Pharyngula

The argument from oranges

What is it with creationists and fruit? I hope you’ve had your coffee already, because this is an unpleasant way to wake up. The clip below is from a public hearing in Orlando, Florida, in which citizens had a chance to stand up and state their opinions of evolution. Are you braced to handle a little smug and stupid this morning?

I’m sure this guy thought he was rhetorically brilliant, with a knock-‘em dead argument against evolution. Why, nobody with any common sense could possibly believe that people (or their pets) could be related to an orange! Just pointing out the obvious to everyone, that round orange fruits don’t look anything like furry mobile animals, will reveal the absurdity of evolution.

Unfortunately for Mr Dallas Ellis, we really don’t have any problem seeing the similarities between oranges and kitty cats — scientists look a little deeper than he does. Slice an orange and put it under a microscope, and what do you see? Cells. Slice a cat and look at it under a microscope, and what do you see? Cells. We find similar organelles: cytoplasm, nuclei, mitochondria, etc. The contents use similar metabolic processes, and we find the same chemicals. The nuclei contain DNA, and we can compare the sequences — and we find similarities there (they are related) but many differences as well (they are distantly related — one estimate for the last common ancestor of plants and animals says they diverged roughly 1.6 billion years ago). Mr Ellis is relying on his profound ignorance of the basic building blocks of biology to make a superficial case.

Let’s not even get into his closing remarks, trying to compare evolution to trucks full of poultry and garbage colliding, and spontaneously fusing maggots and turkeys to produce the school board. It’s simply more evidence that he’s a clueless old git.

I’m perfectly comfortable with the idea that I’m a distant relative of every creeping, crawling, blooming, squirming organism on the planet, but I do have to admit to some discomfort at being related to Mr Ellis. An orange has evolved no neurons and at least has an excuse for being unthinking, and hasn’t evolved speech and so spares us its mindless gibbering.

Comments

  1. #1 Escuerd
    February 16, 2008

    How embarrassing for him.

  2. #2 Dídac
    February 16, 2008

    Anyway, you can deny the ‘reality’ of cells and DNA. If scientists are wicked enough to defend evolution, they can also have fabricated all the ‘evidence’ of the cell theory and the DNA theory of biological information.

    So to speak, human language allow us to defend virtually anything.

  3. #3 Dídac
    February 16, 2008

    Anyway, you can deny the ‘reality’ of cells and DNA. If scientists are wicked enough to defend evolution, they can also have fabricated all the ‘evidence’ of the cell theory and the DNA theory of biological information.

    So to speak, human language allow us to defend virtually anything.

  4. #4 ChemBob
    February 16, 2008

    I don’t know how you do it PZ. I watched about a minute and became too aggravated to watch anymore. Such smugness combined with such ignorance and the “AMEN”s in the background. YEC! I mean YUCK!

  5. #5 Bob
    February 16, 2008

    I’m perfectly comfortable with the idea that I’m a distant relative of every creeping, crawling, blooming, squirming organism on the planet, but I do have to admit to some discomfort at being related to Mr Ellis.

    Now that I actually did need first thing in the morning. NICE!

  6. #6 negentropyeater
    February 16, 2008

    If it weren’t with these people in the background, I would have thought this was a scene from a movie taking place at the end of the 19th century.

    You know sometimes, I start wondering about this American value called “fairness”.
    I mean, there’s one side of me that says, ok, let’s be fair, let’s give idiot ignorant people like this guy a chance to express their opinion. But there’s the other side of me that says, why bother ?

    Does anybody else share the same dilemma ?

  7. #7 Kris Verburgh
    February 16, 2008

    What a beautiful display of utterly barefaced ignorance.

  8. #8 Rick Schauer
    February 16, 2008

    …and that video is solid observable evidence of the complete and utter failure of general education in the USA (at least in Florida.) What a shame and pity. We all have much work to do to correct this shameful ignorance…or we may be doomed.

  9. #9 really
    February 16, 2008

    Pastor Ellis….

    his church

  10. #10 Matt
    February 16, 2008

    I’m glad you’re here to tell us about these things, PZ. I can’t bring myself to watch creationist videos….

  11. #11 John Pieret
    February 16, 2008

    I feel sorry for the educators who have to attend these hearings. Imagine having to be confronted by so many examples of abject failure on the part of your system.

  12. #12 Lorax
    February 16, 2008

    Clearly his “evidence” does raise some important concerns. Like, this guys vote counts the same as mine. Like, this guy represents the base of the republican party. Like, morons like this are the reason I hear more about the presidential candidates’ faith than their policies.

    Coffee PZ? You should have warned us to have some scotch on hand!

  13. #13 Joe Bob
    February 16, 2008

    How coud a orunge an my kat be rulated? Their not even the same culur!

  14. #14 Stavros
    February 16, 2008

    Yeap, Ed Brayton commented extensively on this yesterday. I think he was referring to the same guy (?) Is it ever possible that there exist two such complete idiots that make the same stunningly stupid statements?

  15. #15 Aaron
    February 16, 2008

    Well I didn’t read all the literature he read, but I’m convinced that the orange is more intelligent.

  16. #16 Anon
    February 16, 2008

    I thought it was bananas that were the atheist’s nightmare.

  17. #17 Stavros
    February 16, 2008

    Errr #2, Didac:

    If scientists are wicked enough to defend evolution, they can also have fabricated all the ‘evidence’ of the cell theory and the DNA theory of biological information.

    You are not possibly serious right? This is only a joke? Get a microscope and see the cells. Follow up the experiments and “see” the DNA double helix. I am sure PZ can be more specific as to how to “see” these, but you get my point…

  18. #18 Aaron
    February 16, 2008

    Shouldn’t have paused it in the middle…politicians are turkey-maggot hybrids? I’d buy that one.

  19. #19 jimmiraybob
    February 16, 2008

    Yikes.

    Also, I challenge someone to find Interstate 60. But then, why get any facts straight.

    PS My uncle, the coffee maker, laughed at me for not consulting him before I watched that.

  20. #20 Zeno
    February 16, 2008

    Hot damn. I used to have lunch every week with that guy. Well, not that exact guy, but his clone. (And not an orange, I might add, although oranges were occasionally also in attendance at lunch.) He was a friend of a friend and would drop in to exert his influence on the lost souls of the secularists who attended the lunch group. He gave me a copy of Strobel’s The Case for Christ (for which I was grateful, since that way I got to write a blog post about it without having to buy my own copy). He was forever offering his “proofs” for the existence of God and the impossibility of evolution. Once he brought a creationist tract claiming that trilobites were “witnesses against evolution” because they had never evolved. Later I brought a copy of Richard Fortey’s excellent Trilobite! Eyewitness to Evolution as a refutation, but it was ruled out of order by my acquaintance because Fortey was an evolutionist and thus not to be trusted. Victory for creationism!

    If only he had known the argument about oranges, too!

  21. #21 croor
    February 16, 2008

    Scientists who actively debate religion, christianity in particularly, would have better knowledge of what the bible says that do christians. creationists who actively debate evolution know so little of evolution that they can claim that it is like two trucks colliding and the school board walking out of the wreckage.

    kind of tells you something about the attitude of the two groups, doesn’t it?

  22. #22 Joe Shelby
    February 16, 2008

    Ah, the Chewbacca Defense in action. Did anybody actually tell him that episode of South Park wasn’t a documentary?

  23. #23 GodlessHeathen
    February 16, 2008

    I had an orange tabby… and he was sweet. Doesn’t that blow his argument out of the water? =^_^=

  24. #24 Rick
    February 16, 2008

    Maybe it could become sport to think of two very different plants and animals for the Creationists to use as ammo against evolution. Of course all life on earth is related if you look far enough back, but the Creationists will love ridiculing the common ancestries of a worm and an oak; a fruit fly and a humpback wale; or a toad and a Creationist!

  25. #25 mojoandy
    February 16, 2008

    What was this fine upstanding Floridian doing at a rest stop chatting up truck drivers? Is there a certain creationist rest stop signal or is it just foot tapping like the rest?

  26. #26 idahogie
    February 16, 2008

    I’m insulted. My mother was an orange and my father was a banana.

  27. #27 raven
    February 16, 2008

    HEY! It could be worse. What do you think that guy thinks about witches and witchcraft?

    I’m sure he thinks the day the death penalty was abolished for witchcraft was the downfall of civilization. And despises the Republican party for being “soft on witches.”

    The difference between him and the Taliban or the Mutaween religious police in Saudi Arabia, is….hmmm, well, what is the difference?

    Guy was born in the wrong millenia. Rather than join the third millenia, he wants us to recreate the first.

  28. #28 Carlie
    February 16, 2008

    Over 20 comments and no one’s made a “but that’s comparing apples and oranges” joke yet? For shame.

  29. #29 Snark7
    February 16, 2008

    “What is it with creationists and fruit ?”

    Well, seeing as how they are all complete fruitcakes, the relation should be obvious….

    Wikipedia: Fruitcake is also used, especially in the United Kingdom and the United States, as insulting slang for a ‘crazy person’ (e.g. “he’s a complete fruitcake”).[4] It is derived from the expression “nutty as a fruitcake”, which was first recorded in 1935.

  30. #30 BaldApe
    February 16, 2008

    As I pointed out elsewhere re: this moron, he is actually more closely related to fungus than to an orange.

    It is amusing that when an atheist has an insufficiently nuanced view of a particular version of the invisible friend mythology, he just doesn’t know what he is talking about. OTOH, a creationist can talk in apparent seriousness about turkey trucks colliding with waste trucks as a cause of evolution…..

  31. #31 Michael
    February 16, 2008

    Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, I have one final thing I want you to consider. Ladies and gentlemen, this is Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it; that does not make sense!

  32. #32 Valdemar
    February 16, 2008

    I’m still staggered by the appalling arrogance of the ignorant. Yes, here in the UK ‘nutty as a fruitcake’ is indeed an apt term for creationists. If anyone, even at a local politics level, behaved like that in England they’d be laughed at. At least, that’s what I sincerely hope. Fingers crossed…

  33. #33 Megan
    February 16, 2008

    “I’m perfectly comfortable with the idea that I’m a distant relative of every creeping, crawling, blooming, squirming organism on the planet, but I do have to admit to some discomfort at being related to Mr Ellis.”

    Says it all…thank you!

  34. #34 chancelikely
    February 16, 2008

    You know, he’s not even related to the orange itself, he’s related to the tree that dropped the orange.

    And since it’s probably seedless and non-reproductive, he might as well hold up his cat’s nail trimmings.

  35. #35 Stephen D Moore
    February 16, 2008

    The orange is a citrus fruit.

    Citrus fruits contain citric acid.

    Acid burns.

    Mr.Ellis is a Creationist.

    Creationists are stupid.

    [The] Stupid [it] burns.

    Therefore Mr. Ellis and oranges are related.

    QED

  36. #36 Reginald Selkirk
    February 16, 2008

    29. Valdemar: If anyone, even at a local politics level, behaved like that in England they’d be laughed at. At least, that’s what I sincerely hope. Fingers crossed…

    Read it and weep:

    Clash Over Creationism Is Evolving In Europe’s Schools
    LONDON – After the Sunday service in Westminster Chapel, where worshippers were exhorted to wage “the culture war” in the World War II spirit of Sir Winston Churchill, cabbie James McLean delivered his verdict on Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution.

    “Evolution is a lie, and it’s being taught in schools as fact, and it’s leading our kids in the wrong direction,” said McLean, chatting outside the chapel. “But now people like Ken Ham are tearing evolution to pieces.”

  37. #37 Eddy
    February 16, 2008

    ok, as a non-native english speaker, let’s see if I get this right

    Origin of the species says that everything is related. Therefore, if I get the gist right, this man thinks that all things are *relatives* and therefore the orange (which, btw, is just a bearer of seed and not an individual) should be related to a diseased pet.

    This kind of word-play always drives me nuts in this kind of “reasoning”.

    The sad thing is that this person probably comes from a corner of the world where anybody is related to anybody else in a given area, so the idea might be too strong in his mind.

    Or did I get it wrong?

    I, too, had to pause the movie, find a way to relax before I could continue the next part. This is so mind-numbingly stupid that I my brain can’t handle it in one go.

  38. #38 Don
    February 16, 2008

    No political or public figure in England could even be seen to consider creationism. In Northern Ireland, however, it’s another matter.

    In the following transcript, the excellent Matthew Parris struggles not to call the NI Culture Secretary a ‘nutter’.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/ni/2007/12/are_religious_politicians_nutt.html

  39. #39 Form&Function
    February 16, 2008

    I have not yet had my coffee, and my mind, she don’t work so gud without it. Did I really just see that? I had the same reaction I get when I’m home for the holidays and my parents watch Judge Judy or People’s Court on TV–I can’t actually look at the screen to watch the people embarrass themselves.

    What keeps going through my mind is why did he choose pets? Of all things, why the household cat or dog? Is it just because the horror of even suggesting oranges are related to humans was too great? Or was it because he knew he’d quote Darwin saying that “all animals and all plants” are related to each other and couldn’t bear to include humans in that phrase?

    BAH! I don’t know why I’m trying to probe the creationist mind when my own is so poorly caffeinated.

  40. #40 Form&Function
    February 16, 2008

    I have not yet had my coffee, and my mind, she don’t work so gud without it. Did I really just see that? I had the same reaction I get when I’m home for the holidays and my parents watch Judge Judy or People’s Court on TV–I can’t actually look at the screen to watch the people embarrass themselves.

    What keeps going through my mind is why did he choose pets? Of all things, why the household cat or dog? Is it just because the horror of even suggesting oranges are related to humans was too great? Or was it because he knew he’d quote Darwin saying that “all animals and all plants” are related to each other and couldn’t bear to include humans in that phrase?

    BAH! I don’t know why I’m trying to probe the creationist mind when my own is so poorly caffeinated.

  41. #41 Ken Mareld
    February 16, 2008

    PZ,
    Don’t dja know? If you look a cells in a mikroscope yere doin the Devil’s work! All them things yew see are just the Devil putting the hankerchief of dulusion upon ye. God gave us the nekkid eye to see with. That’s enough fer me. ‘Organelles’!
    Ha!!! That’s just the devil gettin’ yew to look a pornografy!
    Confess yer sins and be saved!

    This message brought to you by the good folks at ‘The Discover Family Focus on American Creation Renewal Institute’! We witness for the Home Schooled Faithful Classes found in basement Universities across God’s Green America, The GREATEST country in the Universe!!!!

  42. #42 BobH
    February 16, 2008

    I live in Orlando, and I attended that particular public meeting. Man, were my eyes opened. We’ve got some seriously scary (and disturbingly well organized) folks in this state. Mr. Orange was indeed one of the more colorful speakers.

    Sadly, the speakers were about 2:1 anti-science. I’m simply amazed at the level of idiocy here in my state, and with two school-aged kids, I am very interested in seeing these new standards implemented. Some of the nutty things that were said in that meeting did a great job of reinforcing just how bad we need to readdress the teaching of science here. Unfortunately, I don’t think that any of those folks would be able to see the irony in that.

    I’ve got my fingers crossed that on Tuesday when the Board votes, we won’t be turned into another Kansas or Dover.

    Wish us luck.

  43. #43 dalai_lala
    February 16, 2008

    I’m so embarrassed for my city… sigh…

    I, and many members of our local atheist/freethought org, have been emailing and signing petitions and some have been appearing at these meetings… We are so very outnumbered down here.

  44. #44 Dennisr
    February 16, 2008

    Croor said: “Scientists who actively debate religion, christianity in particularly, would have better knowledge of what the bible says that do christians. creationists who actively debate evolution know so little of evolution that they can claim that it is like two trucks colliding and the school board walking out of the wreckage.

    kind of tells you something about the attitude of the two groups, doesn’t it?”

    That’s because when a creationist learns as much about evolution he becomes an evolutionist. The reverse almost never happens. That’s why they try so hard to keep their kids from learning.

  45. #45 Dídac
    February 16, 2008

    Well, if you compare the techniques used by the International Citrus Genomics Consortium and the Human Genome Project… Dobzhanski said that modern biology has no sense without evolution…

    But if we turn the reasoning, we can ask the Creationists: How it is possible for one single Creator to create beings so different like an orange and a man?. And if you believe in the Bible you must cope to the fact that all human diversity originated from a single family 4500 years ago! But, perhaps modern creationist may believe African and Asian people are not Noachides, at all, but “beasts saved by Noah”.

  46. #46 Dídac
    February 16, 2008

    Well, if you compare the techniques used by the International Citrus Genomics Consortium and the Human Genome Project… Dobzhanski said that modern biology has no sense without evolution…

    But if we turn the reasoning, we can ask the Creationists: How it is possible for one single Creator to create beings so different like an orange and a man?. And if you believe in the Bible you must cope to the fact that all human diversity originated from a single family 4500 years ago! But, perhaps modern creationist may believe African and Asian people are not Noachides, at all, but “beasts saved by Noah”.

  47. #47 EMR
    February 16, 2008

    LOL, I love the guy rolling his eyes in the background.

  48. #48 Holbach
    February 16, 2008

    Good grief! Senility coupled with insanity in the ever-
    present state of deranged Florida

  49. #49 caerbannog
    February 16, 2008

    Now you know why they don’t have any problems with cousin marriages in that neck of the woods!

    Oh, and a little off-topic diversion: answersingenesis is now subjecting US military recruits to anti-evolution indoctrination, presumably with official approval. You can read AIG’s little blurb about pitching creationism to a bunch of US Marine recruits at http://tinyurl.com/2yytz8

  50. #50 clarence
    February 16, 2008

    Chewbacca may have been at that meeting to present his own defense. At two minutes, Bigfoot wanders through the video, and the amen-shouting loons are too enraptured by that compelling orange-vs-kitty argument to even notice. That’s some good arguin’!

    (My use of “loons” was entirely figurative and not intended to disparage any actual birds, living or dead.)

  51. #51 Tom Foss
    February 16, 2008

    Slice a cat and look at it under a microscope, and what do you see?

    Protesters from PETA and angry letters from the Humane Society?

  52. #52 thalarctos
    February 16, 2008

    Although it’s very risky to draw conclusions about particular individuals from statistical trends about populations, I’d say that–provisionally, and contingent on any later evidence that may contradict it–there is an excellent chance that, given his creationist beliefs, he also holds the patriarchal male-supremacist attitudes that seem to correlate so neatly with creationism.

    Regarding that Y-chromosome that I’m guessing he’s so fond of, I’d love to be the one to introduce Mr. Ellis to Ray Ming’s work in Hawai’i, and watch his head explode:

    Liu Z, Moore PH, Ma H, Ackerman CM, Ragiba M, Yu Q, Pearl HM, Kim MS, Charlton JW, Stiles JI, Zee FT, Paterson AH, Ming R. A primitive Y chromosome in papaya marks incipient sex chromosome evolution. Nature. 2004 Jan 22;427(6972):348-52.

  53. #53 Sastra
    February 16, 2008

    This is the same group which is claiming that belief in evolution leads to racism and genocide, because it lacks the “all men are specially-created children of God” premise which must be established before you can apply the Golden Rule. So, if being created by God means that you’re closely related brothers and sisters, as it were, then isn’t it wrong to eat Brother Orange or Sister Apple?

    If you can make one dumb argument, then it seems to me you can flip it over and make a similar dumb argument on the other side — and even more easily.

    The underlying subtext to the Orange Man’s sermon — and many creationist arguments on ethics — is that only God has a value and worth which can’t be disputed and doesn’t need to be defended. It’s the only thing with inherent importance. Everything else is an undifferentiated series of matter in motion with no point or goal.

    Therefore, the reasoning goes, if even your own baby was not “created by God” (or you don’t think it was), then there is no logical reason that you, or anyone else, should assign it any value or worth. You might as well kill it as kiss it, because meaning only flows down from something universally meaningful — like God. Who gives it meaning, from itself, as a special gift.

    To them, it’s all a command hierarchy.

  54. #54 Eric Paulsen
    February 16, 2008

    You are not possibly serious right? This is only a joke? Get a microscope and see the cells. Follow up the experiments and “see” the DNA double helix. I am sure PZ can be more specific as to how to “see” these, but you get my point… – Posted by: Stavros

    To NORMAL people who are not at war with rationality your proposal sounds sane Stavros but these people are trying to help Adam ‘un-eat’ the apple. Everything bad in our world stems from our ill gotten intelligence acquired when Eve purloined yet another magical fruit from yawehs garden. You say saying is believing?

    They say believing is not seeing.

  55. #55 Eric Paulsen
    February 16, 2008

    “You say saying is believing?”

    SEEING. SEEING. Now just how hard was that? Dang!

  56. #56 tacitus
    February 16, 2008

    Did you notice how, even as he was mocking the very premise of evolution, he couldn’t bring himself to say that the oranges were related to human beings?

    That’s the key point that is unacceptable to creationists. Not that an orange might be a distant cousin of your pet dog but the implication that we are no less part of the tree of life than chimps, dogs, cockroaches, and oranges. It turns their stomach even to think about it.

  57. #57 Neslock
    February 16, 2008

    Having grown up and being subjected to this type of crap every Sunday while I was growing up, it took me about 5 seconds to spot that this guy had to be a preacher. It was very difficult to make it through this whole thing.

    And to think that several dozen people are probably willingly heading off every week to listen to this idiot on purpose…

  58. #58 Mooser
    February 16, 2008

    So! Not content to dissect zebra-fish, now you’re slicing up kittens? Oh you scientists are so cruel!!!

  59. #59 Zak
    February 16, 2008

    To quote Christopher Hitchens in regards to this type of religious inspired, willful stupidity, “There are no statements worth arguing here… All you can do is underline them!”

  60. #60 Diego
    February 16, 2008

    Wow, it’s a triple-header of heart-break! I love Florida and yet there is the shame of having such wackos. I love oranges and yet I have to see the poor innocent fruit so abused by this twisted man. And I love evolution and yet I have to see it so plainly misunderstood and mangled.

  61. #61 Monkey
    February 16, 2008

    Im going to show my highschool class this. It shall be a grand old time. Perhaps it will be their Evolution test project – “debate this mans speech”.

    Im embarassed for the Young Christian Foundation members dangling thier crosses around their necks with no clue as to what it means, and no clue as to what they are ignoring.

  62. #62 Mooser
    February 16, 2008

    “You say saying is believing?”

    The statement is perfectly correct, just the way it stands.
    “If you can say it, it must be true” is the very essence of religious thought. And fiction-writing.

    And that’s the point, they just say it, they don’t even believe it themselves.

  63. #63 Dahan
    February 16, 2008

    I know I would be more blissful if I were that ignorant, But I still don’t want to go down that road. What’s so depressing to me is the willful ignorance evidenced. You see it over and over with these type. It may be christianity, supply-side economics, gun ownership (as evidenced in a very recent post), or any other of a thousand things. The lack of looking into a topic, of letting others do your research and then doggedly following that belief, is incredibly sad.

    I know their only argument, that we who hold to evidence and logic as a god are just as bad. Ya know what? I’m more than happy to be labeled someone who always looks to logic instead of another answer. Blissful or not, thank reason I’m not that fruit guy.

  64. #64 Susan B.
    February 16, 2008

    He should have used peaches instead–at least they’re fuzzy.

  65. #65 Alec T
    February 16, 2008

    “What was this fine upstanding Floridian doing at a rest stop chatting up truck drivers? Is there a certain creationist rest stop signal or is it just foot tapping like the rest?”
    HA!

  66. #66 sailor
    February 16, 2008

    If this is an example of someone with power, all I can say is no wonder you’ll went to war with the wrong country.

  67. #67 Peter Henderson
    February 16, 2008

    Speaking of Northern Ireland, as an NI citizen I don’t know whether to laugh or feel embarrassed at this:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGF2AxlQsYE

    Counciler Paul Givans: “What about Ian Derthal man”

    Kevin Connelly “I wen’t to school with Ian Derthal”

    Richard Dawkins, sounding bemused “I’m sorry, I don’t know what you mean”

    Counciler Paul Givans “You know Ian derthal man, what about him”

    Richard Dawkins”Oh, you mean Neanderthal man !”

    Doh !

    I’m not sure if Givans is worse, or not as bad as Ellis. The sad thing is he’s well educated and has a University education:

    http://www.dup.org.uk/CanProfile.asp?CandidateID=83

  68. #68 astrolieber
    February 16, 2008

    People,
    Don’t u think tht PZ can earn millions in
    fiction ? The last paragraph of this post was
    too cool !
    btw not judging tht guy….but he is the biggest
    argument against humankind as an “advanced species”

  69. #69 Luis
    February 16, 2008

    I think this is a fake. Notice how he introduces his tirade about colliding trucks: “something funny happened to me as I was coming here”. Come on, boys and girls, everybody knows that’s a standart opening line for stand-up routines. This guy is not a preacher, he’s a comedian. He’s trying to develop the “Mr Ellis” persona in the same way that Sacha Baron Cohen developed Ali G and Borat.

  70. #70 -R
    February 16, 2008

    Personally, since I don’t give it much thought dating my cousin, a couple thousand generations removed, I also don’t have much of a problem eating my dog’s cousin, several million generations removed.

    Obviously this man is a bit more squeamish about ancestral cannibalism, but unfortunately, the white blood cells in his body are attacking and murdering his cousins a few hundred trillion times removed. I suppose original sin isn’t such an absurd concept after all :P.

  71. #71 Corey
    February 16, 2008

    Anyone with some knowledge in the area care to take a shot at this one?

    http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_are_orange_cells_similar_to_human_body_cells

  72. #72 Brian W.
    February 16, 2008

    i suggest that next year the Darwin Day feast will consist of peanut butter and banana sandwiches with a glass of OJ. Seeing as how peanut butter, bananas and now oranges have all been used to attempt to disprove evolution.

  73. #73 John Phillips, FCD
    February 16, 2008

    Teh Stoopid, it burns, oh how it burns. It says something when an orange appears more intelligent than the idiot holding it. As has been noted many times on here, it has become almost impossible to distinguish parody from the real thing as they automatically self parody most every time their move their lips.

  74. #74 Erp
    February 16, 2008

    #64 anyone you are dating is likely to be much closer than a common ancestor a few thousand generations ago. The most recent common ancestor for all humans (excluding possibly some very isolated populations) is likely to be less than 8,000 years ago and possibly as low or lower than 3,000 years ago (estimating 20 years/generation about 150 to 400 generations). Between Europeans it is likely to be less than 1,000 years ago (or 50 generations at most).

  75. #75 Ktesibios
    February 16, 2008

    spontaneously fusing maggots and turkeys to produce the school board

    Hey, that’s one of the more plausible explanations for the existence of creationists on school boards that I’ve seen so far.

  76. #76 paul lurquin
    February 16, 2008

    #68,

    Your figures are way, way off the mark. Read some more on the topic before you make comments. Your numbers are well in sync with genesis, though!

  77. #77 PeteK
    February 16, 2008

    Hovind’s version , itself no doubt culled from other creationists, involved bananas…

  78. #78 gg
    February 16, 2008

    Eddy wrote: “Therefore, if I get the gist right, this man thinks that all things are *relatives* and therefore the orange (which, btw, is just a bearer of seed and not an individual) should be related to a diseased pet.”

    The latter part of your statement is a perfect observation of either the ignorance or dishonesty of the creationist speaker. He would have gotten the same ‘shock’ value by bringing in a bottle of human semen and saying, “See this sperm? This is somebody’s parent.” One really big problem: you can’t be a parent until you’ve got a functioning reproductive system, so you can’t use the present tense. The orange example is of course even worse because an orange tree will never give birth to a pet dog.

    In other words, he’s using a pretty pathetic straw man argument.

  79. #79 gg
    February 16, 2008

    P.S. When I was watching the clip, I couldn’t help but imagine a little thought bubble above the orange, reading, “Hey, leave me out of this, you wanker!”

  80. #80 Janine
    February 16, 2008

    I do not know about anybody else but I really want to hear him explain with what the orange mated, how it mated and how this cat was brought to term. It cannot all be the result of speeding trucks crashing with each other.

    Quote Bob Dylan: You’re an idiot babe. It is a wonder you still know how to breathe.

  81. #81 MRL
    February 16, 2008

    That twit in the video leaves me no choice but to pull up the one immortal quote from “Billy Madison”:

    “…what you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.”

  82. #82 truth machine
    February 16, 2008

    It’s worth noting what little concern fundies have for mere human ethics. Only God was going to tell this guy when his time was up.

  83. #83 DiscoveredJoys
    February 16, 2008

    Hm. I only managed to view half the video before my brain imploded – and now I find that the video has been withdrawn. Presumably after strong representation from the Florida Citrus Growers Association?

  84. #84 DiscoveredJoys
    February 16, 2008

    Ooops! The Video is back.

  85. #85 Troy Gavazzzi
    February 16, 2008

    What happened to the video?

  86. #86 truth machine
    February 16, 2008

    In other words, he’s using a pretty pathetic straw man argument.

    You guys are engaging in a silly quibble … a strawman of your own. Oranges and dog ova are related, whether they are, strictly speaking, “cousins” or not (of course they aren’t first cousins, nor parents).

    And for those who say that they guy couldn’t even bring himself to suggest that oranges are related to humans — you’re just plain wrong; he explicitly does so twice, plus his story in which turkeys + maggots + big bang + mushroom cloud + gene pool mixup + mutations = members of the DOE (not their pets). The way to counter this guy is not to be as intellectually dishonest and sloppy about the facts as he is.

  87. #87 Troy Gavazzzi
    February 16, 2008

    The video was pulled from YouTube but I found it here
    http://www.videosift.com/video/Creationism-The-Argument-From-Oranges

  88. #88 JohnnieCanuck, FCD
    February 16, 2008

    It would have been interesting to watch his face as someone explained that for the orange tree, the fruit he was holding serves roughly the same function as a womb does in mammals. If the response went on to describe male pollen penetrating to the ovary of the flower and uniting with the ova, he might have had a conniption over all the dirty words.

    Godidit certainly takes all the hard work out of thinking, doesn’t it, Pastor D. Ellis?

  89. #89 truth machine
    February 16, 2008

    the fruit he was holding serves roughly the same function as a womb does in mammals.

    Uh, no; the fruit often gets eaten by some critter who carries the seeds away to some other location. If anything serves that function, it’s the warm moist earth in which the seed germinates.

  90. #90 Ragutis
    February 16, 2008

    Mr. Orange didn’t bother me so much. I’ve seen blinding stupidity like that before. What I found most disturbing was the lack of laughter in the room, or the thwacks of frustrated forehead slapping. I understand the need for decorum in certain settings, but some reactions are simply irrepressible.

  91. #91 June
    February 16, 2008

    I’m with #63. He was not as dumb as he pretended, not with using words like ‘equidistant’ to precisely set up the big bang collision joke. His parting metaphor was to keep the apple in the hands of the teacher, not the orange. Not bad for ‘an idiot’.

  92. #92 gg
    February 16, 2008

    truth machine wrote: “You guys are engaging in a silly quibble … a strawman of your own. Oranges and dog ova are related, whether they are, strictly speaking, “cousins” or not (of course they aren’t first cousins, nor parents).”

    Um, I fail to see where I’m making a strawman argument. Who said oranges and dog ova are not related? I sure didn’t.

    The big dishonesty with Mr. Orange’s argument is that people commonly use the word ‘related’ to refer to family relations (brothers, sisters), while biologists use it to refer more generally to relationships between species and more general biological connections. Mr. Orange is using the biologist’s observation that organisms are ‘related’ to reach the uncharitable conclusion that biologists think that an orange is a dog’s parent. That’s a strawman.

    He makes the strawman worse by comparing a fully developed organism (a dog) to a seed of another (an orange). He didn’t mention dog ova at all. I don’t see how you can call it a ‘silly quibble’ to correct utterly meaningless comparisons.

  93. #93 Janine
    February 16, 2008

    June, nice little touches like that means nothing when the argument is bad. And, frankly, he is arguing from the “idiot” position. It can only appeal to the ignorant. I feel secure calling him an “idiot” because he allows his faith to curtail his intelligence.

  94. #94 Strakh
    February 16, 2008

    This is what happens when you let brothers and sisters make babies – they give birth to morons who read a book they cannot understand and then stand up in public and make fools of themselves.
    Just further evidence that inbreeding doesn’t work.

  95. #95 So Laris
    February 16, 2008

    I again advise new recruits to the ESC (Evil Scientist Conspiracy) to release the tiger.

  96. #96 kev_s
    February 16, 2008

    Did he quote from Charles Darwin’s “Orange of Species”?

  97. #97 Nate
    February 16, 2008

    I was waiting for this: “Darwin enjoyed eating oranges. He also enjoyed little kittens (who doesn’t?); therefore, oranges irrefutably are the parents and offspring of kittens.”

  98. #98 Nemo
    February 16, 2008

    The orange and the cat are pretty distant, but what about the cat and the human? The similarities are striking and compelling. But that’s not surprising, since we only diverged, what, a few tens of millions of years ago?

    I don’t know how anyone could live with a cat and not see them as related to us.

  99. #99 Grantaire of Jc
    February 16, 2008

    I first thought that this was a joke. Then again, maybe that’s how things are really thought out in Orlando. I thought that the fantasy thrills stopped at the amusement parks. Who knew?

  100. #100 386sx
    February 16, 2008

    The video was pulled from YouTube but I found it here

    Nope it’s still on youtube.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5UiUWa34cY

    Still there.

  101. #101 June
    February 16, 2008

    Yes, Janine, he is arguing like an idiot, but you cannot nail him directly for that since it’s ad hominem. But he is actually making (and mocking) the case for Evolution, so one might try agreeing with him. Imagine a meeting where a member responds: “Actually, you are correct! It is a fact that green plants and animals have a common ancestor about 500 mya. But you are not ‘related’ to an orange by blood.”

  102. #102 spurge
    February 16, 2008

    You most certainly can nail him directly.

    Pointing out exactly why he is arguing like an idiot that is not ad hominem.

  103. #103 Herbert
    February 16, 2008

    Personally I thought Mr. Dallas was very articulate for a retarded person.

  104. #104 The Botanist
    February 16, 2008

    This has pulled me out of my lurking… and now I am going to go cry for all the poor fools who agree with him.
    Thanks PZ

  105. #105 October Mermaid
    February 16, 2008

    Maybe it was stupid and a waste of time, but I went ahead and emailed him about this, just to explain where he is missing the point about this. I tried to be polite and respectful, but he might ignore me or get irritated. I guess that’s his decision, but I thought, you know, why not try, right?

  106. #106 Janine
    February 16, 2008

    Right, so one could state that he is arguing from willful ignorance and just imply that he is an idiot. Either way, it works for me. But I also think that his parents are those turkey-maggots he calls the school board. So, see, he started the ad hominem.

    Sadly, the turkey-maggots are more useful then this idiot.

    On a lighter note, could I be related to a blood orange?

  107. #107 October Mermaid
    February 16, 2008

    Have any of you guys watched the whole video (linked to in the info section on the actual youtube page)? It’s pretty frustrating. Do you think any of them mention that evolution is “just a theory?” Place your bets!

    One woman makes a huge point of that, saying “We should put emphasis on the word theory. It shows that there is still debate. There are other theories that explain the origin of the human species.”

    Yeah, but… the evidence? She doesn’t mention that.

  108. #108 Physicalist
    February 16, 2008

    “We should put emphasis on the word theory. It shows that there is still debate.”

    It just shows their utter ignorance. Sad. Sadder still is the fact that the slightest effort on their part would provide the information they so badly need. It’s all easily found on the web.

  109. #109 J
    February 16, 2008

    One woman makes a huge point of that, saying “We should put emphasis on the word theory. It shows that there is still debate. There are other theories that explain the origin of the human species.”
    Yeah, but… the evidence? She doesn’t mention that.

    Worse than that, there are no other theories, and this is what gets me. Intelligent design and creationism are not scientific theories – by definition they rely on explanations outside of the natural world and as such don’t entail testable hypotheses. Sure, more data is accumulated constantly, but so far none have led to scientific counter-concepts to evolution.

  110. #110 Ribozyme
    February 16, 2008

    The best comment at YouTube.com (by DominoFalls):

    That was like getting bukkaked with stupid.

    Uhg. It’s in my eyes.

  111. #111 milo
    February 16, 2008

    I thought these guys objected to apes and humans being related. When did that change? Why the cats and dogs? After all orange and orangutan both start with the same five letters. And orangutans have orange colored hair. And orangutan is Malay for forest man. And Clint Eastwood had an orangutan who went to truck stops. It’s all clearly related. Are we sure this guy didn’t talk to an orangutan at a truck stop, in the bathroom. Isn’t it more likely the orangutang refused his offer of fellatio and instead mocked him for being chicken to take it in his garbage chute? It would explain the truck metaphor, he can’t get the encounter out of his head.

  112. #112 kj
    February 16, 2008

    Mockery and name-calling is not helpful from either end. Ignorance is rooted in fear. We ought to have compassion for those who live in such fear that they are unable to explore their world fully.

  113. #113 pksp
    February 17, 2008

    You can watch all four hours of the public comments here:

    http://www.fldoe.org/meetings/2008_02_11/meetingArchive.asp

    Mr. Ellis is in the first video set. I watched the entire commentary session in detail and was amazed at the amount of stupidity coming from these people. I would say the fundies vs. rationals was about 10:1. There were a few hopes and bright spots from concerned citizens, scientists, and the FL-ACLU. The ACLU guy got up and reminded the board reps. about the Dover decision.

    This truly is a sad sight to see. So many people, who one would consider to be sane and intelligent, spouting off this ID nonsense. I remarked on Ed Brayton’s blog most of the fundies, excluding Mr. Ellis, were using ID talking points directly from the Dembski & Behe. It was as if they were almost there.

    I hope the board votes in favor of the new standards on Tuesday. If not, we can witness another fun fight in Florida.

  114. #114 Monado, FCD
    February 17, 2008

    I’ll second “The Orange of Species” as the book he probably read.

  115. #115 JohnnieCanuck, FCD
    February 17, 2008

    Bloody pit nickers. In angiosperms it is the ovary that matures to become the fruit.

    It would just have been interesting to watch him squirm when told that he was holding part of a reproductive system as opposed to the whole organism. All this based on my stereotype of the religious and how they actively try to avoid having people learn about the mechanisms of sex.

  116. #116 MAJeff
    February 17, 2008

    Ignorance is rooted in fear.

    Um, that’s an amazingly broad statement that really isn’t even true. Now, the fools pushing the creationist nonsense are willfully ignorant, which might have a partial basis in fear since the religious fundamentalisms of the current era are anti-modern phenomena, and there may be a fear of change in choosing to remain clueless. But, the relationship between ignorance and fear just doesn’t exist like you’re laying it out.

  117. #117 Second Amendment Sister
    February 17, 2008

    I thought these guys objected to apes and humans being related. When did that change? Why the cats and dogs? After all orange and orangutan both start with the same five letters. And orangutans have orange colored hair. And orangutan is Malay for forest man. And Clint Eastwood had an orangutan who went to truck stops. It’s all clearly related. Are we sure this guy didn’t talk to an orangutan at a truck stop, in the bathroom. Isn’t it more likely the orangutang refused his offer of fellatio and instead mocked him for being chicken to take it in his garbage chute? It would explain the truck metaphor, he can’t get the encounter out of his head.

    But what self-respecting orangutan would want to be in the same room as this loser?

  118. #118 -R
    February 17, 2008

    #66 through #72

    Sorry to come back so late in the game here, but I’ve heard figures of human ancestors dating back as far as 10,000-20,000 years, and in some cases, while reading articles/high-school textbooks or watching/listening to interviews, I’ve heard numbers like 50,000 and 100,000 thrown out there too. Now granted, I through out the figure ‘a few thousand’ for rhetorically, because it’s nice and round and fits somewhere between 10,000 and 100,000 years of cousins begotten of cousins humanly classifiable. But because I’ve heard so many different figures thrown around for as long as I’ve been conscious of the evolutionary mechanism, I am quite curious to know roughly how removed I might be from various populations of humans, and from the first definitive emergence of our very first fully human ancestors. Most especially, and I accept that this may be a silly and long answered question (it is rare you can accuse me of hula-hooping), I’d like to know what range of time that humans are likely to have first appeared is accepted in the academic sphere of archeology and evolutionary biology…if such a general consensus exists.

    Any expert opinions on the matter?

  119. #119 Jim
    February 17, 2008

    No wonder creationists get their way. If I were on that school board, I would vote what ever way they wanted to avoid listening to fruits like pastor Ellis.

  120. #120 -R
    February 17, 2008

    #66 through #72 (edit)

    Sorry to come back so late in the game here, but I’ve heard figures of human ancestors dating back as far as 10,000-20,000 years, and in some cases, while reading articles/high-school textbooks or watching/listening to interviews, I’ve heard numbers like 50,000 and 100,000 thrown out there too. Now granted, I threw out the figure ‘a few thousand’ for rhetoric’s sake, because it’s nice and round and fits somewhere between 10,000 and 100,000 years of cousins begotten of cousins humanly classifiable. But because I’ve heard so many different figures thrown around for as long as I’ve been conscious of the evolutionary mechanism, I am quite curious to know roughly how removed I might be from various populations of humans, and from the first definitive emergence of our very first fully human ancestors. Most especially, and I accept that this may be a silly and long answered question (it is rare you can accuse me of hula-hooping), I’d like to know which range of time that humans are likely to have first appeared is accepted in the academic sphere of archeology and evolutionary biology…if such a general consensus exists.

    Any expert opinions on the matter?

  121. #121 GMFORD
    February 17, 2008

    I can see where his confusion stems from. He looks in the mirror in the morning and sees he has not evolved…I must say I agree with him.

  122. #122 Kat
    February 17, 2008

    He’s been confusing those books “The Oranges of Species” with “Origins are not the only fruit”

  123. #123 kev_s
    February 17, 2008

    Maybe Jesus was an orange too. Don’t they sing that carol at Christmas “Orange in a manger, no crib for a bed” ?

  124. #124 Tim
    February 17, 2008

    God, what an arrogant, ignorant dildo. Too bad when he wouldn’t stop even after being told his time was up, they didn’t hold him down and tase him like the don’t-tase-me-bro kid. ;)

    (I’m kidding of course. Just imagine the uproar from ‘persecuted Christians’ if that happened.)

  125. #125 Kiki
    February 17, 2008

    /me facepalms

  126. #126 windy
    February 17, 2008

    Now granted, I threw out the figure ‘a few thousand’ for rhetoric’s sake, because it’s nice and round and fits somewhere between 10,000 and 100,000 years of cousins begotten of cousins humanly classifiable. But because I’ve heard so many different figures thrown around for as long as I’ve been conscious of the evolutionary mechanism, I am quite curious to know roughly how removed I might be from various populations of humans, and from the first definitive emergence of our very first fully human ancestors.

    The most recent common ancestor (MRCA) of humans is much more recent than the first modern human. Several different figures can be correct, since they are estimating different things. You might have heard of Mitochondrial Eve, the ancestor of all humans through the female line only, and she’s estimated to have lived 130,000 years ago. But if you calculate descent through both males and females, there are a lot more possible ways to be related, and it turns out that the MRCA of all living humans probably lived only a few thousand years ago (like Erp said in #70).

    There’s no single way to calculate how far removed you are from different populations of humans, since you’ll have a mixture of recent and a bit less recent ancestors. The same with your cousin (if you didn’t mean that figuratively): your most recent common ancestor was 2 generations back (or more if not a first cousin), but you have other ancestors that go a bit further back.

  127. #127 negentropyeater
    February 17, 2008

    Of course, this guy is a clueless old git, an ignoramus cretinus, a … but all this doesn’t explain one thing, what makes him want to defend his view, with such ardent rethoric, in such a public hearing ?

    What is he afraid of ?

    Ok, he’s a pastor, so maybe he’s defending his job, but that’s not good enough, because what about all the other ignoramuses who defend the same nonsense with such ardent rethoric, and aren’t in the fairytale business ?

    So, what are they afraid of ?

    That if Evolution is finally accepted to have happened as Scientists say it has, suddenly, too many males will become homosexuals, too many females will need to get artificially inseminated and too many others will take pleasure in aborting their babies, that communists will take over the world, that people will have gigantic orgies and start masturbating in public places everywhere, and then finally, when God has become so very angry with us all, he’ll send a gigantic asteroïd and kill us all.

    Is that what they’re really afraid of ? All because we are, somehow, related to oranges ?

    Give me a break.

    He just wants to make himself look and sound interesting, his small chance at a minute of illusionary fame…

  128. #128 Matt LaCrosse
    February 17, 2008

    You have to wonder about this guy’s upbringing. Now doubt, he was indoctrinated into creationism at an early age. He was surely a good Sunday school student. Too bad he didn’t pay attention in biology class, if he ever even managed to get that far.

  129. #129 Kristine
    February 17, 2008

    He doesn’t even make sense. It’s not a matter of not paying attention in Biology class – it’s simply too much speaking in glossolalia, because that’s what he’s doing here.

  130. #130 Sean LeBlanc
    February 17, 2008

    Has anyone watched the rest of this sordid affair?

    http://www.flboe.org/meetings/2008_02_11/meetingArchive.asp

    I started watching the first video, and all I can think is: god, these people are stupid. So far, I think there has been ONE who is for science.

    The rest are just outright creationists or crypto-creationists who quote mine, make logical fallacies, and generally put their ignorance on display.

    Is there something in the water here in America?

  131. #131 Sean LeBlanc
    February 17, 2008

    Also, what was the guy at about the 88 minute mark on about?

    He seemed to have an issue between punctuated equilibrium vs. non-punctuated?

    Was he trying to skewer the whole process or what?

  132. #132 Neil B.
    February 17, 2008

    OK, point taken about evolution once we have cells. But what progress on how cells got their act together to begin with?

  133. #133 Duff
    February 17, 2008

    I think it truly wonderful how this man has instantly become world famous for being a complete moron. May His Pastiferous Holiness continue to bless the internet.

  134. #134 Sean LeBlanc
    February 17, 2008

    LOL, if you get the full set of the proceedings, for part 1, fast forward to about the 100 minute mark.

    We have some genius using an APPLE to make his “case” for creationism.

    Egad.

  135. #135 FromDenverCO
    February 17, 2008

    I had a conversation with an acquaintance just two nights ago. I know her to be a fundy and I make a great effort to keep any conversation we have away from religion or science. I failed on this occasion and the talk turned to the “Theory”. She has been told, and she accepts, that evolutionary theory says that “men evolved from apes.” She then said something that I thought I had misheard. I asked her to clarify her statement and she emailed me this: ‘since there are no men (or humans) evolving from apes at this current time, yet there are still apes, and there is no evidence of a “missing link”, let alone more than one of them, then it is obvious to me that we do not evolve from apes.’ Therefore the Theory of Evolution is false.

    I know this woman well enough to know that she is merely regurgitating what she has heard. Which implies there are more people out there who believe this line of so-called logic. “Since there are no men currently evolving into apes and since there are still apes in the world…”

    Unbelievable and very scary.

  136. #136 Sean LeBlanc
    February 17, 2008

    Ugh. At about the 118 minute mark, a freaking science teacher takes the podium and mouths the “teach the controversy” lie.

    Gah!

  137. #137 Ragutis
    February 17, 2008

    Looked into Grand Ridge a little more. Checking out the Google map, what struck me as particularly sad was that this moron lives around 20 miles from a nice big honkin clue that the planet is quite a bit more than 6000 yrs. old. and shaped by a long slow progression of processes rather than a snap of divine fingers:

    http://www.floridastateparks.org/floridacaverns/

  138. #138 truth machine
    February 17, 2008

    But what progress on how cells got their act together to begin with?

    Why don’t you look into it and get back to us. You can start with http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=abiogenesis&as_ylo=2007

  139. #139 Jack Thompson
    February 17, 2008

    Unfortunately for Mr Dallas Ellis, we really don’t have any problem seeing the similarities between RISC and CISC chips — scientists look a little deeper than he does. Slice a PowerPC chip and put it under a microscope, and what do you see? Integrated circuits. Slice an Intel chip and look at it under a microscope, and what do you see? Integrated circuits. We find similar electronics: semiconductors, transistors, insulators, etc. The contents use similar electric processes, and we find the same materials. The integrated circuits contain logic gates, and we can compare the sequences — and we find similarities there (they are related) but many differences as well (they are distantly related — one estimate for the last common ancestor of RISC and CISC chips says they diverged roughly 16 years ago). Mr Ellis is relying on his profound ignorance of the basic building blocks of electrical engineering to make a superficial case.

    oh snap! processor evolution proven!

  140. #140 Sean LeBlanc
    February 17, 2008

    Ugh. At the 142 mark another science teacher came forward to defend nonsense.

  141. #141 Sean LeBlanc
    February 17, 2008

    At the 146 mark, it’s the third science teacher defending nonsense.

    I’m so glad I didn’t have any of these geniuses for a science teacher, and I feel sorry for those that do have these people for teachers.

  142. #142 Phoenician in a time of Romans
    February 17, 2008

    I’m perfectly comfortable with the idea that I’m a distant relative of every creeping, crawling, blooming, squirming organism on the planet,

    I notice you don’t invite them around for Christmas, you ungracious bastard.

  143. #143 SEF
    February 17, 2008

    round orange fruits don’t look anything like furry mobile animals

    Some of the former do have a navel “like” the latter though. ;-) Not that the placentals are really more closely related to the relevant oranges than other animals are.

  144. #144 ABK in STL
    February 17, 2008

    The only thing left to say say about this idiot is that both him and oranges belong in fruitcake. (And I mean no insult at all to oranges.)

  145. #145 Jonesy
    February 18, 2008

    He seems more like a nut than an orange to me.

  146. #146 Bride of Shrek
    February 18, 2008

    I think he’s being a bit hard on the poor old orange, they’re actually quite evolved if you just get to know them. I have conversations with the oranges in my fruit bowl all the time and they’re really rather knowledgeable and witty. The tangerines on the other hand are just cheeky bastards.

  147. #147 Doug
    February 18, 2008

    The only thing I believe about his story is that he met strange men in a truck stop but I doubt they were talking about evolution.

  148. #148 Elle Rayne
    February 21, 2008

    This comment thread was even more entertaining than the post!

  149. #149 libby
    February 25, 2008

    I love the irritated/bored-looking person in white seated behind him.

  150. #150 Video
    March 2, 2008

    I challenge someone to find Interstate 60. But then, why get any facts straight he coffee maker, laughed at me for not consulting him before I watched that.

  151. #151 Beth
    March 10, 2008

    In response to comment #2:
    You could say that they fabricated the evidence, but the open nature of scientific research allows you to look at the evidence yourself, if you are willing to invest your time to do so. Moreover, can you deny the effectiveness of HIV anti-viral drug cocktails? Their engineering was made possible due to the very fact that cell theory and DNA/RNA recombination theory allows us to find ways to block certain mechanisms that the virus uses to gain entry and replicate in our own cells.

    To conclude, I hope that in your school they allowed you to use a microscope in order to probe the cells that make plants and other living organism. Else, it means that the curriculum you had to follow was incredibly flawed.

The site is currently under maintenance and will be back shortly. New comments have been disabled during this time, please check back soon.