• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Ann Coulter's latest essay against evolution

Moon-Spinner

Graduate Poster
Moon-Spinner
Joined
Jan 19, 2005
Messages
1,581
Okay, hold onto your stomachs. Ann Coulter has a new essay with her anti-evolution views, and as usual, it's pretty demented.

Anti-Evolution

She basically claims that all the scientific advances in biology (since Darwin) prove that evolution is impossible. She still uses 19th century biology as the cornerstone of evolutionary knowledge, and then claims that advances in knowledge disprove what was believed then, thus disproving evolution.

At least that's what get out of her twisted logic.

And of course, life is too complex to happen by itself blah blah blah...
 
Wow, her arguments are so convincing.

By the way, the comments section is . . . interesting.
 
The problem is that there is no level of feigned ignorance that could expose this as a hoax. Creationism is like a black hole of Poe. Nothing is stupid enough to escape the event horizon.
 
Last edited:
Sorry, I've tried reading material by Coulter, and I just couldn't overcome my mental gag reflex. I tried applying a "Three Absurdity Rule," in which I would force myself to continue reading until I encountered three things that were demonstrably false, wildly illogical, or drop-dead stupid. I couldn't get very far.
 
The arrogance of this statement is astounding:

I presented the arguments of all the luminaries in the field, from the retarded Richard Dawkins to the brilliant Francis Crick, and disputed them.
Click to expand...


Yes. That's what happened. You, Ann Coulter, successfully and definitively disproved the work of Francis Crick, one of the most influential and well recognized scientists of the past century. And no one noticed this but you and your readers.

I suspect she's checking the mailbox daily for notification of her Nobel prize.
 
Thanks Linda for the link, it was very entertaining, unfortunately I still don't think Ann Coulter is perpetuating a hoax, I think she's just deranged :D

Yes Vampire, the comment section is almost just as sickening. It seems that according to Ann Coulter, and a lot of the people leaving comments on that site, Evolutionists = LIBERALS!
 
Moon-Spinner said:
Okay, hold onto your stomachs. Ann Coulter has a new essay with her anti-evolution views, and as usual, it's pretty demented.

Anti-Evolution

She basically claims that all the scientific advances in biology (since Darwin) prove that evolution is impossible. She still uses 19th century biology as the cornerstone of evolutionary knowledge, and then claims that advances in knowledge disprove what was believed then, thus disproving evolution.

At least that's what get out of her twisted logic.

And of course, life is too complex to happen by itself blah blah blah...
Click to expand...
Of course it's true more tomorrow than today, but man may alter himself. To some degree he's doing this now. He's selecting what babies are born. He's also altering plant species.

And the convergence of nanotech, biology and computer capabilities is on the horizon.

Doesn't this doom "Darwinian evolution" per the strict definition of it, or resign it to the past on this planet as best we know, and not the future? Coulter does not refer to "modern evolutionary theory" but "Darwinian...".

:)
 
Last edited:
My favorite thing about creationism is the main argument used is that life is just too complex and can't have just happened on it's own.

Yet an infinitely more complex being...an all powerful, all knowing being with the ability to create all the complex life, did appear all on its own.
 
Her commentary is a poorly disguised re-hash of Behe's discredited "irreducible complexity". She has stooped to taking credit for other people's garbage. This would make a most interesting court case.
 
Sometimes cartoons say exactly what I'm thinking.

Now, I don't want to link to the Boondocks episode with Ann Coulter, because it's not at all safe for work, but it says what I think about Ann Coulter: That she's just an act.
 
Last edited:
I think the word that best describes her is whore. I imagine I'll be accused of being sexist but it has nothing to do with sex (or gender.) She doesn't give a rats ass about the truth(or consequences) of anything she says or does as long as people keep throwing money at her.
 
Finster said:
I think the word that best describes her is whore. I imagine I'll be accused of being sexist but it has nothing to do with sex (or gender.) She doesn't give a rats ass about the truth(or consequences) of anything she says or does as long as people keep throwing money at her.
Click to expand...

The word you are looking for is "politician".
 
Am I the only one who thinks Ann Coulter looks like Rexella Van Impe?

Has anyone ever seen them in the same room at the same time?
 
Finster said:
I think the word that best describes her is whore. I imagine I'll be accused of being sexist but it has nothing to do with sex (or gender.) She doesn't give a rats ass about the truth(or consequences) of anything she says or does as long as people keep throwing money at her.
Click to expand...

A real whore provides a valuable service.

Do not insult whores by comparing them to Ann Coulter.
 
That article was just sad. Why don't these anti-evolution nuts at least do a cursory study before they write something? Oh yeah, because then they would be evolutionists:rolleyes:
 
mhaze said:
Of course it's true more tomorrow than today, but man may alter himself. To some degree he's doing this now. He's selecting what babies are born. He's also altering plant species.

And the convergence of nanotech, biology and computer capabilities is on the horizon.

Doesn't this doom "Darwinian evolution" per the strict definition of it, or resign it to the past on this planet as best we know, and not the future? Coulter does not refer to "modern evolutionary theory" but "Darwinian...".

:)
Click to expand...
Your post is confusing. Are you defending Coulter? Is it hard for you given you buy her political views which she presents with equal ignorance (not commenting on left or right political positions, just on the garbage that Coulter spiels when she presents her views)?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom