Creationism vs. Darwin [4/4] - Krista Tippett of "Speaking of Faith" (2005)

[riggermortisify]

I actually came here after trying to watch her bullshit, disinformation on Einstein. I thought it was going to be a real discussion on him and "Spinoza's god" because I'd never seen her before. Ten minutes in I had to turn it off because if the amount of gibberish, lies and outright fiction that this horrid cunt was spewing, all over the memory of a genius who affected all of our lives in ways people tend to not realize.

What a surprise that she's trying to hide her support for creationism.

[mrlordpancakes2]

frankly religon isnt the problem its some influencial people that follow it that's the problem i have no problem with religous people until they deny proven facts and teach there bullshit in schools to very suseptable young chrildren who then believe what they were told and so the idea spreads its a terrible flaw in human society how people believe the most retarded bullshit ever said and plus every religous organisation except a small few are total hyporcrites just look at the chatolic church

[ILUVJOHN112710]

I FEEL SOOO MUCH DUMBER AFTER WATCHING THIS HOW THE FUCK DID DARWIN N GALLILEO WANT TO GET IN THE MIND OF GOD THAT LADY IS JUST PULLIN SHIT OUT HER ASS ATHEISM ALL THE WAY!!!!

[cypeapplejuice]

@GsliMaIiy The bible is not a reliable source as it doesn't corroborate historically on many key points, it also makes flat out incorrect descriptions of creation and the structure of the universe universe. Tacitus doesn't specifically mention Jesus, just Cherestus: some guy alive around 50AD. Celsus calls Jesus a trickster, and he wrote in the second century. Lucian, again 2nd Cent. mocks Jesus. No eyewitness of Jesus enscribed anything, desipte his sacking a temple, come off it!

[benderyMLG32]

@cypeapplejuice Incorrect. In Tacitus' Annales 15:44 the word is spelled Christus, not Cherestus. Get your facts straight.

[scubandre1]

That's the problem in the U.S, instead of speaking about real issues like global marming or clean energy they still waisting time and money to debade about the 6000 years old earth and Adam and Eve......no wonder why they are loosing the scientific race againts modern nations!!!

[elchafa]

It would be naïve to think that if God exists then evolution is impossible. If God exists and is all-powerful, then he might be smart enough to create things that can evolve and improve with time.

[elchafa]

@elchafa (cont.)

Religious people need to understand that science is objective, therefore it is not EVER going to say "This is true because someone said so and wrote a book about it." without any objective and empirical proof; instead, science will test that "truth" and see if it withstands the tests of fallibility, because ask yourselves, if it is indeed TRUE, should it not pass EVERY test of fallibility?

[b991228]

Religions look to the gaps that science can't answer and say that is where God lives. With our modern culture the gaps are shrinking but they felt that at least the creation was the last huge "gap" where God could safely live. Now with Darwin they feel that even the creation is in danger.

[cs181181]

I like the idea of science being linked to religion rather then being the enemy...

[Drarkhan]

@cs181181

Science = how

Religion = why

bam! They magically suddently complement each other and make everyone happy! Wait no, that would be too simple, too rational, and too smart. Let's think of something else....

[gregrutz]

Polls prove we need more science taught is schools.

Evolution does not address GOD, it shows the bible is wrong,

but science has proved the bible wrong many times.

[medicinegone]

It's amazing to me that, with everything that IS known about world history, human history, and just basic reality, that anyone is taking Creationism seriously, or even the concept of a god in general. I just don't get it. Is it fear of not believing? Fear of death? Unwillingness to take responsibility for your own life and decisions? Or maybe you were just brought up this way and can't think for yourself?

[Bozeman42]

She wonders how the poll was worded, then she presumes that the wording posed a stark dichotomy of god versus evolution. This is not the case for Gallop's poll. I will post the wording in a reply to this comment. The percentage of people responding that people were created in their present form within the past 10,000 years has hovered just above 40% since 1982, and last was placed at 44% in 2008 in the US. Other options were evolution with no god(14%, and evolution guided by god(36%).

[Bozeman42]

Which of the following statements comes closest to your views on the origin and development of human beings -- 1) Human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God guided this process, 2) Human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God had no part in this process, 3) God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so?

[allinsman]

If, as you suggest 44% of americans answered option 3 on that poll it is disturbing. The 1st option I can understand as it's just a way for people to rationalize their faith.

[Bozeman42]

Google: Gallup evolution

The first hit should be the official Gallup page about this particular poll. The page describes how the survey was worded and gives the responses given.

[eichael09]

kinda sad to think how much this looks like the death of religion in many ways

[Wushuki]

Brilliant from Jonathan Mann to ask her why all the polls show that the majority of the people literally believe the bible while she claims that the bible didn't really mean it when it said that God created life.

All she could do was stutter that the research had to be wrong, because it would be impossible that she was.

These anti-atheists are in the same kind of denial that creationists are.

[InYourFaceNewYorker]

Einstein and Darwin were atheists... what she talking about? :P

[1wisestein]

Einstein was a deist while Darwin had gone to school to become a clergyman but later on identified himself as an agnostic and died as one, claims his family.

[gamesbok]

"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."

-Albert Einstein

[hanges7269]

She knows that Einstein did not believe in a personal God. See her new book "Einstein's God."

[patakigov]

She only graduated from Yale Divinity School and garnered a Fullgright scholarship, served in the diplomatic service to Germany. Einstein believed in a pantheistic force and in his own way was a deeply religious man. I think you misread and misjudge. I think religious people are more tolerant than this. I think thoughtful people are as well.

[fctchk]

Einstein on Tipett's god:

"The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can change this. Animistic interpretations of religions of nature are in principle not annulled by monopolization. With such walls, we can only attain a certain self-deception; they do not further our moral efforts. On the contrary."

[emeralds222]

This Krista Tippett is uneducated and a boob.

I cannot believe she mentioned Albert Einstein as a religious person. He was quote mined and she buys right into it. He was atheist to the core.

She is a moron.

[AugmentedMinor]

Einstein was deist.

[emeralds222]

Prove it.

[cperez1000]

STOP!! I'm your GOD!!! I made humans in mi image, and I am an ape!

I will scratch my ass now.

[herolink0]

please define truth, because obviously this lady knows everything.

[poolstic63]

It's amazing that so many people have shut their minds off to reality. Religion is an addiction that needs to be abolished.

[tx108us]

If single cell organisms evolved into complex cell organisms, then why are there trillions and trillions of single cell organisms today? You dopies, do you ever use your brain for thinking other than using your brain to find where to get your next crakshot?

[IDownfall]

Evolution isnt a chain, its a likea bush. As small mutations happen and happen to fill in a niche a little better, they would tend to survive better. It has nothing to do with the rest of the "colony", who no doubt already fill a specific neiche. Did you understand any of that? If so just ask. I'm sure there are many people willing to spend more time than I have, if you at least try to listen to reason.

[jimbob224]

Numpty.

[blacksabbathgnr098]

tx108, you're the perfect example of yet another ignorant creationist.

downfall answered your question.

Got any more brainbusters for us crack heads?

well here's one for you, it's your turn:

how do you explain that the world is millions of years old? that we can use radioactive dating to accurately estimate the age of the Earth. I mean it's clearly millions of years old (dinosaurs) which is contradiction with the bible (the world isn't 7000 years old).

That crystal meth must be strong...

[Hijodelaisla]

"Understanding God better" says it all. Why should evolution preclude God's involvement? Don't you think God is smart enough to come up with evolution?

[AmusedChild]

"None of us can fully wrap our minds around" evolution? Speak for yourself, Tippett! "Goes against our instincts"? Um, Charles Darwin was as agnostic, Krista, and so was Einstein. I appreciate that she's against creationism, but she's trying to smooth over an attack on science and she's so bland.

[fctchk]

3:27 " ... christian Americans were taught evolution in school and they were taught to love god and read their bibles in church and intuitively they were able to imagine that reality and life and the world CAN MAKE ROOM FOR BOTH OF THOSE KINDS OF TRUTH"

For Tippet, one of the greatest self deluding purveyors of intellectual dishonesty now pr(e)(a)ying on the airwaves, there exist "kinds of truth": scientific vs "holy" book and intuitively imagined truth - to her, both are equally true.

[tapiwakay]

fctchk, 3:27 " ... christian Americans were taught evolution in school and they were taught to love god and read their bibles in church and intuitively they were able to imagine that reality and life and the world CAN MAKE ROOM FOR BOTH OF THOSE KINDS OF TRUTH"

I can't make sense of when her sentence start or stop sometimes. Is she saying that room for both theories/kinds of truth in the public schools or saying room for for both in LIFE AS A WHOLE/IN THE ENTIRE WORLD. ??? Listen again

[fctchk]

A distinction with nary a difference; even if she meant only the former the latter would still have to be believed to be true in order to even consider teaching it in schools.

To erase all doubt as to what SHE believes, subject yourself to the immaculately produced smarmy, pseudo-intellectual, obscurantist, saccharine prattle she oozes on her Sunday (when else?) morning show on NPR "speaking of Faith". There she strains less to maintain and hide behind her pretense of impartiality.

[tapiwakay]

So i was right. She isn't being honest about what she really feels. She is trying to answer one question with to answers and saying both answers are correct, yet we know that the answers are total opposites.

She will soon gravitate to Atheism. RIght now she is denial. Christian-Aethism or the Agnostic idea are so logical. I find it hard to believe other people don't see this too.

[fctchk]

"She is trying to answer one question with to answers and saying both answers are correct, yet we know that the answers are total opposites."

You have just managed to distill the dozens of hours of the psychopathology which she manifests on her magnificenty produced show Speaking of Faith into one sentence. Bravo!

[fctchk]

Here she goes again: 4:34 "there are very intellectual teachers within evangelicalism who also revere the knowledge of science"

"very intellectual" indeed -her kind of intellectual: one who equates knowledge gained through the scientific method, which can be relied upon anywhere in the universe, with religion - fairy tales whose most compelling reason for you to believe them is that the inexistent evidence to support them cannot be refuted because it doesn't exist.

[BoyintheMachine]

Should clarify that there are more Muslim and Hindu Creationists than there are Christian Creationist, and yes, every Creaationist secretly believes that their favorite God or religion is the 'right one'.

[StandUpForISRAEL]

Yea, and all the explanations dance around reality and pedal with words. Atheist have faith in an infinite regression which is a logical contradiction. There has to be an unmoved mover, or you will reside in the logical contradiction. The unmoved mover identified as God of course. Science has determined that space is in fact expanding, so it is finite, reversing that will lead you back to nothing. Space certainely has to be expanding into something infinite, an infinite realm, namely God.

[TippyCando]

Faith is the belief in something for which there is no evidence, something that atheists(at least the ones that I know) do not do.

Theists talking about "logical contradiction(s)" would be laughable, if it didn't have such serious consequences.

[StandUpForISRAEL]

If Charles Darwin can't explain empathy. What drives the human for hope, and to go out of our way help other people with no benefit to ourselves. Yet evolution is survival of the fittest, empathy does not help me survive in any way. Evolution is light years from explaining emotions...

[mothball667]

WRONG, evolution does explain this, please look up Altruism in animals, Evolution of morality, and Evolutionary ethics. Again just another creationist who hasn't read the basic facts.

[StandUpForISRAEL]

Eistein believed in other realms.

I do not believe that evolution would create the mind, love, empathy, sadness, etc etc. And that it would create us for a hunger for God. Just my opinion.

[StandUpForISRAEL]

If they are going to teach evolution, it is required I believe to teach Intelligent Design. It's fair to cover both views, then students can decide from there. The Cambrian Explosion and things like The Bacterial Flagellum are major objections to evolution, the flagellum is an outboard motor with a rotor, u-joint, propeller, it looks designed. All the parts have to be in place at one time or it could not work.

[kargaethas]

Indeed, we should teach id with evolution in school, just like we should teach intelligent falling and gravity, alchemy and chemistry and ofcourse flat earth and spherical earth!

Also i have this new theory that because snowflakes look designed they were created by the mighty gay bunny, and i think that my theory should be taught alongside with the offical theory. i mean come on, snowflakes forming naturally? Thats just silly.

The offical theory leads you to killing people and raping babies!

[Subfightr]

The mighty gay bunny touched me with his puffy tail, made me feel all worm and fuzzy inside. I would not wish to live in a world where the mighty gay bunny did not exist.

[xtiaan3]

We don't teach Evolution is schools because it "sounds" like a good idea, its 150 years of peer reviewed science. Have you ever even looked in a biology text book? 500+ pages of solid science all supporting evolution. What are you going to put in your "Intelligent Design" text book?? "God did it"... ? If you really believe in ID, then I can understand that the overwhelming scientific evidence against your beliefs must be troubling, but you are just going to have to except it.

[TippyCando]

If there were an alternative to evolution, it should be taught. "intelligent design" is not it. It is not science. Read the Kitzmiller" decision. Read Stephen J. Gould on the Cambrian explosion. The Bacterial Flagellum has been debunked many times. See Kenneth Miller. There has been not one, I repeat, not one peer reviewed article in support of ID. And please don't tell me about Stephen Myers. That's been debunked as well.

[kriztufer2001]

you have the right to have your own opinions as long as everyone else has the right to ridicule them for being ridiculous.

[r0sscun]

same goes for yours.

[IceBlood888]

@kriztufer2001 Yep especially a belief that nothing created the world. There are two beliefs, either nothing or something created the world. (The other beliefs are a minority)