Friday, September 16, 2011

Friday Fundies - Ray Comfort

It has been a long time since I've done a Friday Fundies post, so I made my way over to Ray Comfort's Blog to find a juicy quote.

Here's one from a post he made about evolution.

"The tragedy for those that believe in evolution is that they automatically discount the Genesis account of creation, which holds up perfectly under the light of honest scientific scrutiny. It informs us that God is the initial Cause of all things. He created male and female and caused every animal to bring forth after its own kind.

The theory of evolution has no explanation for the initial Cause (it is a case of "evolution-did-it" with the help of invisible sky-daddy of Father Time), nor does it have an explanation for why 1.4 million different kinds of animals, birds, fish, and insects have male and female."


It's really sad seeing things like this. He sincerely believes that Genesis stands up under scientific scrutiny. I almost feel sorry for him. The simple fact of the matter is that not a single aspect of the Genesis creation myth reflects anything that has been demonstrated to be true through scientific inquiry. Things are in the wrong order, plants are made before the sun is there to sustain them, light exists before stars are there to provide it. It's pointless going through the list of everything that is wrong with Genesis, because until people like Ray decide they are actually going to honestly investigate these things, they will not listen to anything anyone else has to say.

Evolutionary theory does not even attempt to explain the initial cause, that is in the realm of cosmology, or if he is talking about the origin of life (more like the origin of replicating polymers) then it is in the realm of chemistry. What baffles me even more than his astounding ignorance about what science actually is and says despite arguing against science for over 20 years, is that he thinks the existence of male and female organisms somehow presents a serious obstacle to evolution.

A cursory glance at the Wikipedia page for the evolution of sexual reproduction would give you more knowledge on the subject than Ray Comfort who frequently spouts his imbecilic criticisms of it.

It almost annoys me that people put the effort into trying to argue with fundies like Ray, not because it makes people think that he should be taken seriously, but because fundies haven't even taken the time to learn about their own religion seriously, do you really think that they would bother learning about something like evolution properly? It's a matter of intellectual honesty, Ray has none, and because of that he deserves nothing but ridicule.


  1. Wow, where do I start. the god in the Gaps keeps getting smaller and smaller and one day that will include first cause. there is nothing wrong with admitting that we don't know the first cause, yet, but fo sho there is something wrong with claiming that one knows (Christianity). that is a beauty of science. Science can admit when it doesn't know something and will look for the answer, while religion doesn't know the answer or look for it (because they already know that sky daddy is the reason for everything). Awesome buddy. hope everything is going well.


  2. Yeah, the biggest difference between the scientific search for an explanation for the origin of the universe and the religious one, is that science is actually looking. Religion just says "We already have the answer! Our Holy book gives it to us." Science on the other hand makes predictions, builds models and tests them, making actual progress towards a better understanding. Haha, I think I may do a whole post dedicated to this next week.


  3. or if he is talking about the origin of life (more like the origin of replicating polymers) then it is in the realm of chemistry.

    These people almost never have even the most rudimentary knowledge of the theory they are supposedly arguing against -- not even of what it sets out to explain. It's amazing how often this particular error comes up. It's right up there with the "evolution is random" fallacy.

    Thanks for including me in your blogroll, by the way.