Media
Bill Maher Turns Climate Change Debate Into Evolution Showdown
- Posted on January 29, 2011 at 8:59am by
Scott Baker
- Print »
- Email »
(via Mediaite)
Popular Stories
MSNBC Host Snaps in Heated Segment: ‘What in the World Is Riskier Than Being a Poor Person in America?’ 694 Comments
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 662 Comments
‘Jumah at the DNC’ Speaker: ‘Muslims Visited America Prior to Columbus’ & ‘It Was a Muslim’ Who Guided Him to the ‘New World’ 524 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 364 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 346 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 232 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 241 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order Read More- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 147 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 300 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 232 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (456)
UpstateNYConservative
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:37amI guess, too, the British college that falsified or ignored data that didn’t fit their storyline was funded by Big Oil? Gee, and here I thought it was funded by the British government.
Report Post »eventual
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:37amWhy do so many celebs lower themselves to be on this jackass’s show.
I lose all respect for whomever I see on his program.
Report Post »bjt141
Posted on January 30, 2011 at 2:52pmbecause they aren’t scared to talk to people with a different point of view unlike your humble website host who is scared to talk to anyone of a different opinion because he always looks like a fool, ex his appearance on the view
Report Post »BubbaCoop
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:35amWhen these people say there’s a “consensus”, they mean they ignore anyone who doesn’t agree with them.
Psalm 24:1
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v2/n3/antibiotic-resistance-of-bacteria
This is not evolution.
The government subsidies rich people? Other than Senators?
Report Post »barbaraw62
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 11:02am1 Cor 1:19-21, 25, 27-29: For it is written: “I will make the wisdom of the wise [men] perish, and the intelligence of the intellecual [men] I will shove aside” Where is the wise man? Where the scribe? Where the debater of this system of things? Did not God make the wisdom of the world foolish? For since, in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not get to know God. God saw good through the foolishness of what is preached to save those believing.”…Because a foolish thing of God is wiser than men, and a weak thing of God is stronger than men….but God chose the foolish things of the world, that he might put the wise men to shame; and God chose the weak things of the world, that he might put the strong things to shame, and God chose the ignoble things of the world and the things looked down upon, the things that are no, that he might bring to nothing the things that are, in order that no flesh might boast in the sight of God.
Report Post »Aaronious
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:35amThe climate has been changing from day one.
Report Post »clockwatcher
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:34amAnother self hateing group of left wing fools.
Report Post »oldsoldier10
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:33amBill who?
Report Post »mcpbob
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:32ami was going to spout off.. but… bill mahar doesn’t deserve the spit off the ground
Report Post »DashRipRock
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:32amOk wait
before we settle this argument Bill
first tell me
whatever happened to ACID RAIN
is it still around ?
Report Post »did it go away ?
What made it go away?
and what ever made acid rain go away
could it make the carbon in our skys go away?
GnomeChomsky
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:54amAcid rain is still around, though not as common in United States and Europe. The drop in occurrence is due to Clean Air measures put into effect in the 70s which reduced the emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide. China and Russia though still have a substantial acid rain problem.
Report Post »DashRipRock
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 10:09amActually we didnt take sulphur out of our fuel until 2005 when we replaced MTBEs with ethanol.
Report Post »GnomeChomsky
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 10:19amMost of the sulfur dioxide emissions came from factories and power plants not cars. So I’m not quite sure what your point is.
Report Post »matt708
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:32amhe just shows more of his stupidity every time he opens his lying mouth
Report Post »SteveSD
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:30amYawn.
This is not the comedian you are looking for.
Move along… move along
:)
On a more serious note, Mr Mahar is irrelevant and in a few decades, he’s going to have some very difficult questions to answer.
Report Post »KeenIncite
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:30amThe antibiotic example is NOT an example of evolution, it is an example of mutation. This is one of the problems with the debate. The terms being used have been garbled (and I believe purposefully,) to confuse the argument and give cover to the evolutionists. There are two types of evolution: microevolution (otherwise known as mutation) and macroevolution (which is one species actually changing into another.) Evolutionists always use microevolutionary examples to “prove” macroevolution. This is obviously incorrect. Bacteria will mutate as a result of exposure to a certain antibiotic, but I guarantee you, that bacteria will NEVER mutate enough to become an entirely different life form. There is NO evidence, either observed directly or from the fossil record, that macroevolution has EVER happened. Bill Maher et al are wrong (once again.)
Report Post »MAProg
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 11:36amincorrect, there is no distinctio between micro and macro evolution within the scientific community. that is a false dichotomy thought up by creationists. to use your language, tho, “macro” evolution is just “micro” evolution over a long enough period of time. with enough change, an isolated population can become it’s own species.
there is plenty of evidence in the fossil record to prove speciation
Report Post »Echad
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 1:36pmKeenincite is correct and Maprog is absolutely wrong. The evolutionists try to claim that “there is no distinction between micro and macro evolution” that statement is blatantly false. No species has ever been seen to go through a macro change. Evolutionists have their magic fairy dust called time. Just add enough and presto it could happen. That is not science. Just like the linsky experiment with e-coli micro evolution is observable that is a fact. But macro evolution has never been observed. The e-coli are still e-coli and will never be anything other than e-coli. Just like the experiments on fruit fly’s they did everything they could think of to change that poor fly and no matter what they did after many mutations, fly’s with wings, without wings, multiple wings etc. None that could actually live outside the lab. But no matter what they did the fruit fly is still a fruit fly.
Report Post »Sorry Maprog macro evolution is a myth. Speculation and conjecture and saying it could happen is not science.
Mr_Meaner
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 4:03pmHow can a process that always results in a loss of genetic information, (mutation) lead to any sort of positive physical adaptation ?
Report Post »Uniformitarianism is not supported by the fossil record.
Catastrophism is
Snidely
Posted on January 30, 2011 at 1:11amGood observation, Keen. Another reason that resistant bacteria is not an example of evolution is that no new genetic information is created. Existing genetic information lets a few bacteria survive, but the viruses did not gain information. Evolution requires new information AND natural selection. The example the lady gave is ONLY an example of natural selection. (Viruses do exchange genetic information between other viruses, but again, that is not new information, only a transfer of existing info.)
Ma, you are wrong. All creationists that I know believe that kinds (that would likely be at the family level in the taxonomy table) of plants and animals can lose genetic information which isolates them into species. What we don’t believe is that there are any examples of an increase of information that would result in worms becoming eagles. The evolution that you talk about has never been observed. After over a hundred years of experiments, fruit flies are still fruit flies, bacteria is still bacteria, and finches are still finches.
Report Post »MAProg
Posted on January 31, 2011 at 10:40pm@Echad: no where in modern scientific literature will you find language such as “micro” and “macro evolution, because the distinction does not exist. Speciation HAS been observed in nature. As for lack of observations of one “kind” becoming another, this is simply due to the time required for that much genetic change to happen. We’re talking of changes over hundreds of thousands, if not millions of years for such to occur. If we can observe speciation, then enough speciation (genetic drift) over a long enough time will generate different “kinds.”
As for the statement about loss of genetic information, that is simply not the case. There have been instances of observed added information through mutations. To state that no new information can arise from such is to not understand genetics.
Report Post »Ruler4You
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:22amThe only thing ‘settled’ is the fact that Bill Mahar is an idiot.
Report Post »Smokey_Bojangles
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:22amWhy are there no talking apes?People who thought this way have caused over 100million deaths.Bill will meet his idols,Mao,Stalin,Hitler etc in Hell.
Report Post »DashRipRock
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:29amWhat do you mean there are no talking apes
havent you ever seen MSNBC?
Report Post »Harvey
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 10:13amThere are talking apes this fool proves it
Report Post »OneRepublic4us
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 10:15amThe liberals live in such a bubble in California I suspect they think planet of the apes was a documentary.
Report Post »GnomeChomsky
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 10:27amAs opposed to creationists who think The Flintstones and One Million Years BC were documentaries
Report Post »MAProg
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 11:39ambecause other extant species of great apes lack the vocal apparattus that humans possess. Chimps and bonobos (our closest relative) to show an uncanny ability to cumminicate. There have been many experiments demonstrating their ability to sign or use an interface to construct crude sentences.
To answer you question more directly, the reason why there are no talking apes (expect us) is because they evolved into us. We are them.
Report Post »SeeMoore2
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:19amTwo things are missing from the scientific debate on “climate change/global warming”
1. A control, in every experiment to deduce a scientific outcome based on fact, a control is the only way to insure accuracy of the result.
2. The complete reversal of “cause and effect”, CC/GW, as far as I know, is the only alleged phenomena that reverses that simple algorithm. ie: the weather is cause by CC/GW, no matter what the weather happens to be.
Plus I would like to correct the little colored comedian in that storms have NOT increased in intesity.
Report Post »There hasn’t been a hurricane as bad as Katrina since Katrina., not to mention the snow storm that hit the Buffalo area back in the 80′ was far worse than the recent snows in the northeast.
And one more point o the little colored guy, he says he believes in God and that God wouldn’t do these things to our world, paraphrasing of course, anyway, I quess he hasn’t read Revelation.
GnomeChomsky
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:38am“There hasn’t been a hurricane as bad as Katrina since Katrina., ”
Thats, simply put, not true. Rita and Wilma in 2005 both had higher sustained wind speeds than Katrina and Dean and Felix in 2007 were both stronger than Katrina. Then in the Pacific you had Rick in 2009 and Celia in 2010 that were more powerful.
Report Post »flagbearer
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:17amConcensus? These people need to branch out and read other scientific reports/studies, as Cain admits. They attack the oil companies, but give no mention to how much money the people promoting global warming are/will make from it.
Report Post »DashRipRock
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:15amOk evolution basicaly states that man evolved from monkey.
Well Mahr is proof that Darwin is wrong because
Bill Maher is still a monkey
Report Post »MAProg
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 11:33amevolution doesn’t say that man evolved from a monkey. it says that man evolved from another species of primate, **** erectus (eregaster) to be exact.
Report Post »moriarty70
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 11:55am@MAPROG
You can keep telling them that, but it doesn’t matter, their faith “protects” them from such facts so they can keep playing the monkey card.
Report Post »Echad
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 2:08pmThe genetic difference between a human and our nearest so called relative the chimpanzee is at least 1.6%. Wow that seems we are very closely related. But that is a gap of at least 48,000,000 nucleotides, and a change of only 3 nucleotides is fatal to an animal. Fact is we are not closely related at all.
Report Post »CottonMPG
Posted on January 30, 2011 at 12:51amI feel sorry for those who are so determined to cling to this evolutionary theory. It flies in the face of true science. The only observable changes in living creatures have to do with a loss of genetic material and this could only result in devolution and/or adaptation.
Report Post »To clarify, you must start with a living creature first, then you can, through natural or human directed selection, eliminate unwanted characteristics by only allowing certain individuals to live and reproduce. Bacteria and viruses adapt similarly to our own immune systems. They appear different but they are still bacteria or viruses, they don’t turn into amoeba. A wolf hound is still a domesticated wolf as is a dachshund. They are simply adapted, through intentional selection to a specific purpose. The second law of thermodynamics states that all things are moving from order to disorder. This is true science and is readily observable all day every day. This is also in direct opposition to the idea of evolution. Oh and by the way, who do you think would be more highly evolved of all the races if evolution were true? Ask Darwin. He had very definite ideas on the matter. The Bible teaches that God created two human beings in His image and that all the races of the world are descended from them.
MAProg
Posted on January 31, 2011 at 10:51pmIt doesn’t matter if there is x amount of nucleotides different between a human and a chimpanzee, the fact is that we’re not talking about an all or nothing change, we’re talking about a gradual change over the course of six million years. Your argument seems to not consider that.
As for the second law of thermodynamics: evolutionary biology does not violate it because we do not live in a closed system. We live in an open system which receives constant energy from the sun. In fact, in certain systems, entropy can be reduced. You are misapplying the law.
Report Post »therockczar
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:14amMay I point out who got uncivil in this debate–or watch it yourself and it will be obvious. Liberals are bi polar–so it has to be a mental condition.
Report Post »Smitty1969
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 10:42amI live in VA Beach and work in the marine industry on electronics from sonar, communications, navigation and Satellite imaging/ communication. My main bread and butter is the fishing community. I have fished here for over 28 years.
This year the winter season was incredibly short. The reason being the waters off Va (The Gulf Stream) became cold early in the year, the fish ran south faster than we have ever seen due to the cold water. The coastal area (3 mile state territorial waters) dropped as low as we have seen to 34deg. It had a huge economic impact on the commercial fisherman and recreational. The market prices for Rockfish is a staggering $15.00lb.
PS. Dearest Bill Mahr, One bad storm will not cause the Atlantic to do this ;)
Report Post »Steve Martin
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:14amWhy would anybody care what this PinHead says. He is a vial pissed off little *****.
Report Post »tobywil2
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:13amTHE CANCUN CLIMATE CHANGE SUMMIT
Cancun Climate Change Summit speaker Ian Roberts stated that there is a direct correlation between carbon emissions and expanding waistlines. Of course, he considers this more justification to reduce the consumption of fossil fuel. For once, the man is right, at least about the fact that the use of fossil fuel has a direct correlation to prosperity and productivity.
Seldom do the wannabe tyrants admit that their objective is to reduce prosperity and starve the population into submission. The man should be applauded for his honesty if not the validity of his argument.
At last the wannabe tyrants admit that control of the individual using hunger and poverty is the objective of the global warming initiatives.
http://commonsense21c.com/
Report Post »blanco
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:11amSeriously? They just won’t let go!!!!
Report Post »Capt_Spalding
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:09amOnce again, Bill Maher’s biggest supporter and publicist… The Blaze… comes through. This clown can’t buy the kind of publicity this website gives him.
Report Post »dizzyinthedark
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:27amAmen! The comments that follow make for good fodder for his tubing career!
Report Post »flintoid
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:29amAgreed. Why is The Blaze legitimizing him by publishing a daily story about him? Please Blaze, stop giving Maher the publicity he so desperately needs. We don‘t want to hear his opinion or we’d watch his show.
Report Post »Sheepdog911
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 10:35amSorry Captain S, calling him out on The Blaze is not publicity for this moron, it‘s informing those of us who wouldn’t normally waste their time watching him or his type of what is being said. Just because intelligence people wouldn‘t waste their time watching him every day doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t have an idea what his message to idiots is.
Report Post »magnum357
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 7:10pmBill is not the story here listen to the goof balls in the audience. They must have evolved wombats.
Report Post »booger71
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:09amOk Bill, explain in detail this settled science you speak of, thought not
Report Post »So
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:38am“Settled science” proves that a suit, tie, and gray hair does not increase your IQ. You are still just a comedian Bill. And you were never very good at that either.
Report Post »Lonescrapper
Posted on January 30, 2011 at 12:08pmAll you ever really need to say about Bill Maher these days is: “Again???”
Report Post »Carl1
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:09amAll that proves is 4 out of 5 of them are morons
Report Post »obamanation
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 2:30pmYup, I love how they flat out say there is no proof to the contrary, when there is a whole lot of it!!
Report Post »Grandpa
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:09amIt won’t be cold where Bill Maher is going
Report Post »TexasCommonSense
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 10:51amLOL! Good one, Grandpa!
Report Post »sissykatz
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 1:53pmActually I believe in BOTH I think God created Conservatives and I think the Progressives evolved or in the process of evolving which causes them to think so much like Monkeys, they can perform the simple things but when it comes to complex reasoning, like finance and figuring out that you don’t get out of debt by spending, they have real problems. just sayin
Report Post »RobertCA
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:02amI wonder what he evolved from .
Report Post »tobywil2
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:07amTHE GREAT “GLOBAL WARMING HOAX”
The proposals to combat “GLOBAL WARMING” have more potential to destroy our freedom and prosperity than any issue since WORLD WAR II. The cost of energy is increased by all these proposals. Energy is contained in all the products used to sustain our lives.
These proposals will be devastating to the poor, where the cost of survival consumes all their income.
Do you realize that these proposals are to combat an issue that has not even been proven to exist?
AND YOU LAUGH AT DON QUIXOTE?
THESE PROPOSALS WILL ONLY ENHANCE THE POWER OF THE “PEERS.” “CAP AND TRADE WILL DESTROY YOUR WEALTH AND FREEDOM!!
BRACE YOURSELF, THOMAS PAINE, REJOICE YOU “PEERS” THE TYRANNY OF
Report Post »KING GEORGE III IS BEING RESTORED BUT UNDER NEW MANAGEMENT!
http://commonsense21c.com/CLIMATE.html
bikerr
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:07amI think we can be sure that nothing would pro-create with him to continue the gene pool!
Report Post »historyguy48
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:18amThis guy is a comedian. So this has to be a joke, right? Idiots like him are a dime a dozen. The only thing settled about global warming, is that it is a scam. Evolution is still a theory, not proven science, so far, It does look like it may be true, but remember the Piltdown man scam? That one “proved” evolution, until it was pointed out that it was the body of a ape with a human skull.
Report Post »So
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:18amHe came from dogs, like he he tries to paint all Americans that aren’t infected with liberalism.
Maher is a cowardly, pompous, comedian. He says his tripe with a smirk and a smile. He’s smirking because he gets paid to spew his nonsense while the rest of America is hurting for jobs.
Irony at it’s best.
Report Post »VanGrungy
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:20amhttp://inthesenewtimes.com/2009/11/29/1975-endangered-atmosphere-conference-where-the-global-warming-hoax-was-born/
Report Post »Margaret Mead
What we need from scientists are estimates, presented with sufficient conservatism and plausibility but at the same time as free as possible from internal disagreements that can be exploited by political interests, that will allow us to start building a system of artificial but effective warnings, warnings which will parallel the instincts of animals who flee before the hurricane, pile up a larger store of nuts before a severe winter, or of caterpillars who respond to impending climatic changes by growing thicker coats [sic].
KICKILLEGALSOUT
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:21amScience by definition is a branch of knowledge or study dealing with facts. No one is against facts, but it seems Atheist are. The problem today is when people try to claim hypothesis’ and theories are science. If it was in fact science it would not be called a hypothesis or a theory. The error today is to say people who don’t believe in evolution are anti-science, for example,
What I want to know if how people can just make the “jump” to evolution. No scientist in the world today can answer 2 questions by science. Where did it all come from? How did inorganic material transition to organic life? No one can answer this but then just jump to the “facts” of evolution. You can’t just skip a step and the most important one for that matter. There is no sense talking about evolution until they can answer those questions. The only answer is a Creator God or the guess of man.
What-A-Joke
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:26amDoes any one care what Bill Mahar thinks? Science is almost as bad as politics. You can spin the data to favor whatever you choose. Eggs are good for you, no wait, there bad? Meat is good for you, or is it bad? A cup of coffee in the morning is good for you, or it will kill you I can’t remember which. Opinions are like elbows, every one has one or two?
http://www.clubseabreeze.com/TimPhillips
Report Post »tobywil2
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:33amFALSE PREMISE
When the premise is false the only arguments that can be used are fear mongering, emotion, sarcasm, ridicule, attacking the messenger and misrepresentation of the facts (lying). Those who expect to reap huge profits from our misery caused by tyranny are experts at these tactics.
This interview proves the point. The wannabe tyrant’s “witch doctor”, Bill Mahar, attacked the messenger instead of the message. Since his premise was false, what other choice did he have?
The only relevant issue is freedom or tyranny!!!! http://commonsense21c.com/
bread and circuses
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:36amthe only thing settled is the pond scum in his head
Report Post »BubbaCoop
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:38amthe dissolved bones of Neptune
Report Post »independentvoteril
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:45amMaher..
MEMO:
Report Post »Global warming hoax is OVER..Your side lost.. and evaluation only exists for PROGRESSIVES the rest of us came from CREATION.. which explains WHY the progressives have the mentality of a monkey.. actually that’s an insult to monkeys who are MUCH smarter than PROGRESSIVES..
End of Debate…
Noonien_Soong
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:46amFrom an Orangutan to a Macaque would be my guess. The transitional from a slumbering oaf to a loadmouth know-it-all.
Report Post »bulletsinthegun
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:48ambill came from under the rock
Report Post »Xcori8r
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:48amHey Bill,
Your brother Ambam called from the UK and wants to talk this over with you.
http://www.kentonline.co.uk/kentonline/news/2011/january/26/ambam_gorilla_footage.aspx
Report Post »Evileye
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:50amThat the problem he never evolved especially his brain
Report Post »CCulotta
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:54amThis is the same person that said that stupid Americans just need to be dragged into what ever he agrees with, so why any conservative would ever go on that show is beyond me. Just let his panel be all liberal so they can all sit there and agree with themselves. Ratings would plummet.
chuck
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:56amThe head APE speaks, bunch of monkeys!
Report Post »bobodu
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:57amOf course, the science should NOT be debated!!
Mr. Creationist…can you explain how a light bulb works?
Well you betcha. Ya see…in ever light bulb dat God created… He put a tiny lil Jesus in dere…and dat lil Jesus just wants ta shine ya see…He wants ta shine His light on da world…but when we turn off dat switch…we‘us jus’ turnin’ our backs on Jesus…an He casts darkness over da room..
Report Post »Devil Dog 7175
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:58amYet another comment from the peanut gallery…
Report Post »what4
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 10:04am@ Bikerr that would be the gene sespool!!
Report Post »geminisailor
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 10:04amMahar suffers “Napoleon complex”, aka “little man syndrome”, i.e. he is driven by a perceived handicap to overcompensate in other aspects of his life. He probably got his butt whooped a lot as a child; perhaps was never able to attract someone from the opposite sex as a young man; maybe he wasn’t loved or respected by his father, etc.
He is conscious of his diminutive stature and is permanently upset and bitter because he knows that if humans (today) were to be subjected to natural selection, he would be excluded.
Report Post »Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 10:06am@RobertCA
Not what he evolved from, what he has de-evolved into; same as most progressives in DC.
Report Post »natstew
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 10:09amthe same one as Rosie O’Donnald
Report Post »ron the veteran
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 10:13amit takes even more blind faith to belive in evolution than to belive in God. now maybe maher fell out of some monkeys ass as well as most liberals but im going for the God route. maher can take his monkey mom and get out of our country. why do you continue to put this clown on here?
Report Post »stifroc
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 10:17amI wanna know why the heck people keep having this Stalinist come on their shows? Every time he opens his mouth he’s praising Mao, Lenin, Stalin etc. or he’s goose-stepping in his black boots to the global warming / evolution agenda. Why do people continue to invite this waste of skin on their shows?
Report Post »djeffcoat
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 10:37amWoe is us that we are not as supremely knowledgeable and brilliant as Bill Maher thinks he is. Too bad that one day he will be dead and gone and no one will even remember his name.
Report Post »tower7femacamp
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 10:42amWhat ever Maurice Stong tells this ass clown to say
Report Post »How else could such a no talent like Bill stay on the air ?
Bluebonnet
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 10:42amPay no attention to this little man. He’s so full of hate, it’s wasting our time to point out what everyone see already. Such a little no body. and probably has body parts to match the rest of him.
Report Post »legendarytwo
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 10:45amBill Mayer probably did come from a monkey. I didn’t.
Report Post »TexasCommonSense
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 10:47amThere has been climate change as long as there’s been a climate. Glaciers formed the Great Lake! Glaciers take centuries to form. Then, the climate changed, the glaciers retreated north, and ocean levels rose. This all happened long before there were industrialized humans. My feeling is the huge ball of plasma in the sky we call “the Sun” has a lot to do with average global temperature. Do a web-search on the “Maunder Minimum” and how it affected our climate. The Maunder Minimum coincided with the middle, and coldest part, of the Little Ice Age.
Debate human evolution all you want, but they still can’t say how life began in the first place. Do you really think something complex enough to grow, evolve, heal its self, and replicate its self developed in a “primordial soup”? Even if it did, from where did its basic building blocks originate?
Don’t gamble your future on silly human over-thinking and over confidence in what you think you know. You don‘t know what you don’t know. That includes knowing, or not knowing, about God.
I have no doubt Bill Maher thinks he’s somehow smarter than God.
Report Post »aamador
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 10:47amIt is funny to listen to a bunch of idiots talk about something they know nothing about. Of course we know that the party agenda is what is at stake here. Somehow pertuate this lie so they can have Cap and trade.
Report Post »Sparky101
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 10:52amMomma always said “if you can’t say anything nice about someone, don’t say anything at all.” Hmmm. Hmmmm. Hmmmmm. Well, I’ve thought long and hard. I‘ll go to something else for awhile and maybe I’ll think of something nice to say.
Report Post »Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 10:55am@Aamador
Right, to these folks like Mahar, the means justify the ends that they wish to achieve; regardless of the true cost to everyone else. This guy is of the same mindset that the father of Prince Charles was when he declared ‘I want to come back as a virus to kill of millions of people”
In other words, dangerous idealist, dangerous radical, and in my opinion, a sociopathic member of the world.
Report Post »canyousmellmenow
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 11:01amHe said he came from monkey geans. In the 70′s we were gona freeze now were gona melt ? I can tell you this, I am freezing, my gas and electric bill are higher then ever. Send me some global warming please………
Report Post »Sergio Q
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 11:04amevin a putz like billy-boy is the result of Gods creation ,,but he may have been concieved on a pile of bullstuff & a bit oozed in while daddy was on the downstroke ,thus forming the bulk of his grey matter, that I’m guessin has a bit of a brown tint(?)
BY THE WAY , did I really hear the black guy useing his skin color/race in commenting of evolution from monkeys that would have set off mass rantz from A-holez like Jessy~iscrewedupthedream~Jackson & Al~notsosharp~Sharpton had a white guy said it??
ANYHOOOO….
Report Post »heres a link to a posting that will lead you to slightly onerlooked &/or buried
“U.S. Senate Minority Report”
….on the cover is the statement:
“Scientists continue to Debunk ”Consensus“ in 2008 and 2009”
(yup!! thats actually on the cover of the official United States document !)
MADASHELLONE
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 11:17amA bug..
Report Post »tommee
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 11:18amHey What-A-Joke
The lights in your house?… Science!
Your car ?… Science!
Your TV?… Science!
Your computer?… Science!
Your cell phone?… Science!
CT Scans, X-Rays, MRI’s and the drugs to make you better?… Science!
Even the guns in your closet… Science!
You would be hard pressed to find anything in today’s world that is not a result of science.
Report Post »TexasCommonSense
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 11:35amtommee, when science and politics mix there’s good reason for skepticism. No one is discounting science. Just don’t discount God. You don‘t know what you don’t know.
Report Post »exdem
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 11:39amThese people have such a sense of exaggerated self importance. We are just a tiny insignificant zit in this huge universe and have NO CONTROL over the WEATHER. Their WIZARD, Joel Rogers, admitted himself on tape that anything we do, will have no effect on earths temparature , but taxes for it will be used to redistribute wealth.
Report Post »When will the conservatives in the audience not be afraid to cheer and applaud , when their point of view is expressed? It seems they are intimidated by the ******* host and his fans.
The lady on the panel brings up the dinosaurs. I wished someone would have asked her if the Dinos would still be roaming earth if they had paid high taxes?. These folks are morons.. and I cant believe Hughley said he believes in God. I think he just alienated his communist athiest celebrity friends, producers and coworkers. There is a price to pay when you go off the radical progressive script.
Windigo
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 11:59amA turd, and who says that he ever evolved?.
Report Post »edcoil
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 12:15pmHe received his Bachelor of Arts in English and History from Cornell University in 1978.
So now we are suppose to listen to arts and english majors about science?
Report Post »101
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 12:39pmHe’s a comedian, that’s obvious listening to his show. He’s a democrat & a comedian drawing laughs from the left and ticking off the right, that’s leftwing ratings. Listen to his monologue he states no facts to support anything he says and makes a joke of everything. I myself don’t care for him, I don‘t think he’s funny “gay” not funny. I don’t think politics should be taken lightly when you have leftwingnuts that actually believe in what this guy is saying.
Report Post »RightPolitically
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 12:45pmNothing much!
Report Post »Kalish
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 12:48pmWhen you see how intiricate our universe is, or even our human bodies, all the different species etc.. you really have to be off your rocker to think all these things and many more came from nothing, and all of a sudden “bang” everthing just happened, by pure chance, and there is no evidence that carbon dating is even accurate beyond 5000-8000 years
Report Post »DVT
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 12:51pmDidnt you know? …he evolved from slime…o…wait a minute…no he didnt…not yet anyway!
Report Post »tommee
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 12:59pmHey TEXASCOMMONSENSE
You say, “No one is discounting science. Just don’t discount God.”
I say, compared to science, God and the bible have done very little for the advancement of the human condition and civilization. No matter where you look today, you can see the concrete results of science and how it has helped society. What has God, religion and the bible actually done to help society, other than perhaps spur on a bit of charity, or maybe make people feel better? In fact the case can be made that religion, in some form or other, has been responsible for most of the discord in the world, past and present. You know… my God is better than yours, so you’re evil.
Throughout history, science has been in an uphill battle against religion. Even today, the religious element objects to stem-cell research and the teaching of evolution in our schools without some counter argument like “Intelligent Design or Creationism”.
Darwin’s evolution is the basis of all biology and modern medicine. How is Creationism going to help students combat, for example, the problem of deadly bacteria ‘evolving’ into bugs immune to modern antibiotics? That very serious problem of evolving bacteria will only be worked out by people doing real life experiments in science labs, not by people looking for solutions in their prayers and bibles.
Report Post »ClaytonDM
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 1:01pm@Kalish
Mainstream science has even acknowledged that life can’t accidently happen. The odds are astronomical to say the least! The problem is that their own conclusions support something they themselves don’t, which is Intelligent Design. Therefore, they don‘t widely publish that they know it didn’t happen by chance.
I strongly urge folks to take a look at that documentary I posted. In his day, there was no way to prove Darwin right or wrong, so people just accepted it as fact. These days, it’s a different story.
Tepeyac
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 1:16pmWe won‘t know until he’s done evolving! I suppose a mushroom…since he’s full of ****!
Report Post »GONESURFING
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 1:21pmBill Mahar was left out when God was giving out brains, and everything he thinks he knows is wrong. He actually thinks that he is brilliant. Sad pathetic man really.
Report Post »BoiseBaked
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 1:29pmOk, come on. This stuff is as boring and insignificant as an Obama speech. I couldn’t get through the clip…aarg…
Report Post »mill
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 2:47pmAs shucks…billie boy is the original missing link.
Report Post »mill
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 2:51pmOkay, i’m just waiting for 2012 and this wipe out theory. Bet you dollars to donuts roaches and senate committees will be the only ones to survive….yeah, I thought the Franken was a play on Al franken too…such a roach
Report Post »mill
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 2:53pmAND, why why why do we even bother with Billie???? if we would not put his face and comments out, he would die down…shrivel up and go away..
click4cheapandeasyweb
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 3:03pmRobertCA
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:02am
“I wonder what he evolved from.”
More than likely, spawn of the devil.
Report Post »TexasCommonSense
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 3:07pmtommee, true, much can be explained by science. However, what explains science? God is the creator of all thing science, including the people who used his scientific tools to create for mankind. Man proves he serves his fellow man, as God asks, by creating things with science to help mankind? After our biological lives, assuming we do as God asks, everything is provided and we no long need science. That’s called heaven.
What about Science on the atomic level? It’s widely believed a perpetual motion machine is impossible in the conditions which exist on Earth. Yet, that’s what atoms are; electrons orbiting their nucleus perpetually. There are trillions upon trillions of these. From where did they come? Who, or what, created them? Take your standard hydrogen atom, then add a few more protons, neutrons and electrons, without changing anything else, and you have a totally different element. Maybe you’ll have sodium or chlorine, both of which are toxic to the human body. Now, take these to elements and combine them to make a compound and you get salt, a substance which isn’t toxic. Take water and add another oxygen atom and you have hydrogen peroxide. All this from the same basic building blocks of protons, neutrons and electrons, inside an atom which is greater than 99.9% empty space. These are from what you and I, and everything else, are created.
Science can tell who about atomic structure, the basic elements, and what forms compounds. They can’t tell you how they were created or by whom, or what. In short, science can explain everything, but what explains science?
Report Post »click4cheapandeasyweb
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 3:14pmTexasCommonSense
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 11:35am
“…No one is discounting science. Just don’t discount God.”
The dirty little secret that many don’t want to advertise is… Many scientists have become more religious in their own beliefs BECAUSE OF science.
I just wish we could come to a simple agreement with jerks like Maher. In simple terms… “We won’t mock your science if you agree to not mock our faith”. Yeah I know, I’m dreaming.
Report Post »CultureWarriors
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 3:32pmPoor Bill, he suffers from Napoleon syndrome and an extremely small cerebral cortex. Can you imagine what it was like for him growing up? A tiny drama nerd who wasn’t smart enough to pass a math class. He probably got a weggy every day on the playground. No wonder he acts like he does.
Report Post »jakartaman
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 4:07pmOnly in his pea mind.
Report Post »and if brains were dynamite he would not have enough to blow his nose!
TexasCommonSense
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 4:09pmclick4cheapandeasyweb, well said. You summed up what I was trying to say nicely.
Report Post »truwired
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 5:14pmEvolution has no science to back it up!
Report Post »“ALL” of the proof/evidence is based on assumption. Radio carbon dating has proved itself over and over to be inaccurate.
At least creationists have written testimony to back itself up!
Praise Jesus!!
I Corinthians 1:
25 Because the foolishness of God
is wiser than men; and the weakness
of God is stronger than men.
26 For ye see your calling, brethren,
how that not many wise men
after the flesh, not many mighty, not
many noble, are called:
27 But God hath chosen the foolish
things of the world to confound the
wise; and God hath chosen the weak
things of the world to confound the
things which are mighty;
28 And base things of the world,
and things which are despised, hath
God chosen, yea, and things which
are not, to bring to nought things
that are:
29 That no flesh should glory in
his presence.
FoundersRedPill
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 5:16pmIm doing my part to prevent catastrophic global climate change by exhaling into plastic bags and burrying the bags in the back yard.
Report Post »ANTISOCIAL-IST
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 5:56pmi think i just flushed one
Report Post »magnum357
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 6:58pmI wonder what he evolved from
He came directly from a dickweed. He still smokes the weed and rest is self-explanatory
Report Post »suttonea76
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 7:35pmThis guy again?! C’mon Blaze, stop running this turkey since he can’t be held accountable for anything he says since his life is boring comedy with lousy punchlines. I will his picture next to my Pelosi, Reid and Obama toilet paper collection.
Report Post »tommee
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 8:25pmHey TEXASCOMMONSENSE… thank you for your comments.
I respect your beliefs about creation and your God’s role in it, if it makes you feel better, or answers questions to your satisfaction.
But to me, any religious explanation of the world and man’s beginning is begging the question. It’s an assumption, subject to the same questions it purports to answer about the world. Let me ask you this. Why would questions of God’s being and purpose be any less deserving of answers? Is there a Super God who created God? Since the question of who made God can not be answered, it must be accepted with faith.
Science isn‘t really concerned with where the ’practice of science’ came from. Science just is, like some people think God just is. The business of science is to make an hypothesis, then go into the world to actually see if there is any evidence to support it. If the hypothesis is proven correct by observation, the hypothesis becomes a theory, which leads to more questions being asked. The more the supporting evidence, the stronger the theory becomes. Darwin’s theory of evolution is about as solid a theory as one can find in science today.
We can now see why Intelligent Design or Creationism have no business in a science class, or in the process of doing science. The two are very different areas of study. Science looks to the world for factual evidence to support it’s theories, while religious declaration gets it’s support from faith.
Can you imagine a biology professor teaching a bible study class? Instead of bringing a bible for his students, the teacher brings Darwin’s “Origin of Species”. I don’t think it would work. I do know the congregation would be very unhappy with the professor because he’s teaching science instead of the bible. The same can be said of someone who brings theology into a science class. It is not the place for it.
Report Post »TexasCommonSense
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:16pmtommee, of course I wouldn’t want a professor teaching religion, nor would I expect to learn science in Church. I would prefer each stick to their area of expertise. What I am saying is, it is possible to believe in both, and they’re not mutually exclusive.
Tonight, in Church, we learned about family issues. It helped me understand and get closer to my teens. It was a good thing; I highly recommend it for all. Sometimes it takes finding the right Church, and that can take a while.
You can spend a lot of time questioning a lot of things for which you’ll never receive answers, while on Earth anyway. Sometimes faith is what you have, the same as you have faith in science. The truest test is when you know it in your heart, especially if you’ve had a personal experience.
May God bless you and your family, both in your biological life and beyond. Remember, God doesn’t believe in Atheists.
Report Post »bart033
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:24pmmonkeys, just like the rest of us did.
Report Post »Noyo
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 9:51pmWhen I turn the tv on in the evening to relax and be entertained for a couple of hours, I never watch the Bill Mahar show. The reason, he’s not entertaining, not funny and intellectually absent of any relative direction. A clown he could be, but he needs to dress for it.
Report Post »DisillusionedDaily
Posted on January 29, 2011 at 10:19pmThe sad part is that these people probably have Bachelor of Arts degrees. This makes them climate scientists as well as evolutionary and political experts.
“When ignorance gets started it knows no bounds.”
Report Post »Will Rogers
CottonMPG
Posted on January 30, 2011 at 12:19amActually…..it sort of makes sense. Evolution and global warmi..I mean climate change are scientifically very similar. Both are simply accepted on faith with no real evidence.
Report Post »*************************
Posted on January 30, 2011 at 12:38amBill Mahar … DE-EVOLVING before our very eyes.
sheriff BART: “Checkmate.”
Report Post »town drunk JIM: “What?”
sheriff BART: “Checkmate.”
town drunk JIM: “Why, you devious son of a bítch.” [whiskey bottle toast] “Happy days.”
-Blazing Saddles
One1
Posted on January 30, 2011 at 12:40am#1 When did comedians become experts in science?
Report Post »#2 Why do conservatives go on these shows? And the ones that do are the least articulate.
#3 Have you ever notice consevative allow their liberal counterpart to make their point, but the liberal always cut off the consevative?
#4 The reason the evolution debate continue to rage is because both side are splitting the baby. What is wrong with evolution being a creative force of God. example: if you told me you built your house and I responded by saying; “You did not build your house, your hands did.” How rediculous is that? As humans we have created computers. Computers come to conclussions using computer logic. God does not have to set down at a drafting table and design every component of his creation as man does. God being God, it is within his power to create a one cell life form with all the possibilties and diversity built within. This would allow for this life form to populate every aspect of this world as it has done.
For more, read my book: “Evolution, The Bio-Logic of God!” By Daniel Bell daniel.bell@comcast.net
dr_funk
Posted on January 30, 2011 at 1:27amAnyone who thinks Genesis reads like a users manual on precisely how God created the universe and humankind should have their head checked. It is a very vague description that gives no details and merely describes in very general terms what God did to create the universe and in what order.
With respect to the order in which the earth, plants, animals, and humans came about, there is no conflict. Science and the Bible agree that the earth came first. Then came plants. Then came animals. And finally, humans. The Bible doesn’t describe DNA, but we know DNA exists. The Bible doesn’t describe how our bodies metabolize carbohydrates into energy, but we know it happens.
People who try to use the Bible to establish scientific convictions are just as bad as people who use science to establish religious convictions. Religion and science are not and should not be at odds.
I personally believe that God created the universe, and that evolution is a perfectly viable means for him to have created the fauna of earth and humankind.
Report Post »alrunner58
Posted on January 30, 2011 at 8:14amA jackass.
Report Post »gsloc1
Posted on January 30, 2011 at 9:17amThere is research that refutes climate change. Why is it that the Medieval Warm Period and the Roman Warming Period are never mentioned in these discussions? Studies have shown that temperatures were warmer than present day. Its clear that not a single person on this panel, including Mahr, has spent even a few minutes looking at the science, because that’s all it takes.
Report Post »Jackdaball
Posted on January 30, 2011 at 9:53amBill Maher’s is just another lost soul.
Report Post »Clambake
Posted on January 30, 2011 at 10:49amYou mean devolved? I’m so glad to have geniuses like Bill Maher to tell me what to think (or how stupid I am when I disagree).
Report Post »geiserpam
Posted on January 30, 2011 at 11:26amThe media needs to stop giving this man a forum to speak. He is a fool
Report Post »AriBenTZion
Posted on January 30, 2011 at 2:50pmA w, t h e l i t t l e J e w.
Report Post »bjt141
Posted on January 30, 2011 at 2:51pmI love how all of you people get in such a fit over what happens on Bill Maher every week. The show is actually quite friendly and even though they get into arguments, he tries hard to have Republicans on as much as possible (but of course since they talk to liberals you guys will probably break out that RINO bs) and THEY KEEP COMING BACK BECAUSE OF HOW THE SHOW IS. If it was just so terrible, I doubt they would come back. You people talk about liberals being *******, all this site is is Republicans crying about EVERYTHING
Report Post »azjoannie
Posted on January 30, 2011 at 3:44pmAt least he amuses himself – it takes so little to make such a small mind laugh!
Report Post »A Doctors Labor Is Not My Right
Posted on January 30, 2011 at 6:08pm(Repost)
@tommee,
“I say, compared to science, God and the bible have done very little for the advancement of the human condition and civilization.”
The only kind of paradigm in which “the advancement of the human condition” is meaningful is one in which there is a God, and therefore also religion.
Otherwise, what’s the great value in advancing it?
“No matter where you look today, you can see the concrete results of science and how it has helped society.”
Again, “helping society” is relevant in your worldview, because …?
“What has God, religion and the bible actually done to help society, other than perhaps spur on a bit of charity, or maybe make people feel better? In fact the case can be made that religion, in some form or other, has been responsible for most of the discord in the world, past and present. You know… my God is better than yours, so you’re evil.”
First, religion has done far more for society than Atheism. See here:
“The Real Murderers: Atheism or Christianity?”
http://www.str.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=-1&page=NewsArticle&id=5527
Second, I think it‘s rare that religions fight over who’s God is “better” – that would presume that other Gods exist, in their respective worldviews. The disagreements which lead to fighting are usually over who’s religion is right.
This is significant because all wars are fought over who is right – religion isn’t any different, in that regard. The only reason you set religion apart is because you don’t believe that a God exists – you are mistaken. The fact that you can decide to write a comment or not proves that your actions aren’t solely guided by science.
“Throughout history, science has been in an uphill battle against religion. Even today, the religious element objects to stem-cell research and the teaching of evolution in our schools without some counter argument like “Intelligent Design or Creationism”.”
The reason there has been an uphil battle is because, yes, religious people tend not to be able to use reason, but also because the definition of “science” has been deliberately rigged to exclude BY DEFINITION religious conclusions. It‘s not that the evidence doesn’t support theism over atheism, but that the scope of science has been reduced to exclude religious conclusions.
With regard to stem-cells, I think that most religious people are opposed to “EMBRYONIC stem cell research – we aren’t opposed to “ADULT stem cell research”. ESCR takes a human life, while ASCR does not – and ASCR, as I understand it, has produced FAR MORE beneficial results, so far.
“Darwin’s evolution is the basis of all biology and modern medicine. How is Creationism going to help students combat, for example, the problem of deadly bacteria ‘evolving’ into bugs immune to modern antibiotics? That very serious problem of evolving bacteria will only be worked out by people doing real life experiments in science labs, not by people looking for solutions in their prayers and bibles.”
Religious people see biological change all the time, whether it’s watching the emergence of the next generation of humans, or noticing that a deadly bacteria that survives certain treatments is going to generate more bacteria that will likely do the same. And in both cases, the biological information was already there, and so the next question to ask is: what is the scope of variability from one ancestor to any given descendant? It’s not enough to say that that biological diversity ITSELF – in any amount, however small – is sufficient to answer this question.
Report Post »Beckofile
Posted on January 30, 2011 at 8:02pmSo if evolution is true? Won’ we evolve are way out of gloBULL warming? The monkeys will just shed the hair?
Report Post »ishka4me
Posted on January 30, 2011 at 11:15pmglobal warming equals climate change, abortion is pro choice, gun bans equals gun control, christmas equals winter holiday. he is foolish
Report Post »ishka4me
Posted on January 30, 2011 at 11:22pmnatural selection is not evolution. evolution is a bacteria learning to drive, a drug resistant antibiotic is natural selection; that being a bacteria that survives adapts within its genome, it is not changing into something else.
Report Post »smallstuff7
Posted on January 30, 2011 at 11:40pmMaher will meet God, who will ask Maher to explain in detail how man evolved from an ape and Maher will spew out his belief in the popular theory admitting that there is no undenial proof of a missing link. No one will be laughing.
Report Post »Racer-X
Posted on January 31, 2011 at 1:13amHe evolved from a chiwawa that barks ignorant things
Report Post »the_zazzy
Posted on January 31, 2011 at 12:29pmPlease excuse him…he hasn’t finished “evolving” yet. I think he’s trying to evolve from a comedian into someone we should take seriously, but he’s not quite there yet.
Report Post »