Don't know whether to laugh or cry at this:

[CP489]

Cybercast News Service: Most people consider evolution to be a branch of science, or at least a scientific theory, yet in "Godless," you refer to it as a "cult" and a "fetish." What is your basis for calling it that?

Ann Coulter: There is no evidence that it is true. The fossil record contradicts it, and it is a theory that cannot be disproved. Whatever happens is said to "prove" evolution. This is the very definition of a pseudoscience, like astrology. (Of course, I would say that. I'm just a Capricorn, aren't I?)

Cybercast News Service: Creationism is not considered a science because it can't be observed or empirically tested. You assert in your book that the theory of evolution has the same problems. Why then has the U.S. public school system been willing to accept the theory of evolution, but snubbed creationism?

Ann Coulter: Because evolution is the official state religion. Although it is possible to believe in God and evolution, it is not possible to not believe in God without believing in evolution -- otherwise, atheists have no explanation for why we are here. Thus, it's very important for the liberal clergy to force small school children to believe in a discredited mystery religion from the 19th century -- evolution -- in order to prepare them to believe in the nonexistence of God, one of the main goals of the American public education system.


Funny because she's so blatantly ignorant, sad because people actually believe the crap she spews.


ETA: The fossil record contradicts evolution? WTF is she talking about?

[Miss Whiplash]

I'd love to peer into her head. The woman has no brain at all.

Still she reminds me of Mister Ed. I wonder if they use peanut butter on her gums to get her to talk.

ETA a Ann Coulter/Mr. Ed joke.

[ReFLeX]

Definitely cry.

[jimlintott]

She kind of scares me. She spouts gibberish but it comes across believable because she is a fairly decent orator. So was Adolph Hitler.


(Do I win this thread or something??:D)

[SezMe]

ETA: The fossil record contradicts evolution? WTF is she talking about?
I was just reading about this today but, sadly, don't remember where. I believe that she points to some guy who says he has found fossilzed penises (peni?) in coal beds, thereby putting humans on earth at the same time as the dinos. :jaw-dropp

*noodles about* Nope, can't find it. Treat the above as raw rumor.

[CP489]

From what I know of her book (and that's not much, yet. I'm going to try to sludge through her evolution chapters this weekend) I believe she's talking about the Cambrian explosion (as far as a fossil record that contradicts evolution), which I'm certain has been tackled. I know Dembski, which is where she got her info, along with Behe and one other whose name escapes me, has in the past misquoted Ward on the Cambrian and Precambrian in order to make it look like this is a major problem for evolution.

[CP489]

She kind of scares me. She spouts gibberish but it comes across believable because she is a fairly decent orator. So was Adolph Hitler.


(Do I win this thread or something??:D)


Damn! (rule 8? I'm too new to know, just tell me and I'll edit) You've put into words something that I've been mulling over for a while. Something about her scared me, but it certainly wasn't her intellect or factual representation of reality. Thanks, I'll probably use that in the future.

[a_unique_person]

Funny because she's so blatantly ignorant, sad because people actually believe the crap she spews.


Is there any evidence of that? I think she says half of it (and believes the rest), just to make lots of money. Better than being a filing clerk.

[CP489]

Is there any evidence of that? I think she says half of it (and believes the rest), just to make lots of money. Better than being a filing clerk.


Any evidence of which part? That she's ignorant? I guess not if you aren't going to presume that her words are an accurate representation of her ideas. Of course, if we start doing that then we have no evidence of anyone being ignorant.

As for people believing her, there's plenty of evidence of that.

[Miss Whiplash]

Any evidence of which part? That she's ignorant? I guess not if you aren't going to presume that her words are an accurate representation of her ideas. Of course, if we start doing that then we have no evidence of anyone being ignorant.

As for people believing her, there's plenty of evidence of that.

I was discussing her books with some who believes everything she says or writes. The person said, "She has footnotes in her books. That shows what she says is true." I countered with, "Have you ever checked the sources she cites?" I was met with a blank stare followed by a grumble that "Liberals always nitpick about little things!"

[CP489]

With apologies to Al Franken:

How to lie with footnotes: Use 754 of them! :D

[a_unique_person]

Any evidence of which part? That she's ignorant? I guess not if you aren't going to presume that her words are an accurate representation of her ideas. Of course, if we start doing that then we have no evidence of anyone being ignorant.

As for people believing her, there's plenty of evidence of that.

What I mean is, she is telling people what they want to hear. Her audience wants to hear someone trash Evolution, she'll happily do it, even if she doesn't believe it, or if she finds it easy to convince herself it is true. A lot of it appears to be a game for her.

[CFLarsen]

I'd love to peer into her head.

"When a man gazes into the Abyss...."

[CP489]

What I mean is, she is telling people what they want to hear. Her audience wants to hear someone trash Evolution, she'll happily do it, even if she doesn't believe it, or if she finds it easy to convince herself it is true. A lot of it appears to be a game for her.


Gotcha. I agree with that wholeheartedly.

[Nessus]

What I mean is, she is telling people what they want to hear. Her audience wants to hear someone trash Evolution, she'll happily do it, even if she doesn't believe it, or if she finds it easy to convince herself it is true. A lot of it appears to be a game for her.

Sounds like the audience really wants is more of a figurehead, someone to nod their head too and say 'thats what i was thinking too'.

[Bikewer]

Tom Tomorrow's take:

http://www.workingforchange.com/comic.cfm?itemid=20975

[Meffy]

I'd love to peer into her head. The woman has no brain at all.
"My God... it's full of sludge!"

[Miss Whiplash]

I wonder if Ann Coulter would still be as popular if she looked like Phyllis Schlafly (http://www.eagleforum.org/misc/bio.html)? Thanks to bleach, silicone and Photoshop, Ann looks halfway attractive (even if she has a horse face). How many people are really listening after she shows a little skin with that miniskirt of hers. Same goes for her books. Few authors play kodak whore and slap a photo of themselves on the front of the dust jacket.

[tsg]

Ann Coulter is a prop to make the more ridiculous political positions look sane by comparison.

Why do they smear crap on the walls at a [random ethnic group] wedding?
To keep the flies off the bride.

Ann Coulter is the crap on the walls.

[Jimbo07]

The person said, "She has footnotes in her books. That shows what she says is true."

This is a plus and a minus. People at least acknowledge that works should have sources of information. It's an educational step up from blindly accepting the truth of printed pamphlets. People, in general, do not check the validity of those references, either to the internal structure of the argument or to the larger context. That will be the next step in social education, perhaps.


I countered with, "Have you ever checked the sources she cites?" I was met with a blank stare followed by a grumble that "Liberals always nitpick about little things!"

Always more work to do...

[3point14]

Insomnia the other night led me to be listening to BBC radio five at about four in the morning, and they interviewed this woman. Wow, she's scary. I've seldom heard anyone so aggressive in their speech. The interviewer seemed to be torn between laughing at her and giving her a mouthful, she certainly wasn't taken seriously though, which was a relief.

[bjb]

My understanding is that there are some fossil fish that are more 'evolved' than modern fish. The question was why did these fish die out when they were so well developed? Evolution says that earlier animals will be less adapted than later ones so these fossils appear to contradict evolution. The answer came about when the mass extinction theories came along. Most life on earth was wiped out and had to re-evolve again, only the next time around, the fish didn't turn out as well as before.

I do think it is possible to pick and choose fossils that make evolution appear to work backwards, and therefore create the illusion of a contradiction. I honestly don't know what Ann Coulter is talking about though, and I also don't know if any creationists know enough to construct an arguement like this. Personally, I think Ann Coulter can just make statements without anything to back herself up and her readers will believe her.

[SPQR]

She kind of scares me. She spouts gibberish but it comes across believable because she is a fairly decent orator. So was Adolph Hitler.


(Do I win this thread or something??:D)

:D :D

If only she had spouted this gibberish on The Tonight Show, I think that really would got George Carlin going.

[CapelDodger]

The answer came about when the mass extinction theories came along. Most life on earth was wiped out and had to re-evolve again, only the next time around, the fish didn't turn out as well as before.
It's the generalists that come through a mass extinction, not the highly evolved extremists lording it over some specific niche in a particular environment. Important innovations will survive across a mass extinction barrier. General fishiness has definitely survived, there's a lot of it in both of us.

Any mass extinction in the media world will surely take out Ann Coulter.

[CP489]

You just implied that Ann Coulter is highly evolved, I beg to differ.

[pchams]

Evolution says that earlier animals will be less adapted than later ones so these fossils appear to contradict evolution.
Where does it say this?
Couldn't a well adapted species lack one trait that newer geologic conditions demanded? Those which were 'less evolved', which had this trait and survived, would appear 'less evolved' , and appear later in the fossil record.
I think this is a misconception addressed in "The Ancestor's Tale" by Dawkins.

Edited to add: The misconception is that evolution has some kind of linear goal. It doesn't.

[bjb]

OK, so maybe I posted a misconception. Certainly the apparently less evolved creatures like bacteria do very well at surviving mass extinctions. Also, cave fish appear to be less evolved because they lack eyes and pigmentation, but they are actually 'more' evolved because they are better adapted to their environment. In any case, the anti-evolution crowd often use arguements based on false or merely outdated assumptions about evolution (strawmen), so Ann Coulter could be referring to one of these sorts of arguements.

I have to admit that I haven't read enough from Ann Coulter to know what she's getting at. I'm also ashamed to admit that I have no plans to read anything from her since the more I know about her, the more saddened I become about the future of our country. I'm afraid that her kind is going to wind up deciding what my grandchildren will be taught in public school.

[Piggy]

I just stumbled on this thread while on my way to post my own regarding... my aunt's opinion regarding Ann Coulter.

Earlier this week, I visited my ailing grandmother in a neighboring state. During that time, I stayed with my aunt and uncle.

My aunt has always been a Xian nutjob, born on a farm just south of where I live now and raised by evangelical parents. My uncle, a doctor and a well-read and educated man, only recently converted to that way of (non)thinking after their grand-daughter recovered from cancer.

Of course, the little girl had chemo and surgery etc., but her recovery was still a "miracle" to them. But I don't think it was the recovery that swayed him. I think that happened during the time when her death seemed nearly certain, when he gave himself over to the Xian believers and prayer-peddlers who flocked to them. At some point, he surrendered himself.

Now -- I'm still astounded by this -- he's a Bible literalist and a young-earth creationist!

The power of love works to both good and ill, I suppose.

Anyway, my aunt asked if I'd read Coulter's new book. I said I'd read excerpts and seen her interviewed... for the first time, btw. She seemed really flaky in the interview, and I said so.

Oh, but she's not a flake, they insisted. She's very sharp.

Now, I'm familiar w/ the outright falsehoods she peddles, so I had to disagree.

But they were solidly behind her. Even my uncle, who has money, education, and social standing, and who -- until recently -- read very widely. Now, sadly, the books piled on his desk, shelves, and tables are all Xian fundamentalist hooey.

They take her at face value. And so do lots of folks where I live.

Let's not underestimate her potential for harm, just because she's obviously a lying nutball.

[Piggy]

OK, so maybe I posted a misconception. Certainly the apparently less evolved creatures like bacteria do very well at surviving mass extinctions. Also, cave fish appear to be less evolved because they lack eyes and pigmentation, but they are actually 'more' evolved because they are better adapted to their environment.
All critters alive today are equally evolved. We've all been at it the same amount of time. The notion of a ladder of progress was overthrown by Darwin, who proved to be correct.

[Miss Whiplash]

...

My aunt has always been a Xian nutjob, born on a farm just south of where I live now and raised by evangelical parents. My uncle, a doctor and a well-read and educated man, only recently converted to that way of (non)thinking after their grand-daughter recovered from cancer.



That's truely sad. I guess I was lucky to have non-religious parents

[Alliebubs]

Boy, am I sure glad I don't know who this Ann Coulter is. She sounds, um, not smart.

[Timothy]

She kind of scares me. She spouts gibberish but it comes across believable because she is a fairly decent orator. So was Adolph Hitler.
You're not the only one who thinks so.

http://www.people.virginia.edu/~jac3he/GiveUpQuiz/hitlercoulterquiz.html

[Hindmost]

Ann Coulter could be the next step on the evolutionary scale. She seems like quite the mutation. The next extinction won't need an asteroid...enough Ann clones can dampen any desire to procreate.

glenn:rolleyes:

[CapelDodger]

You just implied that Ann Coulter is highly evolved, I beg to differ.
I was thinking of her more as peculiarly adapted to a specific media environment.

I'm with Piggy that all surviving species are equally evolved. All surviving gene-lines are equally successful - they've made it this far.

[Nihilanth]

Actually, Something Awful's site made a good point. They suggested that Ann Coulter is the equivalent of an internet troll. She just spews controversy for the sake of upsetting liberals, because then they get angry and everyone can laugh at them. As for the people who actually BELIEVE her, they're probably so hardcore in their own conservative Christian beliefs that they'll believe anyone that validates what they're thinking.

[Meffy]

Ann Coulter is the equivalent of an internet troll.
Wull yeah. She and Rush and others of that ilk. I've never thought of them as anything else.

[EBU]

Ann Coulter's book Godless has now reached number 1 on the NY Times best seller list.

[Lamuella]

She kind of scares me. She spouts gibberish but it comes across believable because she is a fairly decent orator. So was Adolph Hitler.


(Do I win this thread or something??:D)

speaking of which...

Was It Ann Coulter Or Adolf Hitler? (http://www.people.virginia.edu/~jac3he/GiveUpQuiz/hitlercoulterquiz.html)

EDIT: beaten, badly beaten.

[Lamuella]

With apologies to Al Franken:

How to lie with footnotes: Use 754 of them! :D

or in her case, none. She actually had ENDnotes, making them a lot tougher to find.

[Meffy]

Ann Coulter's book Godless has now reached number 1 on the NY Times best seller list.
It's number 2 in my opinion.

A whole crock of it.

[Yeah_Right]

Anne Coulter definitely is scary, if not a bit on the whacko side. I recall an interview where she tried to justify Senator Joe McCarthy's communist witch hunt.

[RandFan]

She kind of scares me. She spouts gibberish but it comes across believable because she is a fairly decent orator. So was Adolph Hitler.


(Do I win this thread or something??:D)Sorry dude, Godwyn precludes you from winning. :) But I will grant you your point.

[steve s]

You're not the only one who thinks so.

http://www.people.virginia.edu/~jac3he/GiveUpQuiz/hitlercoulterquiz.html


I took the quiz. Got 11 right and 3 wrong.

Steve S.

[Miss Whiplash]

These made me feel better -
http://www.geocities.com/vampire406/annclub.gif

http://www.geocities.com/vampire406/coulterbook3.gif

[Hydrogen Cyanide]

I usually ignore her. But I would love to see her if she is introduced with something like this:

"For the very definition of media whore we would like to present out next guest who pontificates on subjects she has absolutely no clue about... here she is... Ann Coulter!"

[clarsct]

Hmmmmmmmmm.

I got a 50% on the Cuntler/Hitler test.

Erm..I hope I spelled her name right....looks right to me.

Anyway, pretty scary stuff.

[Bruce]

They take her at face value. And so do lots of folks where I live.

Let's not underestimate her potential for harm, just because she's obviously a lying nutball.

I know exactly what you mean. There are people here who worship the Flying Spaghetti Monster. They actually believe there is a wad of spaghetti flying around that influences their lives, as if spaghetti has any care in the world for the pathetic, futile lives of human beings. They believe despite the countless scientific evidence in regards to the lack of aerodynamic efficiency of spaghetti. :mad:

My point is, people will believe crazy nonsense with or without a figurehead. Let the nutball talk. I'll bet for every wacko that listens to her and falls under her spell, there will be a moderate Christian that listens to her and decides to go go full atheist because he doesn't want to be associated with this crowd anymore. ;)

[Meffy]

In the quiz I got twelve right, two wrong. Both errors were thinking Coulter had said what were actually Hitler's words. OUCH.

[Piggy]

I know exactly what you mean. There are people here who worship the Flying Spaghetti Monster. <snip> My point is, people will believe crazy nonsense with or without a figurehead. Let the nutball talk. I'll bet for every wacko that listens to her and falls under her spell, there will be a moderate Christian that listens to her and decides to go go full atheist because he doesn't want to be associated with this crowd anymore.
Of course, the most important difference b/t the FSM devotees and the fundies is that the fundies really (really) do believe it. And the most important difference b/t FSMists and Anne Coulter is that she's not obscure. She's not dangerous b/c of what she believes -- that's as common as moss. She's dangerous because of her position to influence, most importantly to generate and disseminate memes which are used by very well organized and well funded people to secure political positions.

[Bruce]

She's dangerous because of her position to influence, most importantly to generate and disseminate memes which are used by very well organized and well funded people to secure political positions.

By golly, you're right! Let's squash the First Amendment. That should take care of all those crazy people that say dangerous stuff. Vote Republican! :duck:

[HeyLeroy]

[I] {snip}

ETA: The fossil record contradicts evolution? WTF is she talking about?

Have a stiff drink, take a deep breath, and wade in here if you really want your eyes to cross themselves:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/

You're not the only one who thinks so.

http://www.people.virginia.edu/~jac3he/GiveUpQuiz/hitlercoulterquiz.html

11 right, three wrong.

[Dcdrac]

Is it possible for penises to be fossilized? surley not?

[greyfeather75]

In the presence of Ann Coulter, I'd find any hardening of the penis tissue to be unlikely

unless of course you're Rush Limbaugh before the cops confiscate your stash

[The Painter]

She seems to be well educated. She doesn’t look stupid to me. I don't agree with everything she says, but I certainly wouldn't call her stupid. Name calling is the sign of a weak argument, and she has done her share. Now you have sunk to her level. Congratulations.

Ann's Bio (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ann_Coulter)

As an undergraduate at Cornell University College of Arts and Sciences, Coulter helped launch a conservative newspaper, The Cornell Review, and was a member of the Delta Gamma national women's fraternity [8]. She graduated cum laude from Cornell in 1984, and received her law degree from the University of Michigan Law School, where she achieved membership in the Order of the Coif (an honor society for academic excellence) and was an editor of The Michigan Law Review.

At law school, Coulter shared an apartment with human and civil rights advocate Cindy Cohn, who is now the Legal Director for the Electronic Frontier Foundation. At Michigan, Coulter founded a local chapter of the Federalist Society and was trained at the National Journalism Center.[9]

After law school, Coulter clerked for Pasco Bowman II of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, and was an attorney in the Department of Justice Honors Program for outstanding law school graduates. After a short time in private practice in New York City, Coulter worked for the United States Senate Judiciary Committee, where she handled crime and immigration issues for Senator Spencer Abraham of Michigan. She later became a litigator with the Center For Individual Rights in Washington, a public interest law firm dedicated to the defense of individual rights with particular emphasis on freedom of speech, civil rights, and the free exercise of religion.

[Meffy]

She seems to be well educated. She doesn’t look stupid to me. I don't agree with everything she says, but I certainly wouldn't call her stupid. Name calling is the sign of a weak argument, and she has done her share. Now you have sunk to her level. Congratulations.
*confused* To whom is this addressed? The only use of the word "stupid" in this thread appears to be in your post.

[EHocking]

I was just reading about this today but, sadly, don't remember where. I believe that she points to some guy who says he has found fossilzed penises (peni?) in coal beds, thereby putting humans on earth at the same time as the dinos. :jaw-dropp

*noodles about* Nope, can't find it. Treat the above as raw rumor.She quotes noted usenet loon Ed Conrad as a source?! There are just no smileys about that can suitably describe his lunatic delusions, but he may, or may not have been the inspiration for this spoof (with link to loony Ed's site:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/smithson.html

[The Painter]

*confused* To whom is this addressed? The only use of the word "stupid" in this thread appears to be in your post.


Stupid=ignorant=not smart=any synonym use in this thread.

[jimlintott]

Stupid=ignorant=not smart=any synonym use in this thread.
Stupid and ignorant are two different things. Ann is very intelligent but when she says that there is no evidence for evolution she is plainly ignorant.

[Meffy]

Exactly so. Those words are not synonyms, though they're in the same ballpark. Again, to whom was your comment addressed, Painter?

[Piggy]

By golly, you're right! Let's squash the First Amendment. That should take care of all those crazy people that say dangerous stuff.
It's so much fun to have folks around who, rather than engaging with a topic, will simply take a piece of what's said, dream up implications that don't exist, then lampoon those invented implications by blowing them up with playground hyperbole. Fun, fun, fun!

[Jaggy Bunnet]

By golly, you're right! Let's squash the First Amendment. That should take care of all those crazy people that say dangerous stuff. Vote Republican! :duck:

It is possible to think that what someone says is dangerous without believing that they should not be free to say it.

[greyfeather75]

if being stupid can sometimes be dangerous (showering with a hair dryer)...and she leads other people to think stupid thoughts (9/11 widows glad their husbands died, no evidence for evolution???) then I guess it follows that she is a profoundly dangerous woman...

then again, I welcome her and her fans to shower with their hair dryers - darwin in action - quite ironic I think given her ridiculous allegations about evolution


hey, that gives me an idea: ABOLISH WARNING LABELS THAT SHOULD BE COMMON SENSE - let's accelerate this process a little bit ;)

[Hydrogen Cyanide]

She seems to be well educated. She doesn’t look stupid to me. I don't agree with everything she says, but I certainly wouldn't call her stupid. Name calling is the sign of a weak argument, and she has done her share. Now you have sunk to her level. Congratulations.

Ann's Bio (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ann_Coulter)

Where did she learn biology?


And for the record I did not call her "stupid"... I called her a "media whore". She seems to be very intelligent at getting people riled up.