dacium2007
9th January 2008, 01:49 AM
Ron Paul - When asked about The Theory Evolution:
"I think its a theory. The theory of evolution, and I don't accept it, you know, as a theory. It probably doesn't bother me, its not the most important issue for me to make a difference in my life to understand the exact origin. I think that the creator that I know, you know, created us, everyone of us and the universe. And the precise time the manor and all, I just don't think were at the point where anybody has absolute proof of on either side. So I just don't err, If that were the only issue quite frankly I would think its an interesting discussion, a theological discussion, and I think its fine, but if that were the issue of the day I wouldn't be running for public office."
Many other do the same sort or 'spin', claiming its a battle that is undecided about the origins of the universe. Notice how he jumps straight to the battle of origins, he isn't really talking about evolution here, he jumps straight over it, ignores it almost. It as if he is saying the theory of evolution is something that should be decided by theological discussion! Oh dear, where is the reason!
Then there is the much bigger problem that he and so many other politicians seem to have. If you reject evolution you have to reject science. They can 'spin' it all they want. But if he does not accept evolution, he cannot accept carbon dating, fossil records etc. etc. etc, he can't accept any scientific theory at all. Why are more people no dragging him over the coal's for this? If he doesn't 'accept' evolution, whats to stop him not 'accepting' the germ theory? The theory of gravity? Anything else that doesn't fit with his religion? And he shakes it off as if its a completely unimportant point, as if it doesn't matter if the most powerful man in the world will dismiss a scientific theory because it does not fit with his view of a creator.
"I think its a theory. The theory of evolution, and I don't accept it, you know, as a theory. It probably doesn't bother me, its not the most important issue for me to make a difference in my life to understand the exact origin. I think that the creator that I know, you know, created us, everyone of us and the universe. And the precise time the manor and all, I just don't think were at the point where anybody has absolute proof of on either side. So I just don't err, If that were the only issue quite frankly I would think its an interesting discussion, a theological discussion, and I think its fine, but if that were the issue of the day I wouldn't be running for public office."
Many other do the same sort or 'spin', claiming its a battle that is undecided about the origins of the universe. Notice how he jumps straight to the battle of origins, he isn't really talking about evolution here, he jumps straight over it, ignores it almost. It as if he is saying the theory of evolution is something that should be decided by theological discussion! Oh dear, where is the reason!
Then there is the much bigger problem that he and so many other politicians seem to have. If you reject evolution you have to reject science. They can 'spin' it all they want. But if he does not accept evolution, he cannot accept carbon dating, fossil records etc. etc. etc, he can't accept any scientific theory at all. Why are more people no dragging him over the coal's for this? If he doesn't 'accept' evolution, whats to stop him not 'accepting' the germ theory? The theory of gravity? Anything else that doesn't fit with his religion? And he shakes it off as if its a completely unimportant point, as if it doesn't matter if the most powerful man in the world will dismiss a scientific theory because it does not fit with his view of a creator.