She’s gotten much better at this over time.
The host introduced it saying basically “neither side can prove their point nor can they disprove it”. Could not go on!
Michael: He turned out to be totally wrong. That may be the last time such as dumb-ass thing was uttered by a professional in the business.
I assume that was sarcastic — but I actually think that really was the most ridiculous statement about the creationism/evolution “debate” that I’ve seen made by a moderator (but obviously not a creationism proponent!)
Actually, if you want to see something worse, go to the end of the segment and look at his closing statement!
Another facepalm — of course what makes it easy to get away with saying such statements before people who don’t know much about evolution is that it has the cheap trick of making the speaker seem intellectual. It’s the same trick as saying “it’s certainly not black and white” which generates the cached thought of “profound idea” even if it’s not applicable in this case. I can’t believe Scott has been doing this for so long without losing it and going ballistic even once — I think she needs to be canonised as a secular saint.
I’ll be darned. Gish mentioned ‘sudden emergence theory’ before Edwards v. Aguillard and before the cross examination of Behe on a draft of “Of Pandas and People” in Kitzmiller. I wasn’t aware of that term being used pre-Aguillard.
Current ye@r *
Leave this field empty
Notify me of follow-up comments by email.
Notify me of new posts by email.
Notify me of followup comments via E-Mail.
A novel by Greg Laden ...
Read my posts on climate change and related topics.
Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive endless notifications of new posts by email.