Evolution

“Evolution Evangelist”

Spread the love

The current issue of More, a women’s magazine aimed at women over 40, contains a profile of Eugenie Scott in which she is quoted as saying, “I’ve become an evolution evangelist.”

Could someone please explain how evolution constitutes “good news”?

9 Replies to ““Evolution Evangelist”

  1. 1
    Charliecrs says:

    Oh yeah this is a great little #

    ” I’ve become an evolution evangelist ” – gimme a break…

    – Hey Eugenie, lets all adore the robe [ Shroud ] of Drawin next!

    Charlie

  2. 2
    SteveB says:

    “Scientists animated by (or “evangelistic” about) the purpose of proving that they are purposeless constitute an interesting subject for study.”
    -Alfred North Whitehead

  3. 3

    I love comments like this, because the point to the truly religious nature of Darwinian evolutionists. Statements like this are indeed good news for ID advocates.

  4. 4
    arcturus says:

    If evolution were true, I’d think it would be the last thing that we should want to know about. I mean, think about it: it approves of any morality, and we know with human beings that this usually runs as low as it can possibly go, like water. It approves of abortion, infanticide and euthanasia. It undergirds a nihilistic, hedonistic worldview. It does away with ANY sense of spiritual accountability. It does away with eternal justice. It gives mankind no hope, and declares us to be as mindless as the void which begot us! To be inherently nothing more than matter + time. To be an evangelist of this religion is to make devotees to the twin gods of Suffering and Death, the bastard sons of Purposeless Chance.

    Would it not be more beneficial to the survival of the species for men to believe in one of these “silly” religions that give them hope and purpose and a code of conduct by which societies can flourish and remain free? Afterall, if religions are an evolutionary device that has radomly appeared, it must have conferred a survival advantage somewhere, for some reason right?

    But, in the worldview of darwinian dogma, anything goes, everything is right and none of this really matters anyway. Just another meaningless blip in billions and billions of eons of pointless colliding and replicating molecules.

  5. 5
    DaveScot says:

    It’s gotta be rough peddling dogma as science. Freudian slips like Eugenie’s are inevitable.

  6. 6
    kuz says:

    Well, maybe she believes that evolution is God’s will.

  7. 7
    sblank says:

    Perhaps she thinks evolution = freedom from religion? Not ment to be sarcastic.

  8. 8
    Bombadill says:

    Since Darwinism is indeed a religion, she’s right on target calling herself an evangelist.

  9. 9
    TomG says:

    You’re missing the point! Half the battle over ID is getting them to be honest in the way they use language. We have to spend half our time defining what should be obvious, over and over again. This is just more of the same, with a different twist: they simply don’t care about words.

Leave a Reply