Kirk Cameron and the Origin of the Species

[IDrinkaRum]

Kirk Cameron has said some controversial things about the book "Origin of the Species" and will be distributing a certain amount of copies of the book, for free, with a 50 page introduction by Ray Comfort, an evangelist who will provide a view of creationism

Mr. Cameron's ideas have been mocked by others in both academia and elsewhere in the world.

The article has 2 videoes. One of him explaining why he's doing this and his religious objections about other things. Then there is another video of a young woman making fun of Mr. Cameron, calling him a "snake", and pointing out some of his fallacies.

It's interesting.

[guywithashovel]

The Theory of Evolution has over 150 years of peer-reviewed scientific research to back it up. Denying evolution is no different than denying gravity, cells, or atoms.

Creationism is nothing but a conspiracy theory. It should be taken no more seriously than astrology, numerology, or phrenology.

Also, despite what Cameron says, evolution is not an "atheist thing." There are many Christians and members of other religions who accept evolution. For example, Ken Miller is a biologist at Princeton who accepts evolution and is a Catholic. He is the author of "Finding Darwin's God." He was also testifying on the side of science during the Dover Trial in Pennsylvania a few years ago.

[AdminAssistant]

The young woman makes a very valid point - if a group of scientists and historians got together to write a preface to the Bible pointing out all the flaws and inaccuracies, Christians around the world would riot.

Kirk Cameron is entitled to believe whatever he wants to believe. However, this is pure propaganda, and it leaves a nasty nasty taste in my mouth.

[Talon]

Ah, Kirk Cameron aka "Crockaduck boy"

He once claimed in a live interview that the "fact" we haven't found any transitional forms like a "Crockaduck" in the fossil record is proof against evolution. No, but we have found Archaeopteryx, a reptile with feathers. Not that he would ever admit that.

As one youtube commentator put it, his 50-page "introduction" is not recommended for use as toilet paper. The sight of Cameron's face is extremely facepalm-inducing, which is not a good thing given the application

Actually, up until recently I was inclined to think of Cameron as little more than an unintentionally hilarious little fool. But I've recently learned that he allegedly got his co-star Julie McCollough from the TV show "Growing Pains" fired. Apparently he got his diapers in an uproar upon learning she had the audacity to pose nude in Playboy. He demanded she be fired or he would quit. The producers caved.

(Source: http://www.tv.com/julie-mccullough/p...1/summary.html)

If this is true, what a judgmental son of a bitch!

If his god is real, I wonder how he'll be made to answer for his sins of Pride and Dishonesty.

[guywithashovel]

This may not be true, but I read somewhere that Cameron started creating friction amongst the cast of Growing Pains after he converted to his religion (e.g. fussing over "immorality in the story lines, picking on other cast members for things they did). Again, that may not be true, but I'm pretty sure I read it somewhere.

The two churches I attended as a child were filled with people like that. They would act all self-righteous and superior and pick apart everything everyone else did. And then, if anyone got irritated with them or told them to mind their own business, they would play the "blessed are the persecuted" game. The people in the third church I went to were a little more laid back, though.

[lordlundar]

Sheesh! I got 20 seconds into the KC video before the stupid burnt too much.

[Talon]

Oops, it's Ray Comfort who wrote the introduction.

Ray Comfort, aka "Banana boy". He once claimed the banana was "the atheist's nightmare", because it fit so "perfectly" into a human hand it had to be proof of God's design. Um no, the banana was selectively bred into its current shape.

Comfort has since issued an apologetic non-apology for that absurd blunder, for "not explaining himself more clearly."

Both he and Crockaduck boy Cameron continue to misrepresent evolution as having something to do with the origin of life or origin of the universe, when a 1-minute wikipedia search can prove them wrong. Morons

[Gravekeeper]

This may not be true, but I read somewhere that Cameron started creating friction amongst the cast of Growing Pains after he converted to his religion.

It is true, actually. He caused quite a bit of trouble.

[Flyndaran]

He is not entitled to believe anything he wants. He isn't allowed to believe he's the president of the United States, non-existence of gravity and demand his followers jump of cliffs. He just gets a pass because of the magical word, "Religion".
No! When your fantasy beliefs contradict reality in downright obvious provable ways, it is not just our right but our obligation to call FOUL!

[lordlundar]

He is not entitled to believe anything he wants. He isn't allowed to believe he's the president of the United States, non-existence of gravity and demand his followers jump of cliffs. He just gets a pass because of the magical word, "Religion".

Actually, he can believe what he wants. Doesn't mean it's the truth.

[Flyndaran]

Actually, he can believe what he wants. Doesn't mean it's the truth.

Not really. Hate speech, which is what a lot of his religious rhetoric is, would get him in trouble if it didn't have the magical word "religion" tied to it.

[AdminAssistant]

He can believe whatever he likes, but it's his pronouncement of it in public forums that creates problems.

[BookstoreEscapee]

From the article:

The 50-page intro, written by evangelist author Ray Comfort, will present a "balanced view of Creationism with information from scientists who actually believe God created the universe." Those scientists include Albert Einstein and a host of thinkers whose lives predated 'The Origin of Species,' such as Isaac Newton and Nicolaus Copernicus.

Seriously? How about citing some contemporary scientists with actual knowledge of the advances that have been made in the last 400 - or even 50 - years?

I find it sad that people think this way. They're missing out on a lot.

"I accepted a lot of things that are not true before I was able to sit down and listen to more then one side and think things through the issues. I would sit them down and tell them that I was happy that they were thinking about this stuff, now let's look at all of the information and see if we don't come to a better conclusion.

Yeah, that sure sounds like looking at all sides...

Edit: I have been reading some of the comments on this article and they are making my brain hurt.