Newt and Evolution
Frank J
find his views on evolution (something I have been meaning to do for
years) and found this:
http://discovermagazine.com/2006/oct/discover-interview-newt-gingrich
Not the best news for anti-evolution activists. Gingrich may be very
friendly toward fundamentalism, but not to creationism/ID.
Excerpt:
“Evolution certainly seems to express the closest understanding we can
now have. But it's changing too. The current tree of life is not
anything like a 19th-century Darwinian tree. We're learning a lot
about how systems evolve and don't evolve. Cockroaches became
successful several hundred million years ago and just stopped
evolving.”
My comment:
The “stopped evolving” shows that he doesn’t understand evolution very
well, but at least he didn’t pretend that “stasis” is evidence against
evolution or for creationism/ID.
Excerpt:
“I believe evolution should be taught as science, and intelligent
design should be taught as philosophy. Francis Collins's new book, The
Language of God, is a fine statement that combines a belief in God
with a belief in evolution. I do not know enough about the Dover case
to critique the judge's decision, but I am generally cautious about
unelected judges establishing community standards—that is the duty of
elected officials.”
My comment:
That he would cite Collins instead of Behe or Dembski is a slap in the
face of anti-evolution activists everywhere. He seems to have been
partly sold on the “activist judge” propaganda, but what do you
expect? The DI has probably been trying to feed him nonsense for
years, but have been mostly unsuccessful. He admits not knowing enough
about the case to critique Judge Jones’ decision, so it’s possible
that he’ll reconsider the “unelected judges establishing community
standards” comment. OTOH, it could go the other way too, so stay
tuned.
Overall, it could be better; he could have actually criticized the
anti-evolution movement like fellow conservatives Charles Krauthammer
or George Will. But they don’t need the fundamentalist vote, so they
have more freedom to be politically incorrect.
fnord
Jim Willemin
e17f89...@d25g2000prn.googlegroups.com:
> I can�t find the recent thread about Newt Gingrich, so I googled to
> find his views on evolution (something I have been meaning to do for
> years) and found this:
>
> http://discovermagazine.com/2006/oct/discover-interview-newt-gingrich
>
> Not the best news for anti-evolution activists. Gingrich may be very
> friendly toward fundamentalism, but not to creationism/ID.
>
<snip excerpts>
Yeah but: that was three years ago, before the mid-term election that
started the Democratic resurgence, and while his further political
ambitions were perhaps less developed. He could have an epiphany at any
time and switch sides faster'n falling off a floating ferret.
Steven L.
> I can’t find the recent thread about Newt Gingrich, so I googled to
> find his views on evolution (something I have been meaning to do for
> years) and found this:
>
> http://discovermagazine.com/2006/oct/discover-interview-newt-gingrich
>
> Not the best news for anti-evolution activists. Gingrich may be very
> friendly toward fundamentalism, but not to creationism/ID.
Newt doesn't matter anymore.
The Republican Party base, and the Limbaugh fans and so on, turned on
Gingrich when Gingrich announced that anthropogenic global warming was a
real phenomenon, not an Al Gore hoax. And that the GOP needs its own
plan to reduce greenhouse gases.
To the conservative base, for whom it's an article of faith that global
warming is either nonexistent or caused by the Sun, Gingrich's views are
heretical--and they've tuned him out.
--
Steven L.
Email: sdli...@earthlinkNOSPAM.net
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.
'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank
The Repug nutters do indeed seem intent on kicking out anyone who has
the tiniest bit of sanity left.
They are currently trying to kick Crist out in Florida.
================================================
Lenny Flank
"There are no loose threads in the web of life"
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
http://www.RedandBlackPublishers.com
Frank J
> > I can’t find the recent thread about Newt Gingrich, so I googled to
> > find his views on evolution (something I have been meaning to do for
> > years) and found this:
>
> >http://discovermagazine.com/2006/oct/discover-interview-newt-gingrich
>
> > Not the best news for anti-evolution activists. Gingrich may be very
> > friendly toward fundamentalism, but not to creationism/ID.
>
> Newt doesn't matter anymore.
Richard fnord Nixon looked like a has-been in the mid 60s.
>
> The Republican Party base, and the Limbaugh fans and so on, turned on
> Gingrich when Gingrich announced that anthropogenic global warming was a
> real phenomenon, not an Al Gore hoax. And that the GOP needs its own
> plan to reduce greenhouse gases.
>
> To the conservative base, for whom it's an article of faith that global
> warming is either nonexistent or caused by the Sun, Gingrich's views are
> heretical--and they've tuned him out.
I'm starting to buy the argument that the Republican party is becoming
unable to win presidential elections and congressional majorities, if
they keep pandering only to the religious far right. If so, they might
be forced to be more science-friendly - less authoritarian if not less
conservative - or face a long rule by Democrats.
>
> --
> Steven L.
> Email: sdlit...@earthlinkNOSPAM.net