Evolution, Evolution and Creationism, Intellectual Honesty, Liars Lies and Lying, Religion, Science

Do Evangelicals Ever Tell the Truth about Evolution?

Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort are a couple Hollywood actors with a hobby.   Their hobby is to tell whoppers about evolution.  It seems to give them a sense of purpose.

On November 19th, the pair  plan to distribute 50,000 copies of Darwin’s Origin of Species to students on college campuses across the United States.

These are very special copies of the book because each copy contains a 50 page foreword by Ray Comfort.   Comfort uses the foreword to tell the same lies about evolution that he has been telling now for years.   Lies that he knows are lies because he has been corrected again and again on them.  Lies he nevertheless repeats because he lacks intellectual honesty.

A .pdf file of Comfort’s introduction is here.

If Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort were the only Evangelicals lying about evolution,  they could not by themselves do much to harm the reputation of Evangelicals.  But the fact is that so many Evangelicals are lying about evolution these days, Evangelicals are fast getting a reputation for being incorrigible liars.  No one but a village idiot these days would bet real money on an Evangelical telling them the truth about evolution.  Now, whether that’s fair to those seemingly few Evangelicals who do not lie is another matter.

49 thoughts on “Do Evangelicals Ever Tell the Truth about Evolution?”

  1. We faced some of that, well, a lot of that actually, when we Home-Schooled our daughters. I chronicle a bit of it here: http://briancork.wordpress.com/2007/01/20/how-long-is-seven-days/

    I think most of us understand that those evangelicals are wrong. I don’t think they are actually lying, though. Cameron and Cameron (“soul mates”, if you will) actually believe what they say is true. There is a great deal of delusional positioning there.

    Haley Anne was just ten years old when I wrote the above post around evolution. However, the episode actually taught me a lot about how I can connect with her on an honest intellectual level. That helps me now that she is thirteen, and working hard to think critically. So, bridging the gap between wishful thinking, dogma, and facts creates an opportunity to teach the truth, and connect on a real level.

    I pick on Christians and politicians a lot on my own Blog. But, I try to see the silver-lining when reasonable and possible.

    As it turns out. Messrs. Cameron and Comfort really represent a small percentage of Christians. And, they are very poor representatives because they probably turn more people off of faith then onto it. Hoisting their ignorant belief system onto students is sophomoric and silly. And, the good news is most of those students know it.

    So, in closing, Paul’s reference to “village idiots” is pretty spot-on. But, let’s remember that most villages put up with those idiots in a form of love and, perhaps, a grim reminder how lucky we are to have our wits about us – and, ironically here, the discernment God gives us to ferret out the truth.

    Brian Patrick Cork


  2. I remember you telling me that you didn’t put photos of yourself in your blog because you lived in small conservative community. The excellence I see is in the word ‘honesty’ which is often related to the word ‘courage’.


  3. Don’t worry: Christian vigilantes killing atheists is rare. They mostly focus on gays and abortion clinics if they’re going to get their homicidal maniac on, so it isn’t something to worry about too much. Becoming a social pariah is more likely, though.

    Anyway, I find Comfort’s plan disgusting: adding a diatribe against the Origin of Species as a preface to a copy of Origin of Species and selling it as if it were the actual book with absolutely no creationist lies crammed into it. I propose leaving Chick-tract style pamphlets in them, informing everyone about who Ray Comfort is, why is a fucking moron, and how everything he says in his introduction is irrelevant or obviously wrong. Feel free to force somebody to steal that idea.


  4. @ Brian: Welcome to the blog! I hope you’re right that Cameron and Comfort are somehow merely misguided souls and not outright liars. However I fear you might not be right. They’ve been at this for years now and have received all sorts of correction. Nevertheless, they persist in propagating their falsehoods.


  5. @ Paul, Paul Costopoulos, and Asylum Seeker: I think I’m reasonably safe here. I have a friend in town who some time ago put up an atheist site and received several death threats for his trouble. But I think he was the exception, rather than the rule. Nevertheless, because of his experience, I prefer to keep some things about me confidential.


  6. Thanks for the welcome Paul.

    You certainly have a hearty and ferocious crew here.

    Hapless fellows like Cameron and Comfort become their own worse joke at the cocktail party the more they show up. Eventually they become caricatures of their own misguided beliefs. At some point, their infamy will be assured when kids on those very same college campuses start attending Halloween parties dressed-up as “Teeth Gnashing Camerons”.

    Paul Costopoulos: Cameron and Comfort are unlikely candidates to join the ranks of the UniBomber. And, they don’t profile as furtive enough to be serial killers that would say God “made [them] do it”. They like attention. The good news here might be that they’re out in the open where everyone can see them and make informed decisions.



  7. Comfort and Cameron can actually be our greatest allies in the argument against the AiG-style creationism. They are the vocal opponents to evolution with purely religious arguments and they aren’t afraid to admit that these are based purely upon religious ideology. The parasites over at the [lack of] Discovery Institute, on the other hand, are clawing tooth and nail to try and find some way to distance themselves from religion even though pretty much everything they claim is based upon this.


  8. I think it’s dangerous to look at Cameron and Comfort as just the ol’ laughable fool. No they are not just some silly fools with a simple wish. They are not just your regular joe that happen to be misguided on this ONE particular issue. They are purposefully misleading people, I know this is arguable, and if not they are at least willfully denying evidence and teaching others with there beliefs that A) it is okay to do this and B) they have all the answers.

    At a time when better science education, understanding, and care is so crucial I think we need to call a stone a stone. They are teaching people that scientists are lying by using lies and distortions of evidence. They are idiots that need to be pointed out as such. If you think I’m exaggerating then look up “ocean acidification”, read how dangerous of a situation we are creating, and then ask yourself why you have to Google it to learn about it.


  9. Paul:

    Are they “teaching” or preaching?

    Do we have evidence people are listening to them out of politeness, or interest?

    I believe there is a difference. People gather more form being taught. And, I don’t believe Cameron and Comfort are actually teaching much of anything.

    I’ll stil take the position that, as earnest as they might be, their audience will be skeptical. But, I will agree that we all must remain vigilant. Because there, once again, is our truest and best opportunity to actually teach. When people hear what Cameron and Comfort say, hopefully this leads to a discussion elsewhere (for example the home or class room), and the truth and facts can be presented.

    Then, there is always the argument for Mr. Darwin and Natural Selection. Cameron and Comfort will always have an audience. And, they will naturally have a few new recruits. But, the number will always be few – especially if we keep up our own noble efforts to represent light and truth; the facts.



  10. Hi Cork! I think where you and I disagree is in our respective beliefs about how effective Cameron and Comfort are at converting others to their point of view. You seem to feel they are relatively ineffective. I hope you’re right about that, but I doubt that you are. I recall that over half of all Americans reject the Theory of Evolution. I blame propaganda of the sort propagated by Cameron and Comfort.


  11. Lo Paul.

    I wonder if those Americans actually “reject” Evolution as opposed to not being exposed to it, or educated about it. If, indeed, half of our countrymen are rejecting evolution, is it based upon ignorance – as in, not knowing what to think, or, just not knowing?

    I feel this is a relevant question because I would be skeptical that half (the other half?) of this country believes that fossils aren’t real (meaning carbon dating is false, or wrong).

    An interesting national pole (we can do this on our Blogs you know) might be:

    Do you understand that evolution is based, in part, on fossils and carbon dating – and, creationism means that dinosaurs never existed, or only vanished (mysteriously) 2500 years ago?

    If Cameron and Comfort were pressing the hapless denizens of Appalachia, I might be more concerned that they were having a serious impact on our society. However, they probably don’t go there (much) other than to feel more at home and find wives (teeth optional). But, like most evangelicals, they like to debate. So, they’re going to schools, where the real interesting battle is to be found, hoping for brownie points. But, I feel that’s actually our best bet. People may listen to them – often because they are being polite, and might be fascinated by a fallen television star, but they are most likely thinking critically. Those kids at school are also being exposed to other educated people that will encourage them to make decisions based on research and balanced thinking (teachers, faculty and staff). The core curriculum calls upon theories of evolution. But, it comes down to how detailed the faculty wants to be. So, there appears to be subjective bias. Also, statistically, those kids in schools are also influenced by parents. That’s where my best hope will alway focus.

    We had our daughters in private school for years. That was Christian-based, and evolution seemed to be about middle-of-the-road. We then home-schooled for several years. That was mostly through Veritas. And, their position is square on Creationism. And, you saw how I addressed that in my aforementioned post: http://briancork.wordpress.com/2007/01/20/how-long-is-seven-days/

    So… I remain confident that rational thinkers out-number people like Cameron and Comfort. There will be attrition, certainly. But, that will then make Darwin’s point.



  12. Cork,
    You are either playing dumb, oblivious to what goes on in the world, or trolling this site. Which one is it? Seriously, you don’t think people reject evolution? What about the Republicans that raised their hands saying they “Didn’t believe in evolution” during the primaries? What about all the people that voted for those republicans?

    Do we have evidence people are listening to them out of politeness, or interest?

    This is a distinction without a difference here because the question is the intent of C&C and not the people listening. See my previous comment.


  13. Webs:

    I’ll take the position of saying none of those options (although I may hesitate as I’m not clear what “trolling” means in this context).

    To be candid, I don’t recall hearing anything about Republican politicians; and certainly, none of merit stating recently that they don’t believe in evolution. Can you direct us to a few links?

    Perhaps the distinction does, indeed, need to be more about the audience, as opposed to the performers, in this regard. Cameron and Comforts arguments are very flimsy and they fail quickly under scrutiny and critical cross-referencing. So, an educated, or otherwise discerning individual or group (i.e. school campus) would quickly see the fallacies inherent in Cameron’s and Comfort.s point-of-view.

    Look… I walk my seven year old daughter to the bus stop each morning. There are twenty kids in elementary school there every day – along with a handful of parents. Thursday, I asked out-loud who believes in theories of evolution and knew what fossils are? They all raised their hands (even the parents, which I found cool). In the last few days I’ve emailed or called teachers for the elementary schooler, and her sister’s middle school. It’s evolution, baby. And, based upon our demographics, Alpharetta is a Republican town (although I’ll hold to know political affiliation – other than Jeffersonian views). I also coach two girls soccer teams. So, I have access to thirty families. It’s the same response at practices.

    Perhaps I simply have more faith in people (including their intelligence and intuition), and remain skeptical that barn-stormers like Cameron and Comfort can turn their heads beyond a point of entertainment. And. I’m going to leave it at that.



  14. Actually you’re oblivious or a troll if you need me to find you links about Republicans raising their hands to questions of their disbelief in evolution.


    Just so you know, typing in “republican primaries evolution” into Google gives 2.26 million results. I would say the theory that respected Republican candidates accept evolution is squashed.

    Perhaps the distinction does, indeed, need to be more about the audience, as opposed to the performers, in this regard. Cameron and Comforts arguments are very flimsy and they fail quickly under scrutiny and critical cross-referencing. So, an educated, or otherwise discerning individual or group (i.e. school campus) would quickly see the fallacies inherent in Cameron’s and Comfort.s point-of-view.

    Those arguements are flimsy to you but fit perfect in the world of ideas to others. C&C know this and they are purposely taking advantage of it. Or as I already stated, they have been told they are wrong repeatedly and they keep repeating the same lies, sometimes with a new shell, but still the same lie.

    Either way what they are doing is wrong and there is no need to be candid about this. At a time when knowledge of, interest in, and understanding of science is so important we can’t just sit by and laugh at the actions of C&C. Doing so does a great disservice to mother nature and issues of global warming, ocean acidification, and other issues and matters of science.

    Because what C&C are doing is destroying and devaluing sound science. This leads to erosion of scientists and their work. Once you deny evolution with “proof” or “evidence” (not my thinking but the creationists’ thinking) you can now safely deny vaccinations and other important areas and ideas of science. It opens the flood gates.

    I’m sure you meet plenty of people that do accept evolution, I would agree with you there as so have I. But you don’t have to travel far to look for pockets of people that do not think evolution is real. And these are some really big pockets. Just look at how many votes McCain and Palin got. Look at Palin’s popularity. Look at how many people voted in the Republican primaries for candidates against evolution. You can deny evidence all you want, but there is still a large group of people in the US that deny basic science.


  15. @ Webs: I’m going with my gut about this, but I don’t think Cork is a troll. I can see how his lack of common knowledge on this issue might lead one to believe he is putting us on, yet, I don’t think he’s trying to troll us.


  16. So… I learned something new here.

    When Webs started referring to me as a “troll” I figured he was frustrated and resorting to name calling because I was not agreeing with his points.

    I googled “what does trolling websites mean?”. Here’s what Wikipedia says:

    “In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.”It also says: “mean or hard to get along with”.

    So, for the moment, at least from Webs’ limited perspective, if we are debating, and one of us offers a different point of view, they are then “mean”.

    Sorry Webs (and, maybe Paul, as well). That was not my intention.

    This morning, on my own Blog, I posted: “open-minded (and open-hearted) debate is where we sharpen our tongues less, and our minds (if not wit) more.” NOTE: I had left that as a comment on one of Paul’s other posts as well, earlier in the week.

    That’s where you’ ll find me.

    And, I’ll also stand firm, not feeling particularly mean, for it, mind you, in the belief that most people in our country are reasonably well informed, and understand that Cameron and Comfort are misguided.

    In closing, I am confident that, at least in terms of Paul’s post, we all, generally agree that we don’t stand with Cameron’s and Comfort’s views.



  17. Webs:

    Thank you for those links. You are a real “Trooper”.

    In any event…

    The first link shows ten panelists with John McCain being singled-out over the evolution question. He firmly states his belief in evolution, and later adds he also see’s “the hand of God”. So, that seemed fairly even to me. If you question the existence of God, I can see why you might not like his comprehensive response. Of the ten panelists, three raise their hand affirming non belief in evolution. We don’t know if they misunderstood. And, frankly, I don’t even know who they are. So, I’m guessing their impact is mitigated. But this exchange is not about atheism, is it? For the record, I have a strong belief in God. I do struggle with the Christ element. But I’ll not be drawn into a debate over that, if it’s all the same to you.

    The second link has Palin stating she supports evolution being taught as “one of several theories”. That is fair and appropriate – especially in schools where varied theories and investigation are critical for development, right? She also states her confidence in “the hand of God”, just like McCain in the first video. And, I am starting to suspect that is what really gets under your skin.

    The third video featuring Ron Paul is actually funny. And, you can see why he realizes very little support. It’s possible that Cameron and Comfort might support his candidacy, but that ends up making both our points, right? Ron Paul is not a leader. at least not a leader of many. Lets be thankful for that.

    So… None of these videos really support a Republican conspiracy to foist anti-evolution anything upon us. I’m confident you won’t agree with me. But, that’s okay.

    Our best bet is our open-minds, filled by good teachers and examples that pose rounded arguments based in fact. I believe most Americans are confident evolution brought us all here. And, a good number might add that God started it all.

    Here’s a thought for you from a business orientation… I don’t abide by the notion that God has a plan for us. I suspect He’s too BIG for that. But, if He does have a plan for us, then we are responsible for the milestones.

    For me, and the people I’ll abide by, evolution is obvious. There is plenty of evidence.

    Surely, you and I agree on that.



  18. Evolution is obvious… yet two paragraphs above you agree with Palin that is should be taught along side other “theories”. Which one is it? And if you don’t see the problem with this do you see the problem with teaching other “theories” that denounce gravity, a round earth, moon landing, and everything else out there? Surely there are some ideas that have so much evidence for it there is not much point to discussing it right?

    The judge’s decision for the Dover trial on teaching creation besides evolution in classrooms said it best.

    The citizens of the Dover area were poorly served by the members of the Board who voted for the ID Policy. It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy. With that said, we do not question that many of the leading advocates of ID have bona fide and deeply held beliefs which drive their scholarly endeavors. Nor do we controvert that ID should continue to be studied, debated, and discussed. As stated, our conclusion today is that it is unconstitutional to teach ID as an alternative to evolution in a public school science classroom.

    Teaching other “theories” gives those theories equal weight. But some theories don’t deserve equal weighting because the evidence is nowhere near substantial.

    The side issue, of whether or not Republicans accept evolution, seems to be one that I don’t think I will be able to convince you of even if I thought I could. So rather than waste both of our time discussing that I would just reiterate my original point, that what C&C are doing is not healthy and we should be able to call them out and further we shouldn’t just brush them off as idiots or the “town fool”. If you don’t support that fine, but people like myself are going to do it anyway because we see the danger in letting people like C&C erode science in this country. Points I have made above in previous comments that you still have yet to address.

    Our best bet is our open-minds, filled by good teachers and examples that pose rounded arguments based in fact. I believe most Americans are confident evolution brought us all here. And, a good number might add that God started it all.

    I agree that open minds and good teachers and education is all important. But people like C&C and Palin want to ruin that by forcing their “theories” into schools. This is why Paul wrote this post and why I am speaking out.

    As far as Americans and evolution:

    Again, a simple Google search provides tons of information on this topic. Most of those links are biased towards a creation view, but the point is still the same. There are a lot of polls that say America is sliding back towards the dark age. Which is why I feel the need to speak out against C&C.


  19. Hey Web.

    I have an email from a third party observing this exchange and now requesting that I: “stop prodding the monkey with a cattle prod”. Unfortunately much of the information found on the internet is one-sided and, and well, manipulated. And, you’re attempting to use it as flimsy evidence, ironically, I must add, just like Cameron and Comfort.

    I don’t follow Palin. I don’t see her a leader in politics or as a Thought Leader. But, I do agree with her that all theories must be given light in order to be properly vetted. We can’t like, value or appreciate all the theories. But, this is where critical thinking and discernment make an important appearance, and typically save the day.

    I don’t think Cameron and Comfort are “village idiots”. I don’t think their “harmless” either. But, I do believe they represent and appeal to the minority – just like that hapless Ron Paul fellow. And, I remain confident that the majority of our neighbors see the fallacies in Cameron and Comfort’s arguments.

    Look Webs… I don’t agree with Cameron and Comforts views. You don’t agree with them. Probably most of the people we both know don’t like their views. That’s good news. And, I’m just not convinced that’s going to change.

    All that said, I admire your commitment, and offer my hearty best wishes. Be mindful that free speech is at work here.



  20. Cork, you can make all the statements you want, but it doesn’t change the evidence. Yes the Internet has lies, but look up polling on Americans and evolution and the evidence is there. What’s your favorite source for news? Go to it and do a search on this topic and send us a link. I would take the bet that you will find a source for a poll that shows a decent amount of Americans not accepting evolution. Every year over and over again the polls come out and the numbers don’t favor science. If you choose to ignore it so be it, but don’t come around claiming some authority. And the evidence I have presented over and over again you either ignore or wave away with some sweeping statement. Neither of which discredit it.


  21. I have a staff of researchers with the full-time job of scouring global news to keep me briefed. It’s how I stay on top of events so I can properly coach my clients. Often, our focus are analysts from a wide range of sectors and educators from several Universities. This enables us to cross-reference our data to ensure that it’s credible and verified by more than one source.

    Typically we’ll not include home-made Youtube videos as part of the analysis (althoughI do use them often profiling music, or when poking good-natured fun as someone or something).

    I hope this helps you Webs. Give Cameron a hug for me. Perhaps you can appear on Dr. Phil together. He relies on the internet for a lot of his facts as well.



  22. Webs you are in way over your head. You come across like you play too much World of Warcraft. Cork’s arguments are fair. But, all you want to do is rely on the internet. I also have to agree with Cork in that you are more like C & C than you might realize.

    T Rex


  23. I have to agree with Webs on this one. It seems pretty well established a large proportion of Americans reject the Theory of Evolution. One might argue that’s not true in one’s own backyard, as Cork does, but that sort of argument is merely anecdotal and therefore unreliable. Polls by many different outfits over many years have shown that a large proportion — around half — of all Americans reject the Theory of Evolution.

    Furthermore, I don’t think it can be doubted that the efforts of people like Cameron and Comfort are at least part of the reason why so many Americans have been fooled into believing the Theory of Evolution is not the best available explanation for the diversity of life on this planet.

    Last, the notion that we should “teach the controversy” is ridiculous. That would be like saying we should teach the controversy regarding a flat earth. Absurd.


  24. I was not expecting that Paul.

    Webs had called Cork a “Troll” (I think he did it because he could not pose a convincing argument). It turns out thats obviously not the case. Cork clearly likes to engage and inspire rounded thinking. To your credit you did defend Cork and I think that is appropriate. I have followed him for quite some time. He is really very fair. He likes truth and balance.

    Perhaps my comment about Webs and World of Warcraft came across as harsh. But I did not mean it to be cruel or hurtful. People that play WOW tend to be on a quest. Sometimes those quests are Quixotic in nature. Those people and this can include C & C get focused and often fail to others points (even when they might be converging). So Webs really is coming across like C & C but with opposing views.

    This is the case with Webs and Cork. Cork’s acknowledges the problem but does not agree it affects “half” the country. His information is not providencial or in his “backyard” as you put it. His views are formed by and from a very widespread net of people from every conceivable walk of like. His Blog gets big attention.

    My remaining concern here with this exchange is that Webs and you seem to be mostly concerned over people not agreeing with your position. If I know Cork he waded in because he thinks its important to bring together opposing ideas with varied information so it can be fairly evaluated. That is what I saw him do with your post and spending a lot of time (and being patient) with Webs.

    I will stand down not and look for other opportunities for us to save the kingdom (in a not WOW sort of way).

    T. Rex


  25. @ Rex: Fair enough. I don’t entirely agree with what you say, but I very much appreciate your taking the time to correct the earlier impression I had of your being here merely to sling insults.


  26. I have a staff of researchers

    Yet you cannot do simple Google searches? What you are doing here is arguing from a position of authority which means nill when you cannot provide reliable evidence to backup assertions. It wouldn’t matter if I were a pollster for the links to polls I provided. It wouldn’t make my argument any more credible. What you are essentially doing is stating your opinion with no supporting evidence or credible references to backup those opinions or statements, and whatever career you have doesn’t make your claim any more reliable when you cannot back it up.

    Then I provide you with references to show how your claims are not supported by evidence and you just say what amounts to nuh uh! But that doesn’t make your original claim any more valid or mine less valid. Show me who else thinks what you think? What other reliable sources out there agree with you? I have done this already and even asked you to in a comment above and instead you argue from authority and say, “Nuh uh.”

    Do you want to be right or do you want to have a reasonable conversation? This is why I asked if you were trolling because it’s a common tactic by trolls. If you want to be right then fine, but don’t expect anyone else here, me included, to accept what you say or agree with you.

    His information is not providencial or in his “backyard” as you put it. His views are formed by and from a very widespread net of people from every conceivable walk of like. His Blog gets big attention.

    Oh so now the Internet has respectable content? I see. So when the information favors your point of view the Internet is a great source, but when it goes against what you think it’s bad. Maybe I’m exaggerating that point…

    Either way, quoting “folks I talked to online” or “people I have had discussions with in my neighborhood” is meaningless to use in a discussion. If I were from some areas of Kansas I might argue that everyone in the US has a disbelief in Evolution and this would be because certain areas have an overwhelming majority view of creation in Kansas. The problem I would have with such an argument is that what’s true for one subset of a population isn’t necessarily true for another. And you would correct to call me out on using such an argument. Thus the reason why in discussions such as these people provide evidence and sources. Something I have asked for and have not seen. And saying, “Well so and so stated that was the case” is not evidence or a reliable source, but hearsay.


  27. I might venture to guess we walk in different neighborhoods. Unfortunately your neighbors apparently follow creationism while fortunately (can we agree on that small point?) mine follow evolution.

    Meanwhile Cork has likely moved on to more elegant matters.

    In closing Webs I salute your passion but can’t follow your research. The last word here is yours as I think you need that.

    T. Rex


  28. Paul,

    Cork honors your post and is demonstrating a sincere effort to bring truth and light into this matter by posting about the subject on his own Blog. He has also put up a poll to determine if Americans are thinking Creationism or Evolution. Here is a link to the post:


    He sent me an email this morning. As of 7:30EST there were just over 14,000 hits with roughly 78% going with “evolution with Gods hand in it” and another 19% going with just “evolution”. “Creationism” had some votes. But, it’s under 15%.

    They expect over 100,000 hits. He has asked that readers who are not Americans not participate in the poll. The results might be skewed from the stand point that most of Cork’s readers are likely college educated. It has occurred to many of us that ignorance could also skew the result and help make yours and Webs point. Some people that could fall prey to C&T are likely uneducated and might not even have access to the internet.

    I think you will have to agree Cork is playing this one pretty fair and this is a good start.



  29. Thanks for that Paul.

    And, I’ll add that T. Rex is a good man. Certainly a Prudent and Optimistic Gentleman – not to mention Hardy and ferocious.

    I’ve closed the aforementioned poll. The official results show Americans (those that read my Blog anyway) favoring Evolution at 95%, while 5% will bow their heads (pun intended) to Creationism.

    I will concede the poll has it’s flaws. There was just over 83,000 votes. The demographic might not match that targetted by the misguided Messers. Cameron and Comfort, etc. But, we gave it a worthy go nonetheless, and I’m not at all surprised by the results.



  30. Verily I say, that’d be the truth in most polls.

    Perhaps the most accurate truth I can absolutely report here, and from all of this is: My fellow Americans trust in the theories behind evolution.

    And, to use your own words, albeit with a twist, this is likely because there is no scientific evidence to support creationism. Although we don’t always like the facts, we still like and need facts, eh. And, in that we might all find (I’ll add a wry grin here, Paul) salvation. We’ll thank God for discernment.

    Oh, the irony.



I'd love to hear from you. Comments make my day.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s