Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
When I log on to the Worldnutdaily, as I do every day, and see a headline that screams:
Finally exposed: The scientific impossibility of evolution
A smile spreads wide across my face. Especially when it comes with graphics marking it as both "breaking news" and a "worldnetdaily exclusive." When you see such a headline you can be reasonably sure two things are true: 1) Ray Comfort is lurking around; and 2) he's going to say some really, really stupid shit.
And he comes armed with one of the greatest weapons in the creationist arsenal: the fake conversation, the one that they claim to have had with some eminent scientist or some low-level apologist, perhaps on an airplane at some point, where their anonymous opponent conveniently says really stupid things for them to knock down. Like this one:
"All you have to do," Comfort told WND, "is push them into a corner and say, 'So, you're an atheist?' 'Yep.' 'So you believe that nothing created everything, a scientific impossibility?' And they'll say, 'Well, no.' 'So you believe something created everything?' And they say, 'Well, yeah. Something did, obviously.' 'So you're not an atheist?' 'OK, I'm not an atheist.'"'This something you believe created everything," Comfort continued, "do you think it was intelligent? I mean, could you create a bird or a flower or a tree or a blade of grass from nothing?' And they'll say, 'No, I can't do that.' 'Well, is this something you believe created everything intelligent?' And they'll say, 'Obviously.' And I'll say, 'Congratulations, you've just become an anti-science, knuckle-dragger in the eyes of our learning institutions, because you believe in intelligent design.'"
Gosh, I'm convinced. I retract everything I ever said about evolution being true. Thank you, Ray Comfort. Thank you. I suddenly feel the need to go eat a banana and watch Growing Pains.
Politics
Comments
Ray Comfort has to be the biggest fool ever to put pen to paper in the service of anti-science. The crap that drips out is so ludicrous it's shameful. Hence we have WND promoting it.
It is nice to see all the stupid collected in one place by Farah & Co. If you ever need a reason to laugh or feel better about yourself, read WND. Oh, and save me a banana.
Posted by: MikeMa | September 24, 2009 9:11 AM
Bananas are good, you should always take a banana to a party. Just ask Doctor Who.
But are they proof of intelligent design? YES! HUMANS selectively bred the common banana to make it the wonder food we enjoy today - the progenitor of the common banana is IIRC, inedible unless cooked.
Posted by: Blaidd Drwg | September 24, 2009 9:16 AM
While we're asking leading questions, Ray, when did you stop beating your wife?
Posted by: Evan | September 24, 2009 9:28 AM
I guess that settles it. I want a refund of the tuition I paid for my geology degree.
Posted by: TFK | September 24, 2009 9:30 AM
When will these fucktards learn what the following list entails,
1. Evolution
2. Abiogensis
3. Big Bang
4. The Scientific Method
5. Scientific Theory
6. Hypothesis
Oh and on the Banana thing. Ray is wrong the best way to peel it is to turn it the other way around and pinch, like a monkey does it. So much for his stoopid design.
I've got a question for Ray, Who designed the designer?
Posted by: Doug Little | September 24, 2009 9:34 AM
That is really strange: just last night I watched the YouTube videos of Ray vs. Thunderf00t for the very first time and he did the exact same spiel! Coincidence? Synchronicity? Divine Inspiration?
Posted by: Satcomguy | September 24, 2009 9:40 AM
Umm...no. They don't.
I wish there were an English word that encompassed the meanings of both "moron" and "liar." (Apart from "Ray Comfort," that is.)
Posted by: eruvande | September 24, 2009 9:42 AM
Well if Ray comes to my nieghborhood can I push him to a corner to get the anwsers I want? I am sure I can make him beleive in the Flying Spagetti Monster.
Pastafari
Posted by: theroachman | September 24, 2009 9:43 AM
Doesn't Ray Comfort believe that nothing created God?
Posted by: josh | September 24, 2009 10:05 AM
"You can say to them, 'OK, there's nothing in your garage, could you believe in 10,000 years a Mercedes would evolve out of nothing? You'd say, No, that's ridiculous.' 'So, what about 100,000 years?' 'No, that's stupid.' But if you start talking billions of years, they'll suddenly go glaze-eyed and, 'Yeah, I could believe that, a Mercedes could evolve out of nothing over billions of year.' So time is their miracle worker."
I'm pretty sure that Ray doesn't realize that the "atheist" he was talking to probably finally said, "sure, I could believe that" to get him to shut the fuck up. I've heard better arguments from 15 year old teenagers trying to argue against the writings of Darwin and evolution. No one with any reasonable understanding of evolution or biology would even bother with such a moronic series of questions. Of course another alternative is that he's lying... *gasp*
Posted by: dogmeatib | September 24, 2009 10:09 AM
Comfort contends many atheists, including Dawkins, engage in a "reverse idolatry." "Instead of taking nice things and creating a congenial god, they make a repulsive god," he explained. Dawkins, Comfort said, goes through the Old Testament and picks out the harsh judgments of God "and makes an idol that's repulsive." "But the problem is the god that Richard Dawkins doesn't believe in, doesn't exist," Comfort said. "He's a figment of his imagination." The God of the Bible, Comfort contends, "is the God of righteousness and holiness and justice and truth and love and mercy. And he's taken the time to write his law upon their hearts in the form of a conscience."
Comfort talks about his God like an abused wife talks about how good her husband is, we just don't know "the real Him." I love how he argues that Dawkins ignores the "good" while he, at the same time, ignores the bad. The reality is that, from the Bible, you end up with a freakin' sociopath.
Posted by: dogmeatib | September 24, 2009 10:14 AM
Gee, did Mr. Comfort happen to mention that he has a new book coming out?
According to a Living Waters press release, Richard Dawkins's The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution is "due to be released in the United States September 22. Coincidentally, that is the same release-day of best- selling author Ray Comfort's new book, Nothing Created Everything: the scientific impossibility of atheistic evolution (World Net Daily)."
Just imagine, the same day! What are the odds?!?
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | September 24, 2009 10:15 AM
Indeed, and I only found this out because of Ray Comfort, so perhaps he is a useful idiot after all.
Posted by: James Sweet | September 24, 2009 10:16 AM
Comfort has actually backed away from his Banana comments. Cameron hasn't but Comfort has. Regardless he is still an idiot.
Posted by: yoshi | September 24, 2009 10:22 AM
The day I have such a conversation on an airplane will be the day when a certain person, having suffered a tragic and fatal sartorial accident, is found dead on said plan. Seems that in adjusting his tie he got a trifle confused and carried away and strangled himself.
It is one of the many tragic but predictable accidents that befall people who are exceedingly stupid, and very vocal about it.
Posted by: Art | September 24, 2009 10:27 AM
Here, I fixed that:
'So, you're a christian?' 'Yep.' 'So you believe that nothing created god, a scientific impossibility?' And they'll say, 'Well, no.' 'So you believe something created god?' And they say, 'Well, yeah. Something did, obviously.' 'So you're not a christian?' 'OK, I'm not an christian.'
Posted by: oku | September 24, 2009 10:28 AM
The beauty of it all is that Ray and his ilk are actually hurting their own cause. Bring it on Ray, bring it on.
Posted by: Doug Little | September 24, 2009 10:37 AM
Of course, the very conversation that Ray is using to attempt to show the atheist' failings really shows Ray's only intellectal failings.
It doesn't matter how many times Ray's been shown that he's wrong. He's too stupid and too indoctrinated to think outside the box of Christianity.
Posted by: GregB | September 24, 2009 10:52 AM
I'm going to disagree with the opening the banana from the "bottom". When you (I) do that, it does open pretty easily, not that opening them from the other end is confounding or anything, but you end up with that little hard brown banana-turd that you have to pick out. When peeled in the typical manner, you can avoid dealing with that.
By pinching it off.
Posted by: JohnV | September 24, 2009 10:54 AM
Pierce (#12) - about 4 in 1,461 (approx. 0.2737907% using a Gregorian Calendar, to be a little more accurate), assuming every day is equally probable*. :) - DJ
________________
*Sorry, uncontrollable attack of 'calendar geek'
Posted by: DingoJack | September 24, 2009 11:25 AM
Hah! Monkeys do it differently, that proves we don't come from monkeys!
Posted by: Jonathan | September 24, 2009 11:28 AM
Ray is certainly stupid and a fool but he plays to an audience slightly different than those who log in here for the most part. In that scum pond he is a genius.
The same day book release as Dawkins' capitalizes on marketing. While I am sure Ray didn't think of it, his editor most certainly did. He has found a niche where he is well thought of and well paid. Nirvana for the hopelessly impaired. Talking to Ray will gain you noting so we'll have to get what enjoyment there is by talking about him.
Posted by: MikeMa | September 24, 2009 11:43 AM
A conversation I recently had with a fundie while on a plane*:
So - you believe in a invisible, omniscient, omnipotent eternal mass of sparkly energy called god?
Ummm...yeah....
And this being created people out of clay for one and then ripped a rib out him to create another?
Well.....
And being omniscient, allowed a "talking snake" to pervert what he created?
Gosh, I don't know....
And then, even though he knew what happened and did absolutely nothing to prevent it, turned around and punished his creation?
Gee...that is kinda harsh.....
And then inspires an entire book to be written about how he punishes his "children" for any and all perceived offenses, even though again he is omniscient and knows exactly what will happen before hand, yet allows rape and incest for his own supposed glory?
Wow...what a colossal dick....
Congrats...you may be thinking for yourself.
*Well, not really, but if RC can do it, so can I.
Posted by: Pineyman | September 24, 2009 11:45 AM
It also appears that WingNutDaily is pushing a new conspiracy theory:
Posted by: Wes | September 24, 2009 11:56 AM
If Ray Comfort did not exist, we would be forced to invent him.
Posted by: Sadie Morrison | September 24, 2009 12:22 PM
1) What about all the "evolutionists" who are also Christians?
2) Disproving the theory evolution by natural selection does not say anything about the validity of creationism. Won't somebody please buy Comfort a dictionary and highlight "false dichotomy"?
3) About the banana thing, if bananas are proof that something designed them for us (actually modern bananas were intelligently designed - by humans), then how does Comfort explain the paradox of the orange? It's the most delicious fruit, yet it's also the messiest and most difficult to peel. Does that mean it's actually a sin to enjoy oranges, or is it some practical joke that God is playing on humanity?
Posted by: catgirl | September 24, 2009 12:44 PM
The use of the chance conversation on an airplane is such a staple of creationist. When there was a creationist flair up in Grantsburg, WI a few years back, the guy that started it had an "airplane conversation" featured prominently in one of the lectures on his website. His was with a woman who was a biology professor on a long flight either to or from Australia.
Of course, she started talking innocently to this creationist next to her and supposedly became utterly frustrated when confronted with the unanswerable creationist arguments. The point is to ridicule a their opponents and engender self-satisfied laughter in their audience. The audience will never consider that it is highly unlikely that such lame arguments would so easily defeat a scientist and educator in her own field of expertise. My wife and I have run into such unverifiable accounts frequently since then. We always refer to such formulaic sagas as "airplane stories".
Posted by: Dread Pirate Flynt | September 24, 2009 12:53 PM
Ray Comfort has a small number of "arguments" that make no sense, are easily debunked, and repeatedly ARE debunked. But it makes no difference. He's not hurting his own cause because he doesn't actually HAVE a cause. What he has is a commercial product and a market niche that he can milk again and again and again. And a hell of a lot of savvy in getting free advertising.
Posted by: Dee Walker | September 24, 2009 12:54 PM
My conversation* with Ray Comfort:
Me: Hi, Ray!
Ray: Hi, Michael!
M: So, you think you know everything, and that everything that happens is God's will
R: Yep!
M: OK, duck!
R: What? OWWWW!! Why did you punch me in the face???
M: God did it
R: What?
M: Also, God warned you (through me) that you should have ducked!
R: I guess I need to have a little more faith in God! Oh well, time to go home and look at some gay porn!
Posted by: Michael | September 24, 2009 12:56 PM
I made a passenger on a flight sitting next to me red with rage one time. It was sometime in the mid-90s and she became enraged that I had never heard of Celene Dion.
Posted by: Michael Heath | September 24, 2009 1:11 PM
Oxymoron: "Scientific Impossibility."
Moron: Ray Comfort
Posted by: Rev.Enki | September 24, 2009 1:19 PM
To Michael at #29: All porn is gay; just ask Michael Schwartz.
To Michael Heath at #30: It's Celine, but I envy you. I wish I hadn't heard of her, either!
Posted by: Slaughter | September 24, 2009 1:22 PM
Gah. The last thing I would talk to somebody on an airplane about is creationism! I was asked once by an airline employee (the guy at the check-in desk) about the book I was reading at the time, The Devil in Dover, and after explaining what it was about to him I couldn't get away fast enough.
Posted by: Gretchen | September 24, 2009 1:59 PM
Death by wedgie? Now that's harsh. Not to mention that it was probably tried on Comfort when he was in high school.
Posted by: kehrsam | September 24, 2009 2:20 PM
All of this is why I always carry on any flight my copy of "Miss Macintosh, My Darling."
Posted by: Siamang | September 24, 2009 2:21 PM
What? 35 comments and none of Dembski's students have shown up? Is the semester over already?
Posted by: Savagemutt | September 24, 2009 2:31 PM
@ #11
If you all aren't reading Fred Clark's absolute demolition of the Left Behind series at his slacktivist blog, you should be. He makes the same basic observation as dogmeatib does, in his July 24 post:
That is possibly my favorite line in the whole series of posts.
Posted by: chris | September 24, 2009 2:48 PM
A banana that was intelligently designed would include a zipper so that if I only ate half, I could zip it up and finish it later.
Posted by: mark | September 24, 2009 3:11 PM
The thread isn't dead yet. From what I've seen the typical Scienceblogs creationist troll M.O. is to post drive-by comments on a dead thread. I call it "necrophile evangelism"- go into a dead thread, blow you load, then flee the scene.
Posted by: DaveL | September 24, 2009 3:19 PM
As a potential target of said necrophile, can I just say, "Ewwww"
Posted by: chris | September 24, 2009 3:31 PM
Bukkake evangelism.
*
*
*
I'll get my coat.
Posted by: Rick R | September 24, 2009 4:08 PM
The whole argument about nothing is a red herring. There never was a time when there was nothing. How do I know this? Because without something, you can't have time.
Imagine a world that was a complete vacuum with no matter. It would be completely still and never change, much like a world in which time has stopped. You could not have time in such a world. Time requires matter.
So, as far back in time as you care to go, there must have been matter.
Posted by: Paul S | September 24, 2009 4:23 PM
Am I missing something here, or is Comfort now defining 'intelligent design' as 'the creation of something that is intelligent'?
Posted by: Zmidponk | September 24, 2009 4:32 PM
Me @ #43:
No, strike that, I misunderstood what he's saying. I thought he was suggesting that this 'something' also created everything that was intelligent. He's actually meaning that the 'something' that created everything is itself intelligent. My only conclusion from the response being, 'of course', is that Comfort's mythical atheist understands as little about abiogenesis and evolution as Comfort himself does (or maybe misunderstood him in the same way I did).
Posted by: Zmidponk | September 24, 2009 4:39 PM
We need a catchy term, like "necrovangelism" is doing evangelizing on a dead post, like "necropost" is writing anything on a dead thread. I don't know...
But, Bukake Evangelism has been practiced by many preachers. They usually end up crying and apologizing to the flock for their transgressions, then said flock gives them lots of money. Usually.
Comfort - the Tard is strong in that one.
Posted by: Badger3k | September 24, 2009 4:44 PM
I guess it flies right over Comfort's head that birds can create birds, trees create trees, grass creates grass, etc., without the need for intelligence.
The "from nothing" qualifier is a ridiculous red herring. There's no reason to suppose there was ever a time when nothing existed.
Posted by: DaveL | September 24, 2009 4:46 PM
Zmidponk,
He believes that intelligence can only exist by virtue of having been created by something even more intelligent, a rule from which God is exempt for no reason whatsoever.
Posted by: Gretchen | September 24, 2009 4:50 PM
Badger3k
I don't think we need a term like that, "necrovangelism" strikes me as perfect already.
Posted by: Michael Hoaglin | September 24, 2009 6:40 PM
The atheist who can be outwitted by Ray Comfort does not exist, so Ray is forced to invent him.
Posted by: Scott Hanley | September 24, 2009 6:45 PM
If Comfort or Cameron ever approached me on the street--I live in Los Angeles, so that is always a possibility--and he tried the "If you ever lied then you are a liar" scam on me, I would ask him, "Have you ever masturbated?" When he said yes, I would say, "So that's why you are such a jerk-off."
Posted by: wrpd | September 24, 2009 7:10 PM
Siamang @ # 35 - scratching around to find more about the novel you mentioned, I happened across a page of excerpts of reviews of several titles by the same author, one of which excerpts contained an immortal (& probably mistyped) line that could readily be applied to Comfort's brainchild:
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | September 24, 2009 7:26 PM
@22
In the land of the witless, the halfwit is king.Posted by: James Hanley | September 24, 2009 7:31 PM
Re-reading the comments, I think I'll do the opposite of Gretchen @33. I think I'll start carrying a copy of The Blind Watchmaker every time I fly, just to see if I can piss of some fundie. If I actually do get converted because I can't answer their "unanswerable" questions, you'll know by the changed tenor of my comments here.
(Obviously Gretchen's wiser than I am.)
Posted by: James Hanley | September 24, 2009 7:36 PM
James Hanley,
OT - H.G. Wells wrote the story In The Country of the Blind where the premise "in the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king" was played out. Oddly, Wells changed the ending a couple of times as he got older but in no case did the one eyed man take over.
Shame that Comfort seems to be such a successful halfwit. Wells would have had him destroyed I think.
Posted by: MikeMa | September 24, 2009 7:42 PM
wrpd @50 - It occurs to me that their honest answer to that question would be no. Explains the bananobsession.
Posted by: eddie | September 24, 2009 7:52 PM
wrpd @50 - It occurs to me that their honest answer to that question would be no. Explains the bananobsession.
Posted by: eddie | September 24, 2009 7:56 PM
I'm blaming vodafone for the double post, sorry.
Posted by: eddie | September 24, 2009 8:01 PM
Flying over exposures of the Triassic-aged Chugwater Formation (beautiful red sandstones and mudrocks) once, kind of just geeking out and taking photos out the window from my seat.
The guy across the aisle from me and his wife (both probably late 50s) strike up a conversation. A few minutes into it the man says something to the effect of "Ya know what I think? I think all them rocks down there is the remains of the flood. Ya know? Noah's Flood?"
I was just a dumb college kid at the time, but I thought my reply wasn't terrible: "Ya know what? I've heard other people say that. Huh..."
Posted by: Josh | September 24, 2009 8:12 PM
So, we're into new labels? "Necrovangelism" has a nice ring to it. I'm thinking about one for Ray and his ilk, the people who probably believe little if any of the shit that they peddle to the credulous KKKristians. I'm thinking "Cashtian".
Posted by: democommie | September 24, 2009 9:07 PM
Catgirl, @26 said:
XKCD begs to differ, and places the pineapple in this position
Posted by: Douglas McClean | September 24, 2009 9:57 PM
Don't forget 'the clean-up crew' - those that go into dead threads and patiently explain to tea-baggers, birfers, creationists, and other similar retards, exactly why they are retards. They should get a catchy moniker too! - DJ
__________________________
BTW shouldn't that be 'thanato-evangelism' or perhaps 'necrobeneadnuntism'?
Posted by: DingoJack | September 24, 2009 10:17 PM
Perhaps 'thanato-evangelism' could be called 'Pheidippidon' :) - DJ
Posted by: DingoJack | September 24, 2009 10:47 PM
Dimoron ether - same amount of oxygen, twice the moron
Tetramoronamine - can you fit that much moron that closely?
MoronMgBr - Moron so determined it will force itself on anything nearby, reactive or not.
Posted by: Brad | September 24, 2009 11:20 PM
"'So you believe that nothing created everything, a scientific impossibility?'"
Note the subtle question-begging: the use of the word "created". Creating, of course, as an act, and acts have to be performed by someone or something.
The answer is: I don't think that "everything" was "created", at all.
Posted by: Paul Murray | September 25, 2009 2:19 AM
So they FINALLY have disproved Evolution.
Well, I'm just glad that's done and dusted.
Posted by: toby | September 25, 2009 5:49 AM
Now that they have achieved their goal, what's left for them to do?
Posted by: kehrsam | September 25, 2009 7:52 AM
Posted by: James Hanley | September 25, 2009 8:40 AM
Posted by: Taz | September 25, 2009 8:59 AM
Well, someone has to re-train all the biologists, geologists and astronomers, now that "goddidit" is an acceptable answer to everything.
Posted by: Savagemutt | September 25, 2009 9:51 AM
Posted by: Sanity Jane | September 25, 2009 4:27 PM
If the void is much-needed, then we ought not to fill it. ;)
Seriously, though, Comfort's books are most suitable for filling the void between the short leg of the sofa and the living room floor.
Posted by: DaveL | September 25, 2009 4:32 PM
Cameron and Comfort represent the Imbeciles for Jesus.
The style of drivel they push invites events such the woman in SC who tried to deposit the Million Dollar Gospel in her bank account, or the moron in PA who brought his MDG in to get smaller bills. Let us hope these two never meet and mate.
Posted by: Neferkheperre | September 26, 2009 1:16 PM
Ray Comfort is a nothing. He created lots of pages with text on them. Therefore, yes, nothing can create something.
Posted by: Christophe Thill | September 28, 2009 9:43 AM