That people can't live to 900 years old or come back to life after 3 days.

Evolution is a pretty hot button topic in education and if the man is going to be in charge of overseeing a department dedicated to education then it is relevant. If you don't believe radioactivity is dangerous I don't want you in charge of nuclear missles.

But 900 year old men and talking snakes- not crazy at all.

We are talking about really crazy vs. really crazy + one other thing.

He won't be overseeing it. DUCY?

That is not accepted scientific fact. Science by its nature cannot prove such a thing.

Because he won't be president so it wouldn't matter even if he could.

Even if he was, he wouldn't be overseeing it. DUCY?

Did I say anything about 1 view being crazy and 1 not?

Sure and its still relevant. DUCY?

I think both of those things might be possible.

But based on available evidence it is more likely that these things haven't happened then it is that evolution has.

Not sure why we are trying to compare the likeliness of faith-based beliefs though. Likeliness isn't part of the equation for believers.

Evolution has 100% happened

In the future, past, or both? What about snakes talking? What about turning a rib into a woman? Or a boat big enough to be built 4000 years ago but contain every species of animal.

I'm not. I'm talking about a person's statements about evolution that indicate the doesn't have a ****ing clue what it is.

I'm 95% sure BO is a closet Atheist. Only reason he has to have a church is because it's impossible for an Atheist to win an election.

I'm not even sure that time travel to the past is impossible...so I can't answer your first question. But none of this matters. If you find stuff obama has said about scientific subjects as dumb as the paul evolution quote i will certainly call him out on it and say i would be less likely to vote for him for a CEO position.

Because all of you are using the word "believe" incorrectly. He is saying that he doesn't "believe" in it, but you all interpret that as disbelief. You don't know what the word means. To not believe is a NEUTRAL position which ALL PEOPLE should have as their default when confronted with incomplete information.

The problem though is that you guys actually all do BELIEVE in evolution, meaning you have FAITH that it is real when you haven't done anything like sufficient research to form a logical conclusion. This makes you the same as Christians in my book.

He was going to church long before he became a politician. Maybe it was all part of the plan...but that seems pretty amazing to me. At the very least he feels that churches have a positive impact on the community that he wanted to be a part of and more likely than not he believes (or believed) in some of their teachings. Tons of christians, and especially highly educated ones do not interpret many of the old testament stories that seem unlikely literally anyway.

.

I didn't interpret it as some active disbelief the way you are saying.

I said he doesn't believe in evolution. You'll agree that he doesn't believe in evolution but when anyone says those same words you tell them they are wrong because you imagine "He doesn't believe in evolution" as "He actively hates the concept of evolution and is certain it is wrong" which is just nonsense on your part.

Evolution is just as hard for most people to understand! You accept the end conclusion without understanding a damned thing about it and call it believing in it. It's absurd!

And what ignorant things has he spewed other than mangling the meaning of the word "theory", which 99% of Americans do, almost certainly including every other presidential candidate, even if they aren't on record as having done so?

Not when he wants to end the federal government's involvement in education it's not. If he were crying for a federal mandate on teaching evolution in schools, then yeah, that would be pretty damned relevant. Otherwise, no.

Since it seems really important to you to fully understand Ron Paul's position on evolution, how do you square your interpretation of his beliefs with the above quote?

Oops, he called it a valid process, and by the conclusion jumping we're using around here, you just proved that Ron Paul believes in evolution.

That quote does not show that he has any understanding of what evolution is. This quote, from the same book I think, indicates he doesn't understand it even at a very pop/young child level

He is mixing up the scientific notion of evolution with the everyday usage of the word so he seems to have a very, very shallow understanding of the theory of evolution.

What's funny is, even ignoring the evolution part I still strongly disagree with that quote. It's likely humans killing humans (as a percentage of population) has very much been on a downward slope for a long time. He views modern society as sliding into awful chaos and I think we are perhaps just now emerging from it.