knows this. But the extent of it and the connotations people place with it is THEORY.

  • This guy is also against the separation of church and state and women's rights to choose.

  • @nhteaparty

    Evolution is the foundation of modern biology. It doesn't really matter WHAT the president believes, sure - but a president who doesn't believe in a scientific consensus is an illogical man. It's like a president who doesn't believe in electromagnetism.

  • Why even bother with it when it is something we cannot prove or disprove??

  • @nhteaparty

    Evolution IS falsifiable. That means it can both be shown to be true or to be false via objected scientific empirical evidence. It is widely accepted in the scientific community and is as much a theory as the theory of gravity -- in colloquial terms it is a fact.

    What can not be proven or disproven is the existence of a creator; but evolution says nothing about this.

  • For the sake of argument let's say that the theory of evolution is totally false as it stands today. Does that mean that evolution is not happening right now to every living thing? Of course not. It's like saying the rock that hit me came from the left. If it really somehow came from the right, does that mean that the EVENT of me being hit by a rock did not happen????

  • Scientifically we know you can't get something from nothing,

    Scientifically we know you can NOT go back in time far enough eternally to get to the 1st day to complete it to get to the 2nd day, & this is a Paradigm problem for Atheist & evolutionary theory, Plus the fossil record is NOT at all even close to what would be found IF evolution were true, which would be a more evenly spread out metaphorically speaking find of each species & Not just find all fossils at the same stage per creature

  • @ncwdane This is some deep, strong stuff. You should think of selling it to organic farmers. With shit that strong you'd make a bundle.

  • He believes in evolution, he just can't say it because all the old conservative christian fundies won't vote for him if he does.

  • Professor told me this story. This is why I don't put much faith in science either. Scientist does experiment on frog. He puts frog down on table and yells "jump frog" the frog jumps. So he goes back and cuts one leg off of the frog sets him on table again and yells "jump frog" frog weak from wound obeys still and jumps. Now he decides to take other leg off. "jump frog" he says. Nothing, jump I say. Still nothing. His conclusion is. Frogs with no legs are def.

  • this coming from a medical doctor who has a degree in biology and eventually became a medical doctor?

  • @Dpesh7 He is not the exception, but a rule. Most doctors are theists. How they can reconcile their belief with being confronted with contrary evidence daily boggles my mind. The talking ape is indeed adapt at self delusion.

  • You have to take the good with the bad. Ron Paul as a politician brings way more good than bad. If he were presidend he would never force his view on anyone.

  • He walked away from that question with a really good political reply. One that doesn't really burn bridges on either side.He is going for the conservative party where a big majority are scientific retards. You know he can't say he believes in evolution because of the party he is in.

  • That baby at the end is like "Nooo! Nooo more! Shut the old fool up!"

  • I've always liked Ron Paul, though never thought his political ideas were very practical. Now after seeing this video I think I can sort of see that impractical ideas are something he gravitates toward.

  • @LeLimeLine Oh come on. I am one of the most outspoken atheists, but even I can see that your "observation" is bunk. His ideas are ahead of time, that's all, they might be impractical for the current lot of ignorant people. Hopefully the future will be more inspired with moral foundation instead of only "what's in it for me short-term" mentality.

  • @ericDouglace Does it matter what liars what you think, because it is hard to determine whether you are making a genuine opinion or just going on another random trolling spree

  • Luckily his views on evolution is really not relevant.

  • I still support his platform.

  • Cause of all that bullshit a baby started crying. Shame on you Ron Paul.

  • Reading these comments attacking Paul for his answer is insane. Ron Paul has a PHD. He is a medical doctor. He has the right to his opinions on evolution. Evolution has not been proven. I believe in evolution but it cant be proved because it takes thousands of years to observe it. None of you have even spoke to the man and you call him stupid? I can settle with less intelligent people but hypocrites make me want to slap somebody.

  • @Jononutoob Evolution has been proven to the same degree as gravity. We use a theory to describe the fact of evolution just as we use a theory to describe the fact of gravity and all facts. In the scientific sense, the word "theory" refers to an explanation of observable events. Evolution HAS been observed both on the "micro" and "macro" scales. If Ron Paul doesn't understand evolution, he is very stupid to say that no one knows. He should've been honest and said he's ignorant on the topic.

  • @BelligerentAtheist

    You sound very similar to those people who go around and try to make religious people look stupid. He has his beliefs. But to call a medical doctor who is quite intelligent in things that matter a stupid person is hypocritical. Your just another person who thinks they know everything but deep down you cant know for sure. World is full of people like you, you arent helping anyone by calling this man stupid.

  • @Jononutoob

    "and try to make religious people look stupid. He has his beliefs. "

    No one has to do that, religious people already do it on their own.

    And any doctor that doesn't accept the cornerstone of modern biology, is a doctor I would want no one in the family to go to, in any circumstances.

  • @mecher3k You won't have much of a pick then. Most doctors are theists. Good luck finding a good one that's in the US.

  • @grumpone 'most doctors are theists" can you state a source or poll for that assertion or are you pulling that out of your ass?

  • @grumpone

    "Most doctors are theists. "

    Most theists accept evolution.

    Retard.

  • @BelligerentAtheist DNA has never been made or created from Non-Dna, yet we have millins of plants/mammals/fishes & insects that exist, & your saying it all happened by chance or is dirt smarter than humans who's chemical make-up BTW is pretty much just dirt, plus all fossils found are always the same medimorphically as all the others found of its Kind, Example(9-archeoptrix/25-t-rex­es etc) that would be impossible if there had been a gradual evolving of each creature, (impossible odds even)

  • @ncwdane i suggest you check the latest findings. RNA the transcriber for DNA has been seen "created" out of chemicals and temperatures of developing earth. and what is your definition of 'Kind"? typical ID crap. thats what evolution is taking existing stuf and changing it and gradually over generations adapting to environments. Thats why humans have the bones and muscles for a tail and chicken have dna to make teeth.

  • @philosophyman76 "Kind" biology 101, ya know, the Dog family, which would include Woves, elepant family, Horses would include donkeys & Mules, but you cant breed a dolhine & a Donkey because they are different families, & Dogs are all equally evolved weather it be a Great Dane or a Cha wah wah, yet we never find the gratdual transitional forms leading up to todays Dogs, No 70% or 80% or 81 % -90% or 95% evolved, No obvious watertite finds in the 50% -99% range which should outnumber whats found

  • @ncwdane yeah sorry biology books use words like species, genus, kingdom, etc. Never saw a "KIND". If you want to know the evolution of dogs. Here's a simple video explaining where there "Kind" came from.

    youtube . com/watch?v=bJ-DawQKPr8

  • @Jononutoob you can't prove anything! except mathematics. gravity is a theory, cell theory, germ theory, etc. Having a PH.D and being a doctor has nothing to do with understanding evolution. If someone has a PH.D in economics does that mean he can do your taxes? No, different subject. i am a HUGE Ron Paul supporter but on this point he is wrong and it's very dangerous for people in charge to not understand the theory of evolution. would you want kids taught that gravity may or may not be true?

  • @philosophyman76

    For people to say Ron Paul cant be president because he isnt sure about evolution is insane. And exactly how does evolution have anything to do with people in charge? Is a bill going to come across his desk that is designed to legalize evolution? If Paul was running for president of a scientific institute then I would have different feelings but he isnt. Evolution is not fully understood.

  • @Jononutoob first off again NOTHING is fully understood. However there is more evidence for the theory of evolution then there is for the theory of gravity. Of course most people don't know this . BECAUSE WE DON"T EDUCATE PEOPLE PROPERLY. When 100% of the scientific community say this is how science works it's kinda important that the president of out country listens. Science is what gave us all our power and might. First to the moon, flight, TV, lightbulbs. evolution is science

  • @philosophyman76

    what is important is not beliefs its freedom to have them ... ron paul understands you dont

  • @romeoneverdies you do understand that what you said is your BELIEF. and the believes someone has effects their decisions. so for the president to not believe in a scientific fact will influence his decisons. You can be free to believe whatever you want. i agree but there are such things as facts. you can beleive that gravity is a made up thing. thats fine I don't want that beleive taught to children. would you vote for someone who thought gravity wasn't real???

  • @philosophyman76 Most everyone is indocrinated w/ evolutionary teachings & yet over 1/2 the population can see its (BS) even a lotta scientist who had to go along w/ it to get their degrees as technoligy increases are seeing that it is false , but any professors who say this loose there jobs & ya cant get a Job at a university if you dont teach it , so the Bias runs rampid though evidence is simply not there

  • @ncwdane half the population of who? people who don't understand what evolution is or how it works? Evolution has more evidence then gravity. Independent areas of science all confirm evolution. DNA, embrology, fossil record, etc all come up with the exact same evolutionary tree. If someone could prove evolution wrong they would get a nole prize. It's not a "conspiracy". It's called all the evidence points in that direction so its accepted. learn how it works then critizie.

  • @philosophyman76 You been brainwashed, the fossil record doesnt have near the gradual incline of metamorphosis that would found & obvious IF evolution were true, in fact just the fact that every species found, the next fossil is the same as the 1st is 100 to one shot if evolution was true, I mean why isnt the 1st find at stage 7 or 5(50% evolved) etc. if we find 9 archeoptrix at stage 7 , we should find on average 9 at atsge 7.1 & 9 at stage 7.2 & 7.3 on up to 8.9 & 9.0, in other words 90% evol.

  • @ncwdane if you want I can also direct you pubmed where you can give them the genetic markers of any "kind' and they will send you back the genetic background and show you the mutations that occurred to create that new species. you can trace ANYTHING with DNA. plants or animals. You do know that they use evolution to accurately predict where and what strata of rock they should look in to find a particular fossil tha should have lived at a certain time because its between 2 other species.

  • @philosophyman76 EVERY Fossil found is like finding a 10 in a deck of cards for EVERY species, 9 archeoptrix/25 or so T-rexes , millions of trillobites, the evolution model should have on average an equal amount at each atage like a deck of cards 1-9 less evolved & J/Q/K more evolved, whats the chances we always find the most evolved 1st & never more evolved later & all at the same stage !? 1-5 is not watertite or obcvious to say,but if you draw 9-10's you should draw about 100 5-9 at least 40 ?

  • @ncwdane I don't understand what the hell your talking about and I'm not wasting brain cells on trying to decipher all of that. Let me answer by saying this. Do you think fossils are the only evidence of evolution? It's actually the hardest evidence to use because there are so little fossils. Genetics is much better and since you are soo knowledgable about this what about African Wild Dogs. They are a "dog" yet can't mate with domesti dogs and did not come from wolves.

  • @philosophyman76 Your Spiritually Blind to the truth, typical evolutionist, change the subject when the most basic, most obvious thing that should be "Aint" then just change the subject, I got two decks of cards, on is the model for Creation (ALL 10's) the other is the Model for evolution, a regular deck of cards , hearts at archeoptrix, diamonds are t-rexes & whatever the other two, yet we still get all 10's (the creation madel) if the evolution model was true, you'd draw equal 5's 7' 9' & Q's

  • @ncwdane hahaha. "you call me changing the subject and then want to make this ridiculous card analogy. Evolution is not a deck of cards. evolution is called science and creation is called magic. I've never seen magic happen I have seen science work over and over again.

    Did you wathc the aronra video. Nope. You know why because facts and logic kill religion dead. i had no problem watching that nonsense you told me too and it took 2 minutes in to see all the crap in it.

  • @philosophyman76 The Card analogy or Parable if you will was not changing the subject, it was demonstrating the Rediculas odds of the law of averages that would have to be taking place for Evolution to be true, as for Magic, think what you believem that Life came from Dirt(out known chemicl make-up) & that Lifeless dirt would be smart enough to make all these lifeforms & in a manner that can dublicate itself, & HAVE A HOLLOWGRAM WE CALL IMAGINATION, dirt aint that smrt, even new plantlifes Notta

  • @ncwdane most likely life started in the water. If I recall Adam was formed from dirt. So now that you have had ample time to watch the vid i asked you to watch about the evolution of canines I have heard nothing. i watched a bunch of your creationist nonsense and have told you the problem with it. Which of course you don't address DNA at all. which I have told about 4 times. and you havent told me what is wrong with aronra vid about the evolution of dogs. Again intellectually dishonest

  • @philosophyman76 there you go again, wrong about things, geeee, ya cant even get the basics, I DID watch the video you suggested (of course you wouldnt know you wernt there nor researched the facts or looked for the evidence) I made a comment on it in that Forum, DNA is everywhere but has NEVER EVER been created in a labortory in our time nor has it suddenlt appeared a new lifeform or plantlife, yet millions if not billions exist & the obvious conclusion is God, DNA requires 2 sides btw

  • @ncwdane and what does that have to do with the evolution of dogs? your full of crap. The vid I told you to watch doesnt talk about DNA so there is the "evidence" its a simple explanation of the canine evolutionary tract. I thought you were not supposed to give false witness. There is no video (that I know of) that talks about the abiogenisis of RNA but since you "wrote in the forum" of that vid please tell me which one that is bc i'd like to watch it. I don't hv enough time to teach u science

  • @philosophyman76 ou brought up RNA & had tied it in w/ DNA Earlier as you were changing subjects cause you'll lose the fossil debate, You gave me the site for the video moron, Did you watch the video I sent you, it goes over the Lack of fossils of Dogs, abiogenisis does NOT create life at all, merely building blocks to life, sorta like protiens are like taking dirt & pulling out Iron, that doesnt make the Locomotive or the Car, its just the material DNA the blueprint uses, not DNA or assemblers

  • @ncwdane again with the fossils. Do you know that if there was no fossil record at all. Not one fossil in existence evolution would be true based an all the evidence. The dog lines were not based solely on fossil evidence. they are based upon DNA evidence. And as stated the African Wild "Dog" is the same "KIND" as domestic dogs but they can't mate and they aren't descended from wolves. so how do you explain that. God dun it.

  • @ncwdane 2ndly life comes from the building blocks. You tell me a lifeform that has no DNA and I will shut down my channel. Your anologies are so assinine it borders on moronic. . But Iron is raw material, like Carbon and oxygen, DNA is like the plan a blueprint. and RNA transcribes the proteins or materials into usable parts. I'm sorry I can't explain to you cellular biology in a comment. you might want to learn how science works b4 you try and rail against it.

  • @ncwdane I'm done explaining things to you. go watch your propaganda videos form the 1970's that have all been proven false in court, in tests, and in debate. All fossils are transitions. you want us to find a fossil of every generation of evry animal and plant that has ever lived on the planet and that is impossible. if you want to be ignorant then I can't help you. evolution is verified independantly by 10 different fields of science. You choose to beleive 2000 year old fairy tales. go ahead

  • @philosophyman76 Yes, DNA is in all Lifeform & never has been replicated in a laboratory, Building Blocks is the materials Lifeforms are made of such as us who are water & dirt, water & dirt are not lifeforms by themselves minus DNA, youd think w/ all the Lifeforms that have formed according to evollutionist w/o Intelegent intervebtin, we could reproduce it in a Lab w/ intelegent intervention, but it's to complex but you believe wet Dirt did it on its own,your narrow minded not seeing other side

  • @ncwdane

    DNA has been replicated many times. Scientists have even produced a complete genome and they put it into a cell which subsequently began to live. Search "synthetic cell".

    We are not made from dirt, only the bible says so. We are made from the three particles everything is made of: protons, electrons and neutrons.

    Please just watch the featured video on cdk007's channel. Educate yourself.

  • @Quintinohthree we are to made from Dirt, ! what did you eat this week, if eggs, the eggs came from a chicken that ate seed that came from grain that came from DIRT, anything you eat can be traced back to Dirt/Soil !!!

    did you eat fruit, well fruit came from a tree thats roots got it's minerals from DIRT !

    dont discount ANYTHING the bible says, cience has always had to update it's views,

    The Bible never has had to update & has always been right ! Stars & shape of earth for instance

  • @Quintinohthree "The very best Miller-Urey chemistry, as we have seen, does not take us very along the path to a living organism. A mixture of simple chemicals, even one enriched in a few amino acids, no more resembles a bacterium than a small pile of real and nonsense words, each written on an individual scrap of paper, resembles the complete works of Shakespeare."

    Dr. Robert Shapiro (Noted Chemist and Evolutionist).

    If I put together some doorknobs I havent created the whole office building

  • @ncwdane

    "did you eat fruit, well fruit came from a tree thats roots got it's minerals from DIRT !"

    Have you ever noticed you don't have to add any soil to a plant pot over time? Or at least, The dirt is not being consumed, only the molecules dissolved in the water in the soil.

    So the bible is right about the shape of the earth? Tell that the square earth society. Or do you actually think the earth is square?

    Dr Shapiro is correct. There are better experiments than Miller-Urey though.

  • @Quintinohthree Dirt is made from Molecules, & If you plant a tree seed in a lil pot of dirt sat the size of something between a softball & a basketball, surely eventually you will have to transplant it to a bigger pot cause NOT ENOUGH MINERALS in the smaller pot, & yeah Dirt & water, pure water in an isolated environment has not & will not suddenly start creating life, the bibles never said the world is flat, or square like a square Box, it says its round or a sphere always has !!!

  • @ncwdane

    So what dirt is made of molecules. It's not made of the molecules needed for life, not even the atoms needed for life. There is oxygen and carbon in abundance in the atmosphere and hydrogen and oxygen as well as many ions in water.

    Please show me one verse from which I can conclude that the writer of any part of the bible thought the earth was a sphere, the square earth society has many verses to conclude the opposite for another part of the bible. Always been right ey?

  • @Quintinohthree (Isaiah 40:22) There is One who is dwelling above the circle of the earth...

    (Job 26:7) He is stretching out the north over the empty place, Hanging the earth upon nothing;

    Also speaking of Rapture were one person is taken & the other is left, it gives 3 scenarios of two people & at the twinkling of an Eye(instantly) ones taken & the other left, & in the 3 scenarios, each pair is doing something at a different time of day, though all 3 are taken at the same moment GET IT

  • @ncwdane

    The square earth society has another explanation for Isaiah 40:22 which to me is equally likely. More importantly, a sphere isn't a circle.

    And why are you even starting about the rapture.

  • @Quintinohthree Theres other woords in hebrew for flat or disk, draw a triangle a square & a circle on a piece of paper, a 2nd grder can tell youbwhich one is the shape ofr the earth, a square box is 3 demintional, Square earth society, hahahahahahahaha , common man, I cant wait to see you explain this one to God, "OK Gabriel, put up a picture of Earth, lemme see a show of hands, How many say its a square, how many say its a circle that HANGS ON NOTHING, LOL

  • @ncwdane

    But you do not deny that the verses that the square earth society uses to justify their position (what am I saying, it's satirical) say what they claim them to say. You said the bible has never been wrong when it so obviously does.

    And still, a circle is no sphere, a square box doesn't exist and the bible has been wrong on many occasions.

  • @Quintinohthree Theres another word for flat & disc

    some translations do translate the word used as Sphere, some translaters choose to use the word round,

    what it surely does NOT say; is that the world is flat, which you seem to want to tell God he meant, which he obviously didnt

  • @ncwdane

    But those other verses do say it's square don't they? At least all put together. And none of them even hint roundess.

  • @Quintinohthree The Part about Rapture, is How did the author back in those days know that all people caught up in rapture could be at different times of the day, unless God was devinely letting him know its possible because the worlds Big & round & can have morning noon & night going on all at the same time

  • @ncwdane

    Or he just made it all up.

  • don't suppose you watched that video huh. That will gladly answer everything you want to know about dog/canine/wolves "kind" I'm sure you wan't waste you time actually learning about what your claiming.

  • @philosophyman76 You been Duped, checjk this out

    youtube.com/watch?v=U8W88otaPe­U

  • @ncwdane i'll watch yours and you watch mine and we'll see.

    youtube.com/watch?v=bJ-DawQKPr­8

  • @ncwdane dude I'm sorry your so misguided. I just watched this video. Its typical creation crap. No Transitional forms. EVERY FOSSIL IS A TRANSITIONAL FORM. thats like me taking a picture of you at 3 and then another pic of you at 10 and you saying that's impossible they are different people how can the 3yr old turn into the 10 yr old. then I show you a picture of you at 7. THen you say well thats just another thing and now you have a gap btwn 3-7 and 7 -10. it's nonsense

  • @ncwdane haha i would have straightened that guy who posted that junk vid but of course with all creationists he has to approve the comments and only approves those who agree. Weak. Sorry your lost in the world of junk science and religion

  • wow, and this genius is running for a political post in our government

    its only a theory, like gravity, or how the earth is round, or how the earth revolves around the sun, or how a baby is born, etc.

    why dont atheists just say "we have had enough" and make our own country devoid of this stupidity

  • Stupid.

  • This may be a scientific question, but it's point is to address the nominee's level of intellect. As we learned from the W, it's not a good idea to elect an idiot to office.

  • I was a little surprised at this until I took the time to listen to his response and in summary he thinks that it's an inappropriate question to base the presidency on. To give weight to his opinion (a politician not scientist, though he's a Dr.) would empower politicians in general to become experts in any debated scientific field.

  • He address' evolution as a theory that he doesn't accept. You have the right to deny any theory as they are just a synthesis of hypotheses that answer why something happens. He doesn't accept evolution as the answer as to why we are what we are. I believe in evolution, but, I also know it is not a scientific LAW (there's a big difference law and theory).

  • =( <--- my face after seeing this.

  • This is why Nader is better than Paul

  • . The known universe 14,000,000,000 BCE . Earth 5,000,000,000 BCE . Homo sapiens
300,000 BCE . Fire (applied)
200,000 BCE . The underlying law of nature (discovered & applied) 2003 CE .
  • ron paul is a jesus freak idiot who doesn't understand scientific theory.

  • That was a disappointment and rather surprised when learned this about him.

  • FUCK RON :(

    Damnit... oh well - as long as he understand the separation of the church and state.

  • Wow... yet another reason for libertarians not to support Ron Paul. He is ignorant about science.

  • I think most libertarians are science illiterate

  • @fsx23 does it matter if they are?

  • @edgehead31593 Yeah is they try to regulate what is taught in schools

  • bush cant even say his ABC's

    ron paul doesnt want to seem biased to his supporters he is stuck between a rock and a hard place

  • Pandering to right-wing morons. Shame on you!

  • Please dont think it's the jew's fault. You can't blame a whole group of people for these actions. A lot of blame is pinned on Zionists but in fact Zionism is just an arm of the NWO. It's all about creating scapegoats and making the truth almost impossible to discover. Placing blame causes anger. Don't fuel the fire.

  • I WOULD say that Ron Paul lost my vote, but he never had it to begin with.

    "NWO CFR blah blah blah..."

  • shame on the Homo sapiens...that will destroy himself with lies...hey wake up ppl, just search for scientific evidence of human evolution...search ATAPUERCA in spain and you will find a link to evolution...go to a pleistocene excavation with human fossiles and open ure eyes! i just cant bealive that some ppl still think we were created by some superior force! well...with the education some have, for sure they will think the way THEY want u to think so...good luck!

    Evolution...not creation!

  • PHAIL

    This guy is an idiot.

  • No matter how cute Ron Paul is, Ideology always trumps reason.

    What is more incredible is that thin man at one point was a practicing medical doctor.

    The man is simple and wingnut crackpot.

  • It is still a theory and so is pangea.

  • "it's just a theory" AAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRGHH !!!!

    when do you fucking retards learn what the word theory means in science FFS

  • Well, I suppose Ron Paul is not perfect after all.

    However, like he says, evolution is not a very important issue as far as government is concerned.

    That said, I would still support him for presidency, even if he holds completely different beliefs in regards to religion and science.

  • I'm shocked. Utterly shocked.

    I liked Ron Paul too.... Damn.

    I'm definitely bringing this up next time I hear someone toting Ron Paul.

    And if he is just catering to less than intelligent Christians that only shows he doesn't have much in the way of a backbone.

    Believe whatever you want, but if your going to be in charge of me you damn well better be more intelligent than me. Believing the world is 6,000 years old (even partially) is a clear indicator he is either unintelligent or ignorant.

  • Well, he didn't say he believed the world is 6000 years old.

    I'd go with him being ignorant about the science, with a combination of his background.

    And he was right that is *IS* a scientific theory.

    Anyway, it's not like we haven't had presidents that denied evolution before.

  • Creationism is not a theory- it's a crackpot fantasy

  • I never said it was a theory. Also, I never even mentioned the word creationism in my post...I was talking about evolution.

  • I must have misread- my apologies

  • @leppy111

    who says creationism and evolution are mutually exclusive?

  • @leppy111 ~ Put your money where you mouth is !

    I bet the next archeoprix found is the same as the privious 9 found

    (Not more evolved orless evolved) oddsshouldbe 1000 toone in your favor (IF) evolution was true.

    I bet the same w/ the 20some T-Rexes found,all as if drawing a 10 outta a deck of cards everytime !

    No 1-9 gradual evolving & No j/Q/K more evolved,allthe same, I will bet you cause I KNOw THE FOSSIL RECORD FITS THE CREATIONMODEL 100% ,(ur the crackpot if lifeless dirt created life)

  • Ron Paul is an ignorant FOOL.

  • As an atheist, I am an avid believer in the theory of evolution. But Ron's first statement is that of fact. The presidency should not be decided on the basis of personal or religious beliefs. I really don't think it is an appropriate question to ask and I feel that he can believe whatever he wants to, it won't change how I believe or even make me question that which I support.

  • Jake are you being sarcastic?

    Freedom of beliefs and opinions is great but we cant allow scientifically ignorant people to rule over us.

    Our children need to understand that not all beliefs are Equally valid.

    If some one wants to believe that the earth is flat ok, but they shouldn't be allowed to teach the next generation that the spherical earth theory that scientists "believe" in is not true.

  • Unless you want the next generation of people to be scientifically ignorant our politicians need to be asked important questions. And if they give ridiculous nonsense answers we need to take that into account when in the voting booth!

  • I like your answer, disagreement but respectful... ! I believe in creationism, but think that evolution has occured amongst the different species... I think the better way to put it is natural selection... We see it every night when we go out to the bar, with girls selecting men, with virus mutating, however, just as the flu doesn't morph into HIV, and HIV doesn't morph into cancer, I believe that God, did set it in motion.We are getting, bigger, smarter, faster and living longer as a result...

  • "HIV doesn't morph into cancer"

    To make a statement like this you would have to make a further statement like this,

    "I believe in creationism"

    "living longer as a result"

    Living longer has little to do with evolution. Living longer is a direct result of modern medicine, in fact you could almost say the reverse is true. We will be living shorter due to evolution, in response to drug resistance bacterium.

  • My analogy is correct, because it is implying that just as humans adapt, as virus do, so do other species... But I am making the argument that just as one strain of disease doesn't morph into another, neither does a bird morph into a human... There is some evidence that we came from monkey's, although I have a hard time believing that the number of chromosomes have been morphed... we see what happens to humans with one too few or too many...

  • Your analogy is terribly inaccurate. HIV is a virus while cancer is a misconstrued genetic mutuation from within the own body. Of course cancer can't MORPH into HIV. It is just nonsensical.

    Yes, strains of viruses do mutuate quite rapidly. This is the reason why the flu is annual and why we have to update our vaccines so frequently. No, sadly, birds didn't morph into humans, the last ancestor we shared with birds was probably 310 million yrs ago

  • That's a HORRIBLE statement.

    You're right a bird doesn't turn into a whale. Humans are part of the great ape family, meaning we ARE great apes

    Creationist ask things like "If we evolved than why don't babies turn into monkeys?" And i have trouble answering this because I'm so staggered by their general lack of knowledge about evolution.

    Seriously. Read a book on evolution and you'll release why saying "That can't turn into that, so evolution is false" is the worst statement ever

  • I studied under a professor Savisky at Pitt, who as he said is an evolutionist who believes that God set in motion... He said that it is more probable that God set it in motion than to believe that we came from a primortial soup... All of the tests he conducted and observed produced one combustion of bacteria which eventually died... He also concluded the perfection and degree's of consequence for slight changes prove to him that it involed a hand of God... he attempted to rationalize the two...

  • So you've studied biology and evolution and yet you still stated that since HIV doesn't turn into something else, evolution isn't true. If you studied evolution than you either made this statement knowing it was ignorant or you didn't study evolution enough.

    Evolution doesn't magically poof one species into another. Every species is the same as it was billions of year ago, but more evolved, and the mutations from the evolution caused the species to branch out into different kingdoms.

  • Evolution began once Amino acids were formed. Amino acids form from the right conditions, earth had the right conditions, earth began about 4,485,500,000 years after the big bang. What came before the big bang? The singularity. What came before that? No one knows

  • "HIV doesn't morph into cancer."

    Classic haha

  • do you know anything about science? I thought so. Shut the fuck up noob. Stick to reading People magazine.

  • may be God caused it the big bag

  • Christ, I hate this guy. Just another fevered ego attacking our subconscious. No substance except what people put into him.

  • And this is the point when I realized Ron Paul wasn't as wise as we had thought. Very sad.

  • How is his answer not a wise one? Research the evolution debate, the issue is controversial because it can't be proven. There are many gray areas/missing pieces. Doesn't mean it's NOT true, doesn't mean there isn't plenty of evidence to support it, but it's yet to be PROVEN. That's all he said.

    Besides, even if you disagree, Paul isn't the type of person to force a school into teaching the exact view that he holds, he's able to separate the two things. So it really shouldn't matter anyway.

  • There is NO debate! Zero! Zip! Nada! None! Zilch! There isn't a single biologist on the planet that doesn't accept evolution.

    The debate only exists between educated people, and idiots.

    I like most of what Paul stands for... but when someone says something this batshit crazy I have to step back and say "whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa???"

  • I used to think that creationists were nuts until I began researching this. Don't confuse the THEORY of evolution with the FACT that species evolve. Biologists all know that species evolve. The THEORY is the "why" - is it reaction via natural selection to the environment or is it simply random. Many species evolve with parts that seem to be of no help/assistance to them. That goes against Darwin. Early humans resembled apes, but many animals resemble animals that they never evolved from.

  • Oh my goodness. You've done research you say? Methinks you need to go back and do more... and stay of the conspiracy theory sites (a.k.a. "creationist") websites this time. I don't have the room in this comment box to explain all the problems with what you just said.

  • Hmm, message me if you like, nothing I said is wrong. Ron Paul is correct. And a pretty badass dude.

  • There is no debate on evolution....except with fucktard's like you, who listen to people that think wrestling is real and Jerry Springer is a pyschologist.

  • firstly i agree with your second paragraph, and thats all.

    evolution is not AT ALL controversial anywhere but AMERICA, and only among the public, not those who actually have an understanding of the topic.

    secondly, evolution can be proven, and it has.

    and finally what are these 'gray areas'?

  • Well, the most obvious one would be the "missing link" controversy, the direct lineage of ape to man has still not been discovered. Australopithecus afarensis was thought to be the link, but then studies of the jawbone proved that it was actually more likely not a direct ancestor of man. However, this correction was noted AFTER the ape-man connection had been assumed from the original A. afarensis discovery, the textbooks were written that way, and thus many people are unaware of the gray areas.

  • Wow! Pandering to the crowd...There is a clip where he is being interviewed and says the exact opposite. Very sad indeed.

  • Really? Damn.

  • TILLEYJS - If you're referring to a clip of the 2008 Republican Presidential candidate debate, Ron Paul later claimed he misunderstood the question. He's not as sharp as his followers would like to think.

  • Nope, it was a one on one interview. He claimed the opposite of what's in this video. I can't name the interview. I can only ask you to trust me. I was disgusted when I watched this video.

  • TILLEYJS - No offense, but I'm too skeptical to trust anyone I don't know. I'll just say - it really wouldn't suprise me if Ron Paul has "misunderstood" the simple question, do you accept the theory of evolution, more than once. I had him pegged as a spoon-dick a long time ago.

  • freedom0f5peech - Ron Paul is actually more of a crack-pot than you think. Most Libertarians, which he was before he joined the Republicans, think it's just fine for corporations to exploit the world. Most Lib's and Rep's don't see the inherent immorality of capitalism. Why would you expect people like that to see anything wrong with disputing a proven scientific theory? That dipshit would have your kids sold into the slavery of the corporatocracy before they ever heard the word evolution.

  • @freedom0f5peech

    hes verry wise actualy and he dosent hide his beliefs if you vote for obama or bush what are their religion what are their beleifs ?

    honestly it doesn't matter whether you believe on creation or evolution . and evolution is just a theory even if there is lots of evidence that doesn't mean that evolution is the whole picture thats why its called "theory of evolution".

    so will you vote for beliefs or will you vote for freedom to have your own beliefs ? that is the question!

  • @romeoneverdies

    "Just a theory"???

    (bangs head on desk repeatedly)

    A scientific theory isn't a hypothesis; it's a collection of scientific FACTS. Look up the definition of "Scientific Theory". It's not the same thing as the layman’s use of the word, which means "idea".

    Not accepting the most tested and observed scientific theory (fact) in history makes you ignorant, and I sure as fuck am not going to vote from someone this stupid.

  • @freedom0f5peech It is so obvious of Gods Creation, that Even God says it would take a Fool not to realize it & that people would profess tobe wise whoare such fools, I bought into the theory of Evolution because I was foolish enough to think cause schools taught it, that it was fact, But I was challenged to look at the other side of the story & ctual evidence, so I did, & I was pissed what I'd been taught in school, Evolution is a Lie ! all species found the same metamorphically,ex. 28 t-rex's

  • @freedom0f5peech Sure, you'd rather vote for someone who is stupid and corrupt, instead of someone who doesn't know the meaning of theory in a scientific sense. Good thinking.

  • In attempt to develop an evolutionary chain between ape and man, evolutionists often point to many so-called "fossil men". However, when these many links in the alleged chain are analyzed it becomes apparent that they all fall into one of three groups of fossils. These three groups are: (1.) apes, (2.) men, (3.) frauds and mistakes.

  • Apes: Ramapithecus, Oreopithecus, Limnopithecus, Kenyapithecus, and Austalopithecines were all simply various types of apes, perhaps extinct types of orangutans. Austalopithecines is supposed to be a step above the others in the chain, but its skull was strikingly similar to that of a modern orangutan. Its brain was only 400 to 700 cubic centimeters, compared with the much larger 1400 to 1700 cubic centimeters for modern man.

  • wow, it's a theory. A theory that he doesn't accept. What a fucking moron. Thank "god" I didn't vote for him.

    Oh, it's just a theory, a theory with every piece of archeological and historical evidence supporting it.

  • Creationist ideology is nonsense. We've had enough ideologies in the 20th century. I am a Christian but this is a "belief" and science is something different. Creationists like Paul try to throw both things into the same box because it's easier for them to comprehend. But it's just nonsense. Evangelicals are dumbin down themselves.

  • thank you thank you! you have renewed my faith (and until now it simply was faith) that some christians can understand the difference between belief and evidence. you sir are a christian this atheist wouldn't mind buying a beer for!