Home » Intelligent Design » Kenneth Miller on The Colbert Report

Kenneth Miller on The Colbert Report

  • Delicious
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feed

13 Responses to Kenneth Miller on The Colbert Report

  1. Colbert rocks.

  2. Let’s see…

    Equate ID with Creationism: check.

    Scientific community is open and fair: check.

    Parallels to Holocaust denial: check.

    Hostility toward this theory is hostility toward science itself: check.

    I think he covered it all.

  3. And:
    Deny evidence for ID. check

    Deny ID related research.
    check

    One wonders why he felt inclined to write a book!

  4. Do more than 50 percent of Americans think we never went to the moon? The Holocaust never happened?

    So what is Miller worried about? He struck me as being a rather dishonest man.

  5. tribune7

    You make an excellent point that needs saying more often. Huge numbers of Americans aren’t skeptical of hard sciences. They’re skeptical of leftwing ideologically driven lame bandwagon science which basically boils down to just two things – life as a cosmic accident and internal combustion engines melting all the ice in the world creating a flood of biblical proportions.

  6. Dave, thank you.

    internal combustion engines melting all the ice in the world creating a flood of biblical proportions.

    <a href=”http://www.mosquito-netting.com/2006-05-mosquito-borne-diseases.html” And killer mosquitoes. Can’t forget the killer mosquitoes. Only Al Gore can save us. LOL.

  7. Did he actually say that science is open to debate. I can’t believe he said that with sincerity. What a friggin hypocrite!

  8. Colbert has a great idea! Let’s change the name of ‘Intelligent Design’ to ‘Evolution’ then they would have no choice but to focus on content!

  9. crandaddy,

    Frankly, that’s actually a tact I’d like to see taken. Not the name-change, but the attitude of discerning design right in evolution itself, and arguing it isn’t random and unguided at all. It would probably only count in a philosophical sense, but so what? Metaphysics is what this is all about for many anyway.

  10. “dishonest man”
    “hypocrite”

    I bet that he must spend a considerable amount of time kneeling on the corn praying Hail Mary’s and whatnot romanists do to ask forgiveness. (PS: I dont even believe he is a romanist either).

  11. Let’s change the name of ‘Intelligent Design’ to ‘Evolution’

    There actually was a discussion about a similar possibility a while back. The phrase “intelligent evolution” is used sometimes, but has not caught on.

  12. Intelligent Design is a beautiful phrase and one with historical traction (even Darwin used the phrase)…..

    The compromise, in order to study evolution without reference to ID, but in a balanced manner that didn’t sweep the Darwinist falsehoods under the rug, but let them be evident is Explore Evolution.

  13. 13
    Bettawrekonize2

    “Science is open to debate”? If science were really so open to debate then why doesn’t he invite a prominent proponent of ID or creationism or critic of evolution to debate him in front of such an audience (ie: Michael Behe or William Dembski). I’m sure most prominent proponents of ID and creationism and critics of evolution would be glad to debate against him in a public debate. Instead, they put him up against someone who seems to agree with him. How scientific.

    I know why he won’t debate a prominent proponent of ID and creationism or a prominent critic of evolution. Evolution can’t defend itself and ID can.

Leave a Reply