´óÏó´«Ã½

What did you say Stephen Baldwin's profession is, brain surgeon? One look at him and I'd have guessed it on my own.

If I were from another planet investigating earth and Stephen Baldwin was the only photograph I had of a human, I'd guess it was the monkeys that evolved from the humans.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

That old facepalm... Sometimes people just have to say one thing to let you know how stupid they are and how little they have thought about the issue under discussion.

What did you say Stephen Baldwin's profession is, brain surgeon? One look at him and I'd have guessed it on my own.

If I were from another planet investigating earth and Stephen Baldwin was the only photograph I had of a human, I'd guess it was the monkeys that evolved from the humans.

Come on now Marcus, you can do much better than that. No better than Rev. Ian's comments about the way Brian Cowan looked a few years back.

I can't access the listen again facility William, though it's good to know that Richard Bacon had read up on some of the claims and was able to provide a correct answer for this one. I assume Baldwin has no background in science ?

I can't access the listen again facility William, though it's good to know that Richard Bacon had read up on some of the claims and was able to provide a correct answer for this one. I assume Baldwin has no background in science?

I'd say that's a pretty fair assumption. You can get a flavour of his level from his response to Bacon's brief explanation, which was something on the lines of, "You're playing some sort of Jedi mind trick here. You're saying that all animals are related? That's just horse hockey. Do you get away with that here in England? Because I can tell you that in America, son, forget about it."

Peter #4;

When I was a kid, there was this chimpanzee on American TV called Zippy. He sometimes wore a hat and looked just like Stephen Baldwin...except more intelligent :-) He also had a sweatshirt and rode around TV studios on a tricycle. Do you think Stephen Baldwin could handle a tricycle? Somehow I think if he tried, it would tip over.

Ah, here's Zippy.



and here's Zippy's own web site;



Zippy was also smart enough to keep his mouth shut when he didn't have anything worth listening to to say. Can Stephen Baldwin make that claim? :-) Smarter than an awful lot of people I know. Yes, descended from humans almost certainly, clearly more evolved.

Good thing for Gordon Brown, David Cameron, et al. that Zippy is not British. Given the current state of affairs, I'd say he'd have better than even odds of being the next Primate Minister :-)

There is only one way to describe Stephen Baldwin: idiot. For "born again" Christians are akin to Al Qaeda in their fanatacism; whether it is overt or covert. For this seems to me to also apply to Iris Robinson and her spiral into who knows where. He simply seems to not possess the intellectual capacity to comprehend anything beyond his obvious Baldwin ego! Listening to someone like him has been a collosal waste of my time!!!

For "born again" Christians are akin to Al Qaeda in their fanatacism

Sadly Colin, Baldwin's ideas are the norm in evangelical circles now, both in Northern Ireland and throughout the UK. Virtually every evangelical denomination i.e. Baptist, Brethren, Elim, all strands of presbyterianism (apart from the non subscribling variaty...probably), Congragational, Indipendant Methodist, Free Methodist, etc. etc. in the province endorces YECism as doctrine. Even in the mainstream Presbyterian Church in Ireland, YECism appears to be the majority view.

All this from the man that brought us the sci-fi epic "Biodome", could hardly see that one coming.

"Live radio can throw up some curious encounters."

How about;

"Zippy explains Darwin to Stephen Baldwin"

I don't know if that would work. Baldwin's brain may not be evolved enough to abosorb what Zippy would likely tell him.

More Zippy;



Zippy demonstrates here that even in his formative years he was a being of superior intelligence who knew how to deal with difficult individuals and situations. How many homo sapiens can say that?

There are really, some silly statements being made on this blog about the term "Born Again" honestly, I came to this blog to learn from others who are different from myself and to see if there is "just maybe" something in my understanding of others that could be misguided and incorrect but in the light of some bloggers comments. they have nothing to offer.

John, in that case it is up to you to correct the picture that many have of *some* Christians. For example, Baldwin's understanding of biology appears utterly ignorant at best; the man appears to think that the Universe is a matter of a few thousand years old and that we are not closely related to the other apes. Instead of slagging off atheists and more enlightened Christians for their pillorying of this pillock, tackle the problem. Demonstrate that "born again" (whatever that means) Christians *do* actually have some understanding of science and recognise our evolutionary affinity with the rest of life. That's what it takes. Then come over to the fun side :-)

Indeed William

I have plenty of relatives who are born again Christians and none are like al quaeda, though quite a few are YECs.

#13 - Heliopolitan -

"For example, Baldwin's understanding of biology appears utterly ignorant at best; the man appears to think that the Universe is a matter of a few thousand years old and that we are not closely related to the other apes. Instead of slagging off atheists and more enlightened Christians for their pillorying of this pillock, tackle the problem."

Without resorting to any interpretation based on any philosophical presuppositions at all (and I mean none), please provide the irrefutable proof - based entirely on empirical data and nothing else - that humans are descended from apes.

Remember my strict conditions (we're talking about science not philosophy here).

Since Christians who question this 'theory' are 'pillocks', as you so maturely put it, please enlighten us from the vast storehouse of your superior wisdom.

I look forward to your reply, so that I can then analyse it to see that it is indeed completely free of all a priori philosophical presuppositions and interpretation based thereon, and that it logically rules out any other possible explanation for the origin of the human race (or 'species', if you prefer).

(And if you dare to use the word 'theory' to describe your viewpoint, then I fail to see the justification for your insults.)

Er, LSV, humans are not just descended from apes - we ARE apes. Your parents were apes; you are descended from them. QED. I'll have my prize now, thanks. You're a vertebrate and a mammal too - need I go on??

You will also note that I described *Baldwin* as a pillock, not Christians in General (Will, take note of that too). I know many Christians are decent thinking people who care about truth, but it strikes me as odd that they refrain from criticising those of their number who espouse odd views like those of Baldwin. I know lots of Christians who have no problem with evolution (indeed, several of the best of 'em post comments on this fine blog).

Indeed, it is the fallacy of the false dichotomy that we have seen at work in our politics recently. "Unionist" vs "Nationalist", as if there were "two communities", two independent bubbles that contained the range of political opinion. I am not a Unionist, and I am not a Nationalist. Therefore I don't exist?

Christians can and do criticise each other over loads of things; it is frankly bizarre that over this scientifically settled matter they get all squiffy. If they think Baldwin is wrong (and many do), why are they not shouting about it? Are they embarrassed for pretending to their Sunday Schools that Adam and Eve and Noah actually existed, rather than being figurative creations from Ancient Myth (as Christine points out in her lectures?). Are they more concerned about a display of "unity" than with honesty?

Or is it that only *Christians* are allowed to criticise Christian nutters? Well, I'm a born again Christian too - I just happen to now be an atheistic one, so I'll call Baldrick out on his nonsense if I jolly well please, and suggest that he adopt a more cunning plan.

-H

William,

This is kind of related to religious / secular culture wars, and I hope this message is allowed, as it is slightly off-topic (only very slightly, mind you). However I find this case fascinating, and I wonder whether it's worthy of some discussion on your blog:



It's about the USA granting political asylum to an evangelical German couple who want to homeschool their children (homeschooling is forbidden in Germany).

The grounds for 'persecution' are that their children would be taught an allegedly anti-Christian world-view in the compulsory education system in Germany.

It seems that Germany is now creating asylum seekers of its own!!

The mind boggles.

William Crawley;

"the fallacy of generalisations from observed instances is in play here"

I gather this is someone of some importance in NI. Frankly...how can I put this as delicately as possible....ahem.....hmmmm....based on the photograph.........I think someone should check immediately to see if this man is still breathing and if not to see if they can get a pulse. There might be a chance at resuscitation if medical help can get there and act quickly enough. Based on my limited medical training generalizing from observed instances......I've seen healthier looking corpses :-)

conerning Stephen Baldwins personal opinion on how old the earth is, does not represent the complete spectrim of the Evangelical world.
Sadly, in the USA, politics & religion (like) here, go hand and hand, and this opinion has been shaped the way SB portrays his belief.
Also, Baldwin, does not have great Biblical knowledge, but only some sort of interpretation.
For example... some jews according to their own estimates, say the world is 5751 years old and this is where some YECs get their scope from, while others would say, NO, the time mentioned 5751 was the start of the jewish calendar NOT how old the earth is?.

There is also the q of overt religiosity - does it indicate an irideal (pertaining to the iris) attempt to conceal deeper insecurities and failings? i'm not a very lovely psychiatrist, but one does wonder...

If they think Baldwin is wrong (and many do), why are they not shouting about it?

I do plenty of shouting over on the BCSE discussion forum and elsewhere Heleo and yes, my brothers have had a number of rows with their inlaws over this. However, like you I do have concerns as to why prominent Christians don't come out against YECism, particularly within the Presbyterian Church in Ireland, the province's largest denomination and where YECism is now rampant.

I think there are a number of reasons why they don't shout louder.

(1) They are ignorant of what YECism actually is.

(2) We that accept science are drowned out by the YECs

(3) That YECism within the evangelical church is far bigger than anyone imagines.

(4) They don't want to offend fellow Christians.

I still can't figure out why the PCinI brush this under the carpet and why church leaders in the province don't speak out more.

Without resorting to any interpretation based on any philosophical presuppositions at all (and I mean none), please provide the irrefutable proof - based entirely on empirical data and nothing else - that humans are descended from apes.

And when you wake up in the morning, Helio, you had better do the same for the theory that your bed is standing on a solid floor in a house with firm foundations, just so you can be sure that you won't tumble into a dark abyss of fire breathing dragons when you get up.

You can't be too careful.

Popes, Moderators, Archbishops, Ministers, Priests, Rabbis, and possibly even Mullahs accept evolutionary theory. They could not ignore reality.
There is no serious argument by serious people on this matter.
However, some of us bored folk with time on our hands are willing to amuse ourselves in places like this.
Perhaps the anti creation people could, rather than their usual attempt to pick away at the the theory, only to expose an ignorance and lack of understanding, produce some evidence for their creation beliefs.
To keep things simple we will just deal with the myth from the Hebrew Bible and not the numerous other incompatible creation stories.

Question... to post 25, who was the first person, recorded in history to claim that the world is a globe.

Seeing your so knowledgeable on creation more than all the others you have mentioned.

If god had wanted man to believe in YEC or intelligent design...he wouldn't have given him a large well functioning brain. It appears at least in some less well endowed cases...that was in fact his intent :-)

The final clincher for me (I didn't need one) was the explaination by Dr. Miller showing exactly where the two pairs of chromosomes were joined to evolve from the simian branch to ancestors of homo sapiens. That's how the the transition took place going from 24 pairs to 23. Still and all, watching Zippy, I'm not so sure the divergence happened very quickly. It must have taken millions of years to evolve from Lucy to Stephen Baldwin. Or was it dozens? Clearly there were stops along the way.

"who was the first person, recorded in history to claim that the world is a globe."

I'm not 100% sure, but as an opening bid I'll put up Pythagoras of Samos, 569-500 BCE.
And while mentioning achievements of the ancient Greeks, I'll also throw in Eratosthenes of Cyrene, 276-200 BCE. He calculated the circumference of the world to be 46000 km. Amazingly good (cuurently held to be 40000 km) for a civilization 2-2.5 millennia old.

wow!

William tackling Helio for stereotyping Christians!

I'm impressed!

;-)

#26
Don't know John. How tell me the point of the question.

Chaps, it is because John is under the mistaken impression that Isaiah 40:22 indicates a spherical earth. Which it doesn't, but never mind. If it's any consolation, Psalm 104:5 doesn't demonstrate a very good conception of the shape of our planet.

Isnt Baldwin simply explaining why Americans voted for George W twice and look at the fine mess we got into. The most worrying aspect he is not alone amongst high profile Hollywood stars demonstrating they have pure sawdust between the ears. Critical thinking seems to be sadly lacking!

I think this is one of the key aspects. It's not so much that Baldwin is a creationist - there are stacks of them around, and if we tore our hair out everytime one of them stumbled blinking into the light, we would have to get one of Stevie's fetching hats (I wonder does Ted Haggard like them too?) to cover our alopecia. No - it's the fact that he thinks the "If We Are Descended From Apes, Why Are There Still Apes" (IWADFAWATSA) Argument is a clever thing to say. I mean, even Ken *Ham* knows that that one is beyond dopey. It's just a rule of thumb, but when you hear someone using IWADFAWTASA, you know you are dealing with someone who either does not understand the first thing about biology, or is irredeemably intellectually challenged. Or both.

@Helio

I know what you mean. It brings out a sort of Pavlovian response in me, something along the lines of "For crying out out loud, read a book for once in your life!" Which is quite unfortunate because the last time I encountered it was down my local on a quiz night. The quiz master, a lovely guy, came out with IWADFAWATSA after a question about Darwin and out came my conditioned response, much to my wife's embarrassment and anger.

On a side note, I defy anybody to actually listen to Kevin Bacon for any significant period of time. Wow. He's HORRIBLY uncharismatic, with this lagging, non-dynamic on-air manner (though at least he's reasonably intelligent).

KEVIN Bacon? He of Tremors?

U meaned teh Francis, ya?

Uh, Richard Bacon, sorry.