Um, ok, the guys religious views are fundamentalist wacko, but how does his taste for squirrel or horse meat mean anything? I'd eat just about any animal given the need to, and I'm what I consider to be a rational atheist.
Yes, Huck is a nut-job, but his dietary habits don't seem to be the issue.
The problem is not that there are crazy people like this in the federal gov't. The problem is that there is a federal gov't in the first place, which by it's very existence, puts everyone else at risk of being subjected to crazy people like this. Eliminate the apparatus and the crazy people will no longer have a means to do harm on such a huge national scale.
1) Have a look at Behe's survey (in Darwin's Black Box) of all the major textbooks in his field of microbiology.
2) Darwin's theory is that random mutation and natural selection have the power necessary to explain all biological complexity. What evidence is there that these mechanisms have such explanatory power?
3) Darwinism "made it possible to be an intellectually satisfied atheist." -Richard Dawkins
In short, you illustrate precisely how Darwinism is perpetuated.
1) Michael Behe is professionally dishonest. He proved this in Kitzmiller v. Dover.
2) All biological research in the past 150 years has supported evolution. The theory is testable, falsifiable (yet has never been falsified), and makes extremely accurate predictions (e.g. Tiktaalik). Morphological, genetic, and embryonic phylogenies all coincide perfectly
3) Dawkins is one guy with odd ideas. Nice quote mine. Science makes no comment on the supernatural.
I didn't say science comments on the supernatural. I implied that evolutionists make claims about the supernatural. Dawkins is simply one example.
Since evolution is an enormously indiscriminate word (used to refer to everything from inherited genetic change to gargantuan extrapolations about the power of random mutation and natural selection), I'll use 'Darwinism.' It's much more specific .
What evidence is there that Darwin's mechanisms have such explanatory power?
"What evidence is there that Darwin's mechanisms have such explanatory power?"
1) The entire fossil record
2) Atavisms
3) Observed, documented evidence of speciation
"I implied that evolutionists make claims about the supernatural. Dawkins is simply one example."
There's no such thing as an "evolutionist" just like there's no such thing as a "gravitist." Dawkins is violating the philosophy of science in that quote and I really don't understand your point.
1. The fossil record can say nothing of the power of random mutation (RM) and natural selection (NS). The fossil record is what RM and NS are supposed to explain.
2. You think that atavisms provide sufficient evidence that RM and NS can explain all biological complexity? And all skeptics of that gartantuan extrapolation are "retarded tinfoil-hat liars who refuse to learn"?
3. How are you defining species and what examples do you have in mind?
1) Random mutation, natural selection, and genetic drift do explain the fossil record.
2) To say otherwise is an argument of personal incredulity. Do you have another explanation for why atavisms exist, especially in their volume? There's also reverse sequencing and other genetic methods to determine common ancestry with more confidence than a paternity test.
3) Species is defined by the ability to produce fertile offspring. Drosophila, London Underground mosquito, cichlids.
You don't seem to understand how science works. You can't just throw out something that works and replace it with nothing that doesn't because it "offends your beliefs." Faith isn't permitted in science. There's no question that evolution happens...that allelic frequencies in populations change over time according to the laws of population genetics as descent with inherent modification, which is all evolution really is. The only things up for debate are the details.
1. Your statement is tautology. This is precisely the claim I'm asking you to provide evidence for. Similarly, common ancestry provides no evidence of RM and NS...it is what RM and NS are intended to explain. You fail to understand which evidence is required for which claims.
2. I'm not debating the ability of RM and NS to explain atavisms. I'm questioning the extrapolation from that evidence that therefore ALL biological complexity can be explained by RM and NS. (cont'd)
3. RM and NS can produce creatures that can't produce fertile offspring THEREFORE RM and NS explain all biological complexity. I’m a tinfoil hat wearing liar for being unconvinced of the preceding leap?
Darwinism asserts that RM and NS alone produced (for example) the human brain. This massive assertion is supported only by colossal extrapolations from the evidence. And yet the great scientific virtue of skepticism is, in this one case, deemed to be lunacy.
"And yet the great scientific virtue of skepticism is, in this one case, deemed to be lunacy."
It's not skepticism at this point. It's denial. Unless you have a better theory, you use the best explanation. Evolution is supported by all the evidence. Making Behe-like "irreducible complexity" arguments that have all shown to be junk (immune system, bacterial flagellum).
Atavisms themselves explain the fossil record. Common descent has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
If you're going to say "Evolution is incorrect," then you must replace it with a theory that better explains the evidence. There is no alternative theory.
Zoo, I don't know how to be any clearer that my ONLY point of contention has been whether or not the mechanisms that Darwin proposed to explain biological complexity (namely, RM and NS) have enough power to actually explain it. You called me a tinfoil hat wearing liar for even being skeptical; so the evidence must be overwhelming. And yet you offer nothing but gargantuan extrapolations. (cont’d)
(cont’d) You, who earlier accused ME of not understanding science, are completely mistaken. One need not know the correct theory in order to be skeptical that a given theory is sufficiently demonstrated. Similarly, I don't need an alternative theory of biological complexity in order to be skeptical that RM and NS alone account for it. By your logic, scientists are not allowed to say "We don't know [yet]."
You talked about the "masses accepting a theory with so many gaping holes" as part of some sort of conspiracy. That's tinfoil-hat material.
The truth is that the theory best explains the evidence, so of course it's taught. The theory of gravity pre-general relativity was wrong, but we still use it today for certain applications. The failure of a theory to explain everything in 100% detail isn't a reason to throw it out.
You don't have to have an alternative theory to be skeptical, but you DO need one if you're going to rant about the teaching of the current theory that does an excellent job explaining the evidence uncovered so far and makes accurate, testable predictions.
I'd settle for is an educational system didn't produce students so deeply indoctrinated with Darwinism that they immediately belittle and berate anyone who even raises questions about the evidence for the power assigned to RM and NS. I'd settle for a system that didn't produce students who come out of the classroom thinking that doubting Darwinism is like doubting gravity. I'd settle for a system that taught students the semantic difference between "evolution" and "Darwinism".
"I'd settle for a system that taught students the semantic difference between "evolution" and "Darwinism"."
Firstly, there is no such thing as "Darwinism." What textbooks are you looking at? They don't say that anymore. Evolution isn't Darwinism any longer and never really was. The point of high school science is to provide a general overview of the scientific consensus across a ton of subjects, not to be on the cutting edge of research into evolutionary biology.
So teaching the basic components of the theory of evolution would require "being on the cutting edge of research?"
This well explains why you attempted to provide evidence for RM and NS by providing evidence for common ancestry. It appears you haven't been taught to distinguish the basic components of the theory and what evidence is needed to support each of those components.
You confirm my dismay at how our educational systems handle the issue.
"It appears you haven't been taught to distinguish the basic components of the theory and what evidence is needed to support each of those components."
This is because I'm an engineering student that hasn't taken a single college biology class. This is basically what I learned in high school plus a bit of research on my own. Sorry to disappoint you, but I really don't see why every singe person needs to understand the intricacies of the theory of evolution.
That was going to be my last comment. But you asked such a worthwhile question.
I do not in any way think that every single person needs to understand the intricacies of the theory of evolution.
However, I do think you need to understand the intricacies of evolution IF you see a comment critical of evolutionary theory and immediately call that individual a "retarted tinfoil-hat wearing liar who refuses to learn." (con't)
(cont'd) And given that so many others are coming out of our educational system with the same snide confidence in the theory; then I would expect that they too well understand the theory and the evidence that so obviously confirms every aspect of it.
But they don't. That is the issue...the dogmatic perpetuation of a theory that belittles and ignores reasonable dissention.
I understand skepticism of the nuances of modern theories
I don't understand portraying the teaching of the best explanations we have to date to students who won't be exploring these intricacies for years as some sort of Western conspiracy to discourage innovation. In fact, it's the opposite. There's an old musician's phrase that applies to science and mathematics: "You have to the learn the rules before you can break them."
DonExodus, I love your videos, but aren't you yourself using an irrelevent fact when you say that he eats horse and squirrel? What does that have to do with politics? If anything it comes off as culturally biased. The only countries in the world that consider horse-meat unappetizing are non-anglophone. I'm not saying I don't think this guy's a crazy idiot...I'm just saying it was a bit hypocritical of you. Unless it was a meant as a joke...in which case it should have been more clear.
I think that says it all about the man. Only hicks who eat squirrels themselves would vote for him. Even non-religious right right-wingers probably wouldn't vote for Huckabee if he ever ran again.
This knuckle dragging, far right whackjob belongs in the 13th century, his most recent rant involving the comparison of homosexuality to incest and polygamy. He and his ilk aren't becoming extinct nearly fast enough for me.
I suppose hucklebery would amend the constitution by adding the ten commandments. Would he also implement the decreed punishments for disobedience of same? Death for working on the sabbath etc. It's all real or, it's all shit. This guy is detrimant
What's with these questions like "Do you believe in evolution?"
Evolution is not a matter of belief. Nuclear physics is not a belief, either, any more than electricity, gravity, or how airplanes fly. You may be IGNORANT of how an atomic reactor works or how to make the lights go on with a dammed-up lake, but you don't refuse to accept them because they're not in the Bible.
You can say you don't "believe in" anything you like but it hasn't the slightest impact on simple facts. Like evolution.
To heal the gap between church and state is to FIRST allow the Trinity of yours to step forth and defend themselves in the highest court in the land. It can't. they can't. it can't happen.
Since this IS the case then all mentions of Santas cousin ought to be out-written from laws, swear ins, schools and yes the constitution.
Oh, wait: Obahma is bat shit crazy too and went to Africa/Saudi to claim all humans reside under a god.
No need for reality just talk to your shoes and get a better life
I'll back Huckabee that I see nothing wrong with eating horse or squirrels,but it's nonsense to say there isn't a line we can't cross.I mean I don't plan on eating any humans anytime soon.
Huckabee is not only a delusional dimwit(he didn't even know man and apes are both primates)he's also a prolific liar and thief.Read as much as you can about this complete arrogant fraud.Changing the Constitution for his living god.Fascism is right around the corner.He has a bloated disregard for the laws of this land,and is a serious danger for us all!
Ok, what's wrong with eating squirrels and horses? Don't get me wrong, if this guy's a creationist, then he is crazy. But it's pretty species-ist to think eating cows is perfectly fine but horses isn't. There are probably cultures that wrinkle their noses at what we eat.
I'm from Iowa, and I grew up hunting and eating squirrels. I didn't realize that was considered weird until I got to college. Oh, and Huckabee is batshit crazy.
"DARWIN, My Life and Letters Vol. 1, page 210, letter to Mr. Bentham admits, When we decend into details we can prove that no one species has changed (i.e. We cannot prove that a single species has changed); nor can we prove that the supposed changes are beneficial, which is the ground work of the theory. Nor can we explain why some species have changed and others have not."
Don't quote mine!!! Do you think that was all Darwin said? No it wasn't. You just pick up the parts that you liked most. Quote mining is even more childish than straw-mans.
Not knowing why or how does not preclude knowing that something exists.
Ancient man could say the sun exists without knowing how it burns. Newton could say what gravity does, without knowing what caused it. And Darwin could notice that creatures evolved without knowing how or why.
Today we know that the sun burns through fusion, gravity works through gravitons, and evolution works because of DNA.
Darwin was only admitting the the people of his time didn't know. We know in detail.
So what if he eats squirrel or possum or chocolate covered ants. Exactly where would YOU draw the gastronomic line?
Most of your videos are well thought out (I generally rate your videos 5 stars). You missed the boat on this one and you let your emotions get the best of you.......1star!
Huckabee is no doubt mentally crippled by his god delusion. He may or may not be batshit crazy.
Who cares if he eats horse and squirl. Seems like a retarded thing to complain about. Do you eat cows, pigs and chickens? Its really all the same if you think about it.
Of course, I think Huckabee is a complete moron. I just don't like dietary choice is really a concern.
poor Huckabee, I relay like the fella, but ya, I would not want him to be prezzz, percher ya, prezz no. But I'm not relougus so I would not want him to be my percher ether. (God, I don't know how to spell percher, and spellchecker dos not help... is god telling me something?)
You can't really make an argument against eating horses and squirrels without also inadvertently making the same argument for cows and bunnies.
If you're going to use 'he eats squirrels' as an argument for insanity, you might want to double check your own beliefs for consistency, to figure out why one animal is exempt from being eaten, and another isn't, so that you don't unintentionally accuse yourself of being insane as well.
Huckabee's own statement on the constitution and the bible should automatically disqualify him from public office. He is admitting that he will violate our constitution, and admitting that he will ignore the constitution because his magic book says otherwise. Well Mike Huckabee, I think there is FAR MORE MORALITY in the US constitution than your precious book of ancient fairy tales. I would die to protect the Consitution, but the bible...if you ask me it isn't worth a cup of warm piss.
So what if he eats horses and squirrels!?!? Its just what he eats...people all across the world eat things that most americans would consider to be "disgusting" and possibly "immoral"
The fact that he wanted to change the constitution so it supports "god's standards" scares me more than anything else he could have said
In all fairness, the fact that he eats horse meat shouldn't matter. It's just weird in our culture, similar to how eating cow is weird/wrong to Hindus, and how eating shrimp is *supposed* to be wrong to xians.
However, anyone who wants to live by the xian god's standards (which he called "living", though anyone who is living needs much higher standards) is clearly dangerous.
Your description falsely represents that Huckabee believes "women should serve their husbands". His agreement is that wives should be submissive/agreeable to their husbands who serve them (husbands serving their wives). Actually it's both ways. The key is that Mrs. Huckabee is far happier and better off than any douche bag commenting here could offer their women.
Huckabee's life on earth is the worst it will ever be for him which means unfortunately for others like you this is the best you will ever have it and and while Huckabee's future brings him closer to ultimate satisfaction your kind get closer to ultimate regret.
Why don't you get together with a group of your atheist friends and do something constructive and positive like other organizations (especially churches) do?
Huckabee isn't bat shit crazy because of what he eats. That is very ethnocentric to call someone a freak because of their food choice (the Dutch are rather kick-ass, too bad he doesn't follow any of their other cultural traits). What is scary is his sexism, homophobia, and complete ignorance of science.
What's wrong about eating horses? lol It seems quite out of place to say Huckabee "doesn't believe in evolution","wants to change the Constitution to fit with the Bible","thinks AIDS patients should be quarantined", AND "he ate horse meat". OH THE HORROR! Eating horse meat?!! That's just aweful! Cow meat and pig meat are alright BUT HORSE MEAT?! That's just going too far. lol
Lol, i dont see anything wrong with eating horses either. Dutch cooking often uses horse meat. Why is it okay to send them to the knacker to make glue but not to turn them into shit?
Some horses are bred for buthcering and eating, they're the ardenn-horses. Horse doesn't taste like chicken btw... And as much as he's a freak, eating horse meat is not one reason to that.
Same aplies for the squirrel. Im pointing out these, because this popularism is below you. You have some great videos and I respect you a lot for the level of argument you show on them. Keep your stantards high.
What was that about eating horse meat? Why is it worse then eating cow or a pig? Unless you think eating meat is a criteria for crazy it was just a crazy argument. Totally irrelevant.
I don't know about Vietnam, but in Korea the dogs they eat are a different breed. No one would consider eating a companion dog. Their thought of as separate species almost.
But I agree with GuyaRicanMC, to attack his food choices (no matter how odd) is irrelevant.
He is completely off his rocker, but why bust him on the horse meat thing? Is farming and slaughtering horses more horrible than doing the same things to pigs and cattle all of a sudden?
Agree. I think pigs are smarter than horses anyway. And there are several tasty rodents - squirrel happens to be one. But Americans are funny. We like aquatic arthropods, but freak at a salted basket of fried locust. We'll munch on conch, but turn weird at the thought of escargot. And we freak about reptiles - although I can attest that turtle, rattlesnake, gator and iguana are all good.
No, Huckabee scares the snot out of me because he thinks the Constitution should read like Leviticus.
How did he become Gouvenour? He seems so unprofessional and ignorant he should have been shot as soon as he began to campaign. I do not understand it, not even a bit.
Next time you're in the states, visit Arkansas. Drive around, avoiding the interstates. Stop at the small-town diners. You WILL understand. On the other hand - he is a likable, funny guy. He plays a pretty good electric bass. Heck, next time I'm doing a cookout, he's invited. Of course, Ted Bundy was also very personable, and Huckabee really is deeply, fundamentally batshit - and it has nothing to do with his diet.
I generally love you stuff, and the general thrust of this video is dead on. The main thing I disagree over is the negative view of eating horse.
I love horses, I love riding horses. That sad the taboo against horsemeat is a heavily Euro-centric view. Here in Japan horse is just another meat that can be eaten (and it is tasty). Strangely enough my young students react with near horror when they learn that in the West we eat rabbit.
Damn, I'm glad we dodged that bullet. But isn't Ron Paul also on record as saying he doesn't accept evolution either? There is a youtube video available. My jaw dropped when I saw it. I Darwinism was a major inspiration of modern libertarian ideas.
@DonExodus2 ...And claims that the bible is objective morality are really horseshit (or squirrelshit). People just take the parts of the bible that agrees with contemporary views or their own ethical or bigoted opinions and follow them, and then claim that they follow the rules of the bible and it is objective morality. It isn't. Besides, if you refrain doing something out of fear of hell, does that make you moral? If i don't kill Bob because John will shoot me if i do, am a moral person?
@DonExodus2 I've scene 'the young': torch toy green army men, put salt on slugs, torture poor Earth worms on grills, this is not unusual youthful behavior. It is borderline sadistic but not unusual, however this behavior as late as college is. I'm not sure he was implying he ate the squirrel though. I need more information and preferably another statement from him on the subject.
i don't care if he eats horses but his views on religion and the constitution and gays and women??? How did anyone vote for him???? He basically promotes genocide. Americans are so dump. I'm ashamed at times to live here.
Who the fuck cares what kind of food he eats? It's not any more ridiculous than eating any other animal. This is definitely the least ridiculous, and least frightening, of his views.
@CommodoreAxilon You said,"Who the f cares what kind of food he eats?"-Exactly! If DonExodus2 starts attacking food then he'd better attack half the world. The French eat snails. Some oriental countries consider cats and dogs a delicacy. Some countries eat chocolate covered ants. Some countries eat fried scorpions. If you attack his eating habits your making a enemy of half the world viewing this. DON I knew it was only a matter of time tell your mouth got you in trouble good luck bud.
Mike is the only one that can beat Obama. Mac can't go up against a guy who is in his 40's, great speaker and is outside of Washington. Waht is the GOP doing-commiting suicide?
wtf is up with people trying to push their religion on everyone, it especially pisses me off when politicians try that shit. i'm pretty sure it says in the bible to pray away from other people or something along those lines(cant remember the exact passage), but then again when have the religious ever let a little thing like their religion get in the way of what they want to do.
"Liked the idea of quarantining AIDS victims". Well, we wouldn't expect a presidential candidate to actually learn about a threat before reacting to it, now would we? :O Incredible that a profoundly ignorant extremist like this could ever make it as far in the presidential race as he has. But got to agree with the other comments there - an unusual diet is not a particularly good point against someone...
@DonExodus2 Enjoying frying live squirrels is sadistic and cruel, but i don't see much of a problem with eating horse. His stances on "amending the constitution so it's in gods standards" technically means setting the punishment for working on Sunday to a public stoning to the death... "oh, that's metaphorical...", yeah well what if "thou shall not kill" is metaphorical? He'd say that it isn't. Why? Because he agrees with it. People don't take the bible objectivity, they take what they want.
I hate pushy fundamentalists. I dislike fundamentalists in general, but pushy fundamentalists (fundamentalists that push their religion on you) grind my gears.
A note on horse meat: There's nothing really wrong with eating it. Lots of cultures around the world eat it. I've tried it once, and I can't say I really liked it, but it was better than the rest of the $75 meal it came with (I should have paid $120 and got the steak :( ).
What's the big deal about his eating habits? Why is it okay to eat a cow but not a horse, a rabbit but not a squirrel? I don't care if he shovels rancid pigeon shit into his mouth, what bothers me is the vile insanity coming OUT!
His statements on the Constitution and evolution are quite ridiculous. But why is it so crazy to eat horse and squirrel? It's only "crazy" within the context of your culture (its Huckabee's culture too, but still). Eating cows is "crazy" in India.
I don't know. I actually look forward to the day when I have enough money to travel around the world and try all kinds of exotic foods, and if squirrel and horse are on the menu, and it looks appetizing, I'll give it a shot.
Um, ok, the guys religious views are fundamentalist wacko, but how does his taste for squirrel or horse meat mean anything? I'd eat just about any animal given the need to, and I'm what I consider to be a rational atheist.
Yes, Huck is a nut-job, but his dietary habits don't seem to be the issue.
GermanChocolateCake 7 months ago
I can't believe I had respect for this guy arrrrggh!!!
Exli3r 8 months ago
The problem is not that there are crazy people like this in the federal gov't. The problem is that there is a federal gov't in the first place, which by it's very existence, puts everyone else at risk of being subjected to crazy people like this. Eliminate the apparatus and the crazy people will no longer have a means to do harm on such a huge national scale.
Voluntaryism and the Non-Aggression Axiom, FTW!
rmcdaniel423 9 months ago
How do you get the masses to accept a theory with so many gaping holes in it?
1. Teach the theory in every public school in the Western wold--not by explaining the evidence for it but simply by asserting and assuming it.
2. Demonize and belittle everyone who raises any questions about it--even if the skepticism is the result of scientific evidence.
3. Tell people that if they accept the theory, they don't have to believe in God.
That approach ought to gain a following.
MissingChurchill 9 months ago
@MissingChurchill
1) The evidence is taught and there is no assumption involved.
2) There is no scientific controversy over evolution and no scientific arguments against it.
3) Science makes no comment on the supernatural.
In short, you're just another retarded tinfoil-hat liar who refuses to learn.
TheZooCrew 9 months ago
@TheZooCrew
1) Have a look at Behe's survey (in Darwin's Black Box) of all the major textbooks in his field of microbiology.
2) Darwin's theory is that random mutation and natural selection have the power necessary to explain all biological complexity. What evidence is there that these mechanisms have such explanatory power?
3) Darwinism "made it possible to be an intellectually satisfied atheist." -Richard Dawkins
In short, you illustrate precisely how Darwinism is perpetuated.
MissingChurchill 9 months ago
@MissingChurchill
1) Michael Behe is professionally dishonest. He proved this in Kitzmiller v. Dover.
2) All biological research in the past 150 years has supported evolution. The theory is testable, falsifiable (yet has never been falsified), and makes extremely accurate predictions (e.g. Tiktaalik). Morphological, genetic, and embryonic phylogenies all coincide perfectly
3) Dawkins is one guy with odd ideas. Nice quote mine. Science makes no comment on the supernatural.
TheZooCrew 9 months ago
@TheZooCrew
I didn't say science comments on the supernatural. I implied that evolutionists make claims about the supernatural. Dawkins is simply one example.
Since evolution is an enormously indiscriminate word (used to refer to everything from inherited genetic change to gargantuan extrapolations about the power of random mutation and natural selection), I'll use 'Darwinism.' It's much more specific .
What evidence is there that Darwin's mechanisms have such explanatory power?
MissingChurchill 9 months ago
@MissingChurchill
"What evidence is there that Darwin's mechanisms have such explanatory power?"
1) The entire fossil record
2) Atavisms
3) Observed, documented evidence of speciation
"I implied that evolutionists make claims about the supernatural. Dawkins is simply one example."
There's no such thing as an "evolutionist" just like there's no such thing as a "gravitist." Dawkins is violating the philosophy of science in that quote and I really don't understand your point.
TheZooCrew 9 months ago
@TheZooCrew
1. The fossil record can say nothing of the power of random mutation (RM) and natural selection (NS). The fossil record is what RM and NS are supposed to explain.
2. You think that atavisms provide sufficient evidence that RM and NS can explain all biological complexity? And all skeptics of that gartantuan extrapolation are "retarded tinfoil-hat liars who refuse to learn"?
3. How are you defining species and what examples do you have in mind?
MissingChurchill 9 months ago
@MissingChurchill
1) Random mutation, natural selection, and genetic drift do explain the fossil record.
2) To say otherwise is an argument of personal incredulity. Do you have another explanation for why atavisms exist, especially in their volume? There's also reverse sequencing and other genetic methods to determine common ancestry with more confidence than a paternity test.
3) Species is defined by the ability to produce fertile offspring. Drosophila, London Underground mosquito, cichlids.
TheZooCrew 9 months ago
@MissingChurchill
You don't seem to understand how science works. You can't just throw out something that works and replace it with nothing that doesn't because it "offends your beliefs." Faith isn't permitted in science. There's no question that evolution happens...that allelic frequencies in populations change over time according to the laws of population genetics as descent with inherent modification, which is all evolution really is. The only things up for debate are the details.
TheZooCrew 9 months ago
@TheZooCrew
1. Your statement is tautology. This is precisely the claim I'm asking you to provide evidence for. Similarly, common ancestry provides no evidence of RM and NS...it is what RM and NS are intended to explain. You fail to understand which evidence is required for which claims.
2. I'm not debating the ability of RM and NS to explain atavisms. I'm questioning the extrapolation from that evidence that therefore ALL biological complexity can be explained by RM and NS. (cont'd)
MissingChurchill 9 months ago
(cont'd)
3. RM and NS can produce creatures that can't produce fertile offspring THEREFORE RM and NS explain all biological complexity. I’m a tinfoil hat wearing liar for being unconvinced of the preceding leap?
Darwinism asserts that RM and NS alone produced (for example) the human brain. This massive assertion is supported only by colossal extrapolations from the evidence. And yet the great scientific virtue of skepticism is, in this one case, deemed to be lunacy.
MissingChurchill 9 months ago
@MissingChurchill
"And yet the great scientific virtue of skepticism is, in this one case, deemed to be lunacy."
It's not skepticism at this point. It's denial. Unless you have a better theory, you use the best explanation. Evolution is supported by all the evidence. Making Behe-like "irreducible complexity" arguments that have all shown to be junk (immune system, bacterial flagellum).
Atavisms themselves explain the fossil record. Common descent has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
TheZooCrew 9 months ago
@MissingChurchill
If you're going to say "Evolution is incorrect," then you must replace it with a theory that better explains the evidence. There is no alternative theory.
TheZooCrew 9 months ago
@TheZooCrew
Oh dear.
Zoo, I don't know how to be any clearer that my ONLY point of contention has been whether or not the mechanisms that Darwin proposed to explain biological complexity (namely, RM and NS) have enough power to actually explain it. You called me a tinfoil hat wearing liar for even being skeptical; so the evidence must be overwhelming. And yet you offer nothing but gargantuan extrapolations. (cont’d)
MissingChurchill 9 months ago
(cont’d) You, who earlier accused ME of not understanding science, are completely mistaken. One need not know the correct theory in order to be skeptical that a given theory is sufficiently demonstrated. Similarly, I don't need an alternative theory of biological complexity in order to be skeptical that RM and NS alone account for it. By your logic, scientists are not allowed to say "We don't know [yet]."
MissingChurchill 9 months ago
@MissingChurchill
You talked about the "masses accepting a theory with so many gaping holes" as part of some sort of conspiracy. That's tinfoil-hat material.
The truth is that the theory best explains the evidence, so of course it's taught. The theory of gravity pre-general relativity was wrong, but we still use it today for certain applications. The failure of a theory to explain everything in 100% detail isn't a reason to throw it out.
TheZooCrew 9 months ago
@MissingChurchill
You don't have to have an alternative theory to be skeptical, but you DO need one if you're going to rant about the teaching of the current theory that does an excellent job explaining the evidence uncovered so far and makes accurate, testable predictions.
TheZooCrew 9 months ago
@TheZooCrew
I'd settle for is an educational system didn't produce students so deeply indoctrinated with Darwinism that they immediately belittle and berate anyone who even raises questions about the evidence for the power assigned to RM and NS. I'd settle for a system that didn't produce students who come out of the classroom thinking that doubting Darwinism is like doubting gravity. I'd settle for a system that taught students the semantic difference between "evolution" and "Darwinism".
MissingChurchill 9 months ago
@MissingChurchill
"I'd settle for a system that taught students the semantic difference between "evolution" and "Darwinism"."
Firstly, there is no such thing as "Darwinism." What textbooks are you looking at? They don't say that anymore. Evolution isn't Darwinism any longer and never really was. The point of high school science is to provide a general overview of the scientific consensus across a ton of subjects, not to be on the cutting edge of research into evolutionary biology.
TheZooCrew 9 months ago
@TheZooCrew
So teaching the basic components of the theory of evolution would require "being on the cutting edge of research?"
This well explains why you attempted to provide evidence for RM and NS by providing evidence for common ancestry. It appears you haven't been taught to distinguish the basic components of the theory and what evidence is needed to support each of those components.
You confirm my dismay at how our educational systems handle the issue.
Best wishes.
MissingChurchill 9 months ago
@MissingChurchill
"It appears you haven't been taught to distinguish the basic components of the theory and what evidence is needed to support each of those components."
This is because I'm an engineering student that hasn't taken a single college biology class. This is basically what I learned in high school plus a bit of research on my own. Sorry to disappoint you, but I really don't see why every singe person needs to understand the intricacies of the theory of evolution.
TheZooCrew 9 months ago
@TheZooCrew
That was going to be my last comment. But you asked such a worthwhile question.
I do not in any way think that every single person needs to understand the intricacies of the theory of evolution.
However, I do think you need to understand the intricacies of evolution IF you see a comment critical of evolutionary theory and immediately call that individual a "retarted tinfoil-hat wearing liar who refuses to learn." (con't)
MissingChurchill 9 months ago
@TheZooCrew
(cont'd) And given that so many others are coming out of our educational system with the same snide confidence in the theory; then I would expect that they too well understand the theory and the evidence that so obviously confirms every aspect of it.
But they don't. That is the issue...the dogmatic perpetuation of a theory that belittles and ignores reasonable dissention.
Best Wishes
MissingChurchill 9 months ago
@MissingChurchill
I understand skepticism of the nuances of modern theories
I don't understand portraying the teaching of the best explanations we have to date to students who won't be exploring these intricacies for years as some sort of Western conspiracy to discourage innovation. In fact, it's the opposite. There's an old musician's phrase that applies to science and mathematics: "You have to the learn the rules before you can break them."
TheZooCrew 9 months ago
C'mon, Huck. It's easy to 'change the word of the living god'. Xians have been doing it for millennia.
yeshuahfullofit 1 year ago
Oh, horses are actually pretty tasty.
But eating a squirrel? That's like eating a rat. Sounds like a great way to contract the plague.
Consuming rodents and primates are a great way to get flesh-eating diseases, so a sane person doesn't do so.
Horses are fair enough for meat really.
Shavarnarak 1 year ago
Wait, fun thought! Maybe he wants to change the constitution so eating horse is legal! XD
AllergicToPain 1 year ago
DonExodus, I love your videos, but aren't you yourself using an irrelevent fact when you say that he eats horse and squirrel? What does that have to do with politics? If anything it comes off as culturally biased. The only countries in the world that consider horse-meat unappetizing are non-anglophone. I'm not saying I don't think this guy's a crazy idiot...I'm just saying it was a bit hypocritical of you. Unless it was a meant as a joke...in which case it should have been more clear.
AllergicToPain 1 year ago
DonExodus has a good sense of humor
pMp3z08 1 year ago
Don, horse meat is delicious. I truly cant see any difference between eating a horse or a cow. Its just a big dumb grazing animal.
Noah2112 1 year ago
I didn't know eating horsemeat was uncommon in the US.. What's the big difference with eating cow meat?
(I don't mean it's ok, I just mean it's not worse than eating cows)
VincentPhil 1 year ago
Huckabee eats squirrel.
I think that says it all about the man. Only hicks who eat squirrels themselves would vote for him. Even non-religious right right-wingers probably wouldn't vote for Huckabee if he ever ran again.
Shavarnarak 1 year ago
fuck mike huckabee
auroradamien 1 year ago
This knuckle dragging, far right whackjob belongs in the 13th century, his most recent rant involving the comparison of homosexuality to incest and polygamy. He and his ilk aren't becoming extinct nearly fast enough for me.
SuperImready 1 year ago
I really don't give a shit if he eats horse.
drunkrtard 1 year ago
Fuck the Huck!
QuestionMarc 2 years ago
OMG He eats horse! This makes his arguments invalid :-p
rickl242 2 years ago
What's wrong with eating horse meat? I mean, I wouldn't eat any, but I don't see anything wrong with it other than personal taste.
sciencemile 2 years ago
wow, just............ wow. the founding fathers would spin in their graves if this guy got elected.
gobblox38 2 years ago
Torturing small animals is an early sign of sociopathy.
gagaplex 2 years ago 3
I suppose hucklebery would amend the constitution by adding the ten commandments. Would he also implement the decreed punishments for disobedience of same? Death for working on the sabbath etc. It's all real or, it's all shit. This guy is detrimant
toelesshoe 2 years ago
What's with these questions like "Do you believe in evolution?"
Evolution is not a matter of belief. Nuclear physics is not a belief, either, any more than electricity, gravity, or how airplanes fly. You may be IGNORANT of how an atomic reactor works or how to make the lights go on with a dammed-up lake, but you don't refuse to accept them because they're not in the Bible.
You can say you don't "believe in" anything you like but it hasn't the slightest impact on simple facts. Like evolution.
NVanWendy 2 years ago 4
To heal the gap between church and state is to FIRST allow the Trinity of yours to step forth and defend themselves in the highest court in the land. It can't. they can't. it can't happen.
Since this IS the case then all mentions of Santas cousin ought to be out-written from laws, swear ins, schools and yes the constitution.
Oh, wait: Obahma is bat shit crazy too and went to Africa/Saudi to claim all humans reside under a god.
No need for reality just talk to your shoes and get a better life
humanman65 2 years ago
I'll back Huckabee that I see nothing wrong with eating horse or squirrels,but it's nonsense to say there isn't a line we can't cross.I mean I don't plan on eating any humans anytime soon.
akaDickBush 2 years ago
Huckabee is not only a delusional dimwit(he didn't even know man and apes are both primates)he's also a prolific liar and thief.Read as much as you can about this complete arrogant fraud.Changing the Constitution for his living god.Fascism is right around the corner.He has a bloated disregard for the laws of this land,and is a serious danger for us all!
akaDickBush 2 years ago 16
Not sure of the different meat has to do with it frog legs taste just like chicken but otherwise this dude is a nutjob.
godos320 2 years ago 3
Ok, what's wrong with eating squirrels and horses? Don't get me wrong, if this guy's a creationist, then he is crazy. But it's pretty species-ist to think eating cows is perfectly fine but horses isn't. There are probably cultures that wrinkle their noses at what we eat.
Mithcoriel 2 years ago 7
I'm from Iowa, and I grew up hunting and eating squirrels. I didn't realize that was considered weird until I got to college. Oh, and Huckabee is batshit crazy.
bbaytie 2 years ago
I also grew up in Iowa and ate plenty of deer and pheasant but never squirrel or horse.
adamredwine 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Whoever posted this video was apparently sheltered by their mother.
Huckabee might be crazy, but appealing to Olberman shows beyond doubt tDonExodus2 is infected.
gcnengineer 2 years ago
"DARWIN, My Life and Letters Vol. 1, page 210, letter to Mr. Bentham admits, When we decend into details we can prove that no one species has changed (i.e. We cannot prove that a single species has changed); nor can we prove that the supposed changes are beneficial, which is the ground work of the theory. Nor can we explain why some species have changed and others have not."
waketheoblivious 2 years ago
Quote mine
amateurevolutionist 2 years ago 3
Because science has not advanced in 150 years, and hasn't already solved these questions.
BRtankbuster 2 years ago
Don't quote mine!!! Do you think that was all Darwin said? No it wasn't. You just pick up the parts that you liked most. Quote mining is even more childish than straw-mans.
samihanmina 2 years ago 4
Not knowing why or how does not preclude knowing that something exists.
Ancient man could say the sun exists without knowing how it burns. Newton could say what gravity does, without knowing what caused it. And Darwin could notice that creatures evolved without knowing how or why.
Today we know that the sun burns through fusion, gravity works through gravitons, and evolution works because of DNA.
Darwin was only admitting the the people of his time didn't know. We know in detail.
BW022 2 years ago 3
Horse tastes nothing like chicken.
ancalites 2 years ago
I agree.
I find it taste more like very high quality beef.
Newtonip 2 years ago
So what if he eats squirrel or possum or chocolate covered ants. Exactly where would YOU draw the gastronomic line?
Most of your videos are well thought out (I generally rate your videos 5 stars). You missed the boat on this one and you let your emotions get the best of you.......1star!
Huckabee is no doubt mentally crippled by his god delusion. He may or may not be batshit crazy.
Give it to Mikey...he'll eat anything!
157626 2 years ago 2
Who cares if he eats horse and squirl. Seems like a retarded thing to complain about. Do you eat cows, pigs and chickens? Its really all the same if you think about it.
Of course, I think Huckabee is a complete moron. I just don't like dietary choice is really a concern.
MNICY 2 years ago
poor Huckabee, I relay like the fella, but ya, I would not want him to be prezzz, percher ya, prezz no. But I'm not relougus so I would not want him to be my percher ether. (God, I don't know how to spell percher, and spellchecker dos not help... is god telling me something?)
DiceWarwick 2 years ago
horses and squirrels?
Dont care.
But uh...
the rest of the shit more than makes up for my apathy to those two issues =p
He is without a doubt, BATSHIT INSANE
sketchydc 2 years ago
You can't really make an argument against eating horses and squirrels without also inadvertently making the same argument for cows and bunnies.
If you're going to use 'he eats squirrels' as an argument for insanity, you might want to double check your own beliefs for consistency, to figure out why one animal is exempt from being eaten, and another isn't, so that you don't unintentionally accuse yourself of being insane as well.
smariot 2 years ago
The squirrel part is no big deal to me. It's like eating any other meat. The only way to have a valid opposition to this is to be a vegetarian.
countryquarterback 2 years ago
I think you should also make note that Ron Paul does not accept Evolutionary theory...even though HE'S A FUCKING DOCTOR.
razieldumas 2 years ago 3
Horse does not taste like chicken! he IS bat$hit!
just2w4tch 2 years ago
Huckabee's own statement on the constitution and the bible should automatically disqualify him from public office. He is admitting that he will violate our constitution, and admitting that he will ignore the constitution because his magic book says otherwise. Well Mike Huckabee, I think there is FAR MORE MORALITY in the US constitution than your precious book of ancient fairy tales. I would die to protect the Consitution, but the bible...if you ask me it isn't worth a cup of warm piss.
kclymer1 2 years ago
So what if he eats horses and squirrels!?!? Its just what he eats...people all across the world eat things that most americans would consider to be "disgusting" and possibly "immoral"
The fact that he wanted to change the constitution so it supports "god's standards" scares me more than anything else he could have said
vanmaren962 3 years ago 18
He takes a popcorn popper and cooks fucking squirrels on it.
JamesJimRaynor 3 years ago
In all fairness, the fact that he eats horse meat shouldn't matter. It's just weird in our culture, similar to how eating cow is weird/wrong to Hindus, and how eating shrimp is *supposed* to be wrong to xians.
However, anyone who wants to live by the xian god's standards (which he called "living", though anyone who is living needs much higher standards) is clearly dangerous.
WatcherThePunk 3 years ago 2
I am from Arkansas, and Huckabee is a huge joke among us as well.
KitPandorius 3 years ago 2
If you ve read the Bible, you know that "God s standards" are the last thing we want to live by!
MistertheSpike 3 years ago 4
Playing with the U.S. constitution to fit it with "God standards" is the stupidest thing I've ever heard.
arsenelupin123 3 years ago 3
Your description falsely represents that Huckabee believes "women should serve their husbands". His agreement is that wives should be submissive/agreeable to their husbands who serve them (husbands serving their wives). Actually it's both ways. The key is that Mrs. Huckabee is far happier and better off than any douche bag commenting here could offer their women.
visualvirtue 3 years ago
It appears that Huckabee is a misogynist, just like the primitive, barbaric, superstious, ignorant old men who wrote the Bible.
Atheistjeremy 3 years ago 2
Huckabee's life on earth is the worst it will ever be for him which means unfortunately for others like you this is the best you will ever have it and and while Huckabee's future brings him closer to ultimate satisfaction your kind get closer to ultimate regret.
visualvirtue 3 years ago
Why do you think that your lame threats intimidate intelligent, educated, rational people?
Atheistjeremy 3 years ago 2
Why don't you get together with a group of your atheist friends and do something constructive and positive like other organizations (especially churches) do?
HUCKABEE/PALIN 2012
visualvirtue 3 years ago
Huckabee isn't bat shit crazy because of what he eats. That is very ethnocentric to call someone a freak because of their food choice (the Dutch are rather kick-ass, too bad he doesn't follow any of their other cultural traits). What is scary is his sexism, homophobia, and complete ignorance of science.
RyeItGrrl 3 years ago
oh my god that is sick.
hamper11 3 years ago
I never thought I'd say this, but...
I'm glad McCain is the Rep. presidental nominee.
Konoha107 3 years ago
I'm gonna have to go ahead and agree with you.
That gave me the shivers.
zzyzx0788 3 years ago
What's wrong about eating horses? lol It seems quite out of place to say Huckabee "doesn't believe in evolution","wants to change the Constitution to fit with the Bible","thinks AIDS patients should be quarantined", AND "he ate horse meat". OH THE HORROR! Eating horse meat?!! That's just aweful! Cow meat and pig meat are alright BUT HORSE MEAT?! That's just going too far. lol
GuyaRicanMC 3 years ago 3
Lol, i dont see anything wrong with eating horses either. Dutch cooking often uses horse meat. Why is it okay to send them to the knacker to make glue but not to turn them into shit?
boonw 3 years ago
Some horses are bred for buthcering and eating, they're the ardenn-horses. Horse doesn't taste like chicken btw... And as much as he's a freak, eating horse meat is not one reason to that.
Baszottbivaly 3 years ago
That guy actually wants to lower our standards to people's that lived thousands of year ago in the desert? FUCKING INSANITY!
Shadowlink2213 3 years ago 3
5/5 and fav!
soulinite 3 years ago
Same aplies for the squirrel. Im pointing out these, because this popularism is below you. You have some great videos and I respect you a lot for the level of argument you show on them. Keep your stantards high.
Darvinisti 3 years ago
What was that about eating horse meat? Why is it worse then eating cow or a pig? Unless you think eating meat is a criteria for crazy it was just a crazy argument. Totally irrelevant.
Darvinisti 3 years ago
however....
eating any companion animal is kinda odd
same as eating dog or cat
SpanerMagnet 3 years ago
Eating animal, that was your companion is odd, but I bet the squirrel or horse were not his pets.
They eat dogs in Vietnam and horse is probably eaten everywhere, because it would be waste to let so much meat just rot.
Darvinisti 3 years ago
I don't know about Vietnam, but in Korea the dogs they eat are a different breed. No one would consider eating a companion dog. Their thought of as separate species almost.
But I agree with GuyaRicanMC, to attack his food choices (no matter how odd) is irrelevant.
sillypanda85 3 years ago
He is completely off his rocker, but why bust him on the horse meat thing? Is farming and slaughtering horses more horrible than doing the same things to pigs and cattle all of a sudden?
Superphilipp 3 years ago 2
Agree. I think pigs are smarter than horses anyway. And there are several tasty rodents - squirrel happens to be one. But Americans are funny. We like aquatic arthropods, but freak at a salted basket of fried locust. We'll munch on conch, but turn weird at the thought of escargot. And we freak about reptiles - although I can attest that turtle, rattlesnake, gator and iguana are all good.
No, Huckabee scares the snot out of me because he thinks the Constitution should read like Leviticus.
47f0 3 years ago
theres something unseemly about eating companion animals...cows and pigs are different
SpanerMagnet 3 years ago
You forgot to mention how he pardoned rapists who converted to Christianity. (One of them, after being set free, raped and killed a woman.)
Heathenfidel 3 years ago 3
fucking christans
jthm47 3 years ago 3
The scariest part is how he wants to change the constitution to equal God.
Faustuss1 3 years ago 5
"The scariest part is how he wants to change the constitution to equal God."
Nope, to the BIBLE (not necessarily god), and HIS interpretation of it...
annpetasupporter 3 years ago
That's what I meant.
Faustuss1 3 years ago
I figured, I just thought I'd specify...
annpetasupporter 3 years ago
As a Brit, I would like to say that you're politicians are even crazier than ours.
sunyata999 3 years ago 3
I didn't realize he was that much of an idiot. WOW...
DIRTYDUNNZ 3 years ago 2
How did he become Gouvenour? He seems so unprofessional and ignorant he should have been shot as soon as he began to campaign. I do not understand it, not even a bit.
l0rf 3 years ago
Next time you're in the states, visit Arkansas. Drive around, avoiding the interstates. Stop at the small-town diners. You WILL understand. On the other hand - he is a likable, funny guy. He plays a pretty good electric bass. Heck, next time I'm doing a cookout, he's invited. Of course, Ted Bundy was also very personable, and Huckabee really is deeply, fundamentally batshit - and it has nothing to do with his diet.
47f0 3 years ago
Separation of church and state? Huckabee's never heard of it.
Crosisborg 3 years ago 4
I generally love you stuff, and the general thrust of this video is dead on. The main thing I disagree over is the negative view of eating horse.
I love horses, I love riding horses. That sad the taboo against horsemeat is a heavily Euro-centric view. Here in Japan horse is just another meat that can be eaten (and it is tasty). Strangely enough my young students react with near horror when they learn that in the West we eat rabbit.
drekkan85 3 years ago
He has mad squirrel disease!
Brainmold 3 years ago 3
Yeah, I don't really care if he eats horses. It's a culture thing.
But I prefer my State with a separate side of Church please.
MRJerrod410 3 years ago 8
Well, I don't give a shit what the guy eats, but yeah, everything else is pretty crazy.
poparena 3 years ago 9
come on Don, they eat horses in France right? Meat is meat is tasty if you cook it right... yum! The dude is a moron nevertheless
einyr 3 years ago 3
Damn, I'm glad we dodged that bullet. But isn't Ron Paul also on record as saying he doesn't accept evolution either? There is a youtube video available. My jaw dropped when I saw it. I Darwinism was a major inspiration of modern libertarian ideas.
FlowCell 4 years ago
Yes, the RP thing really, really turned me off of him.
DonExodus2 4 years ago
Dude... Your hilarious... The vid description made me lmao.
sighuponsigh 3 years ago
@DonExodus2 ...And claims that the bible is objective morality are really horseshit (or squirrelshit). People just take the parts of the bible that agrees with contemporary views or their own ethical or bigoted opinions and follow them, and then claim that they follow the rules of the bible and it is objective morality. It isn't. Besides, if you refrain doing something out of fear of hell, does that make you moral? If i don't kill Bob because John will shoot me if i do, am a moral person?
procritic09 1 year ago
@DonExodus2 I've scene 'the young': torch toy green army men, put salt on slugs, torture poor Earth worms on grills, this is not unusual youthful behavior. It is borderline sadistic but not unusual, however this behavior as late as college is. I'm not sure he was implying he ate the squirrel though. I need more information and preferably another statement from him on the subject.
JESUSRULESFOREVER777 10 months ago
I could not agree more!!!!
To think this guy won so many primaries in the south.
bravesirjoey 4 years ago
That aids idea sounds good.
LongShlong125 4 years ago
i don't care if he eats horses but his views on religion and the constitution and gays and women??? How did anyone vote for him???? He basically promotes genocide. Americans are so dump. I'm ashamed at times to live here.
VogtTD 4 years ago 5
Who the fuck cares what kind of food he eats? It's not any more ridiculous than eating any other animal. This is definitely the least ridiculous, and least frightening, of his views.
CommodoreAxilon 4 years ago 4
See my prior comments on this.
DonExodus2 4 years ago
@CommodoreAxilon You said,"Who the f cares what kind of food he eats?"-Exactly! If DonExodus2 starts attacking food then he'd better attack half the world. The French eat snails. Some oriental countries consider cats and dogs a delicacy. Some countries eat chocolate covered ants. Some countries eat fried scorpions. If you attack his eating habits your making a enemy of half the world viewing this. DON I knew it was only a matter of time tell your mouth got you in trouble good luck bud.
JESUSRULESFOREVER777 10 months ago
I've eaten a lot of squirrel. Never from a popcorn popper, but it's not out of the question.
The rest of the stuff I agree is nutty.
TheFallibleFiend 4 years ago
Sorry, Mr. Huckabee, but I think I'll keep my constitution and my apparent damnation for doing so.
lisamariefan 4 years ago
What do you mean: "it's time to heal the gap between church and state."
onemoregod 4 years ago
"What do you mean: "it's time to heal the gap between church and state.""
.....tell me you are joking?
Obviously, Huck there intends to move this country to a theocracy under the Christian leadership.
Isn't that obvious?
ThatOneQuestion 4 years ago 2
that's what I assumed, just wanted to clarify. i think i would have said: time to widen the gap between church and state.
it's cool...
onemoregod 4 years ago
I was being sarcastic :)
DonExodus2 4 years ago
Yes, Chuckabee is crazy. But he's testing the waters for future demagogue nutjobs.
onemoregod 4 years ago
Mike is the only one that can beat Obama. Mac can't go up against a guy who is in his 40's, great speaker and is outside of Washington. Waht is the GOP doing-commiting suicide?
HebertForHuck 4 years ago
the fact that he said that about the constitution and got as far as he did in the presidential race scares the living shit out of me.
IllegalAlien1 4 years ago 3
"the fact that he said that about the constitution and got as far as he did in the presidential race scares the living shit out of me."
Same here.
ThatOneQuestion 4 years ago
Mike Huckabee is plain old stupid.
4AthiestEvolutionary 4 years ago
well it doesn't really matter how crazy huckabee is cause mccain is the winner for republicans. Probably obama will win which I hope.
Saibomb 4 years ago
That part about changing the constatution scares me almost as much as the group of people applauding him for saying that.
sweatytoothmadman 4 years ago 3
LOL....brilliant, hes like the crazy person who lives in the strange house..every town has one
Elcristoph 4 years ago
wtf is up with people trying to push their religion on everyone, it especially pisses me off when politicians try that shit. i'm pretty sure it says in the bible to pray away from other people or something along those lines(cant remember the exact passage), but then again when have the religious ever let a little thing like their religion get in the way of what they want to do.
carnut666 4 years ago 2
That is very ironic. It seems as if the party which exploits religion is the least religious.
-Pro War
-Pro capital punishment (How do you think Jesus feels about that one- hint t)
-Anti helping the poor.
-Anti love- pro violence.
-Anti helping the sick
etc etc etc.
DonExodus2 4 years ago
But there very anti-science and that is religious.
sweatytoothmadman 4 years ago
if jesus came back to huckabee's theocracy he'd be killed by lethal injection for blasphemy. keep on repeating your mistakes, religion!
marrokiu 4 years ago 2
'batshit crazy'; you got that from edwardcurrent, didn't you? :)
Bfly99 4 years ago
Nah, Ive said that for years :P Its my trademark! lol
DonExodus2 4 years ago
i can get ostrich and buffalo at the local supermarket ...who cares about his diet
but that batsh*t crazy religion of his ...
OH HAYL NO!!!!!!
dancingnature 4 years ago 2
I LIVE IN NYC ..i can also get caviar
dancingnature 4 years ago
looks like the bible will destroy the constitution...yay! sigh....huckabee's craziness makes mccain's win oh so easy....
marrokiu 4 years ago
damnit! the bnible is for CHRISTIANS! keep it to yourself and stop bringing it into politics! if you like it so much, STFU and follow it.
marrokiu 4 years ago
"Liked the idea of quarantining AIDS victims". Well, we wouldn't expect a presidential candidate to actually learn about a threat before reacting to it, now would we? :O Incredible that a profoundly ignorant extremist like this could ever make it as far in the presidential race as he has. But got to agree with the other comments there - an unusual diet is not a particularly good point against someone...
MightyTiny 4 years ago 4
Im trying to reach both audiences. The thinkers dont care about frying critters- they care about his views on God.
The average person doesnt really care about his views on God- but should find the eating squirrel a bit alarming!
Either way, little experiment, and I dont care what you say, frying squirrels is fucking weird. :P
DonExodus2 4 years ago
thats because you probably dont have southern relatives over the age of 60
they ate raccoon too ..and given how closely related raccoons and dogs are .....that one used to turn my stomach
dancingnature 4 years ago
They arent related because evolution is a LIE!
DonExodus2 4 years ago
Just like George bush isn't related to humans because evolution is a lie.
DarthLeviathan 4 years ago
@DonExodus2 Enjoying frying live squirrels is sadistic and cruel, but i don't see much of a problem with eating horse. His stances on "amending the constitution so it's in gods standards" technically means setting the punishment for working on Sunday to a public stoning to the death... "oh, that's metaphorical...", yeah well what if "thou shall not kill" is metaphorical? He'd say that it isn't. Why? Because he agrees with it. People don't take the bible objectivity, they take what they want.
procritic09 1 year ago
Correct, there is nothing wrong with eating horse meat in many cultures, however, it is NOT in his!
Actually, its illegal I think...
DonExodus2 4 years ago
Make that slaughtering horses for food.
DonExodus2 4 years ago
Comment removed
mortenlu 2 years ago
I hate pushy fundamentalists. I dislike fundamentalists in general, but pushy fundamentalists (fundamentalists that push their religion on you) grind my gears.
A note on horse meat: There's nothing really wrong with eating it. Lots of cultures around the world eat it. I've tried it once, and I can't say I really liked it, but it was better than the rest of the $75 meal it came with (I should have paid $120 and got the steak :( ).
Atriviality 4 years ago
What's the big deal about his eating habits? Why is it okay to eat a cow but not a horse, a rabbit but not a squirrel? I don't care if he shovels rancid pigeon shit into his mouth, what bothers me is the vile insanity coming OUT!
theinquisitor 4 years ago
His statements on the Constitution and evolution are quite ridiculous. But why is it so crazy to eat horse and squirrel? It's only "crazy" within the context of your culture (its Huckabee's culture too, but still). Eating cows is "crazy" in India.
I don't know. I actually look forward to the day when I have enough money to travel around the world and try all kinds of exotic foods, and if squirrel and horse are on the menu, and it looks appetizing, I'll give it a shot.
EvoLIEtion 4 years ago