Religious broadcaster says Scott Walker was right: ‘Real experts’ have ‘disproven’ evolution

[hue]

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/02/religious-broadcaster-says-scott-walker-was-right-real-experts-have-disproven-evolution/

A religious right broadcaster defended Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, who declined to say whether evolution was real when questioned by a British reporter during an overseas trip.

Radio host Sandy Rios, who also serves as governmental affairs director of the American Family Association, said during a broadcast that the likely Republican presidential candidate should not be mocked for “punting” on the question, reported Right Wing Watch.

“In the sense that Darwin taught about species morphing into other species, evolving into other types of species, that has not happened,” Rios said. “There is no scientific evidence.

She claimed the “real experts” would show that the foundational principal of biology had been disproven and was based on faulty evidence.

[Panich52]

1. The willful ignorance aside, Walker's 'punt' was really a fumble

Rios' undoubtedly faith-based ignorance & denial are non-issues -- except when pols like Walker do exactly what he said they shouldn't. That happens every time they try to force creationism into education and add 'disclaimers' to or forbid legitimate science ed (like current attempts to avoid climate change).

Pick up the ball, Walker. Tell us why you're a science denier.

..

[shenmue]

2. Uh, no

Sandy Rios is an idiot.

[blkmusclmachine]

3. Stupid.

[amb123]

4. "Y'all don't needs branes when you've got the Bible!"

[onenote]

5. I doubt Rios could spell speciation, let alone understand it.

[Beartracks]

6. Weirdly, they think that because evolution cannot be seen, it can't be real.

What it is they don't get about the pace of evolution? Why is it hard to fathom a process that takes millions of years?

Children grow, trees grow, but you don't actually "see" it happening -- and THOSE are processes that at least produce observable results that you CAN see from year to year, even while you can't observe it day to day.

So, expand that concept to a process that takes much longer than the lifespan of a human or a tree...

Weirdly, creationists think that because it cannot be seen, evolution can't be real. Whereas, religion -- which is clearly the basis for their anti-evolution stance -- often requires that one BELIEVES even though they have not SEEN.

Perhaps it is this notion, that evolutionary scientists are similarly believing without seeing, that really bugs creationists, because that sounds like scientists are taking something ON FAITH -- that is, creationists seem to hold that scientists BELIEVE in science, as opposed to believing in something else, say, the Bible. So creationists automatically treat evolutionary scientists as members of a different faith, and we all know how well different faiths go over with the conservative Christian set.



====================

[brooklynite]

7. I'm confused: I though the job of the AFA was to say ignorant things about social policy...