dfledermaus

I liked the last line too but while it’s entertaining to watch the Republican Party implode in the name of ideological purity, it’s also a bit disturbing. Once the saner folks leave, all that will be left will be hardcore true-believers; people with an unshakeable certainty in their world-view and, since they won’t have the numbers to accomplish anything, an increasing sense of frustration with and disenfranchisement from the system.

So… what happens when a group of people who know for a fact that they are right and know for a fact they have a duty to do something about it, feel they can no longer accomplish anything within the system?

Some scary possibilities occur to me but hey, I’m probably just an alarmist, right?
Richard Wade

So… what happens when a group of people who know for a fact that they are right and know for a fact they have a duty to do something about it, feel they can no longer accomplish anything within the system?

Some scary possibilities occur to me but hey, I’m probably just an alarmist, right?

Let’s just send them plenty of Kool-aid and cyanide.
Daniel

Sigh, the problem is that what a creationist would say is that viruses are only a case of ‘microevolution’ and not ‘macroevolution’…
Luther Weeks

I’m all for teaching the evidence for and against evolution. I know there is a lot for. Perhaps there is some against.

That is a whole lot different than teaching the myth of creation in science class.
EndUnknown

@Daniel

and the explanation ‘macro evolution is just a crapload of micro over millions of years’ cant penetrate their skull.
SW

No Luther, there is none against. Not in 150 years of worldwide research has anything been found that goes against it.
Jaroslav Sveda

@EndUnknown

But the ultimate problem is that changes in genome (like hox gene duplication) that enable completely new feature happen only rarely, and even then it’s probable that the change that will ultimately end up leveraging the potenital will take millions of years, therefore practically eliminating possibility to ever show an example of it.
Jeff

Luther Weeks Says:
I’m all for teaching the evidence for and against evolution…That is a whole lot different than teaching the myth of creation in science class.

I agree. Science is all about self-criticism. Evolution theory should be critically examined. That is how science advances. Creationism falls outside science both in concept and in the methodologies of the practitioners. Creationism should definitely not be taught in science class.
Skeptico

Pretty good. Now all Bill needs to do is apply those same standards to himself when he’s talking about what he calls “western medicine”. If he’s going to insist that vaccines don’t prevent disease and that that Pasteur recanted on his deathbed, etc, as he has done on numerous occasions then Maher himself shouldn’t expect to go to a doctor if he gets sick.
NeuroLover

TOTALLY agreed, Skeptico. Also all his “vaccines cause autism” bullshit.
Red

I have a son with autism, and let me state for the record, that my son “WAS” developing quite normal until that dreaded vaccine. But that is another argument.

I love Bill Maher. I could listen to him for hours. And even if you don’t agree with him on everything, at least he gets you thinking.
Colin Purrington

If you’d like a graphic for this line of reasoning, here’s something I made in 2005 or so:

http://www.swarthmore.edu/NatSci/cpurrin1/evolk12/h5n1/avianflu.htm