The "science" of evolution

From dictionary.com:

Science: The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.

Well, at least the evolutionist True Believers have the latter down. One and four are totally absent, while two and three mutate more rapidly than anything proposed by the grand faith itself.

I barely consider economics to be an actual science, but at least there are some replicable experiments that can be performed which reliably support its basic laws. Perhaps you can’t test C+I+G+(x-m) very effectively, but you can test the Law of Supply and Demand and you’ll always receive the same result if you control for variables.

In fact, I suspect that Biblical principles are more reliable than evolutionary principles, albeit in a distinctly different arena. Spare the rod with 100 children, apply it firmly to another 100 and the firm foundation revealed by the experiment will have more genuine scientific support than Darwin’s landmark defense of racial eugenics.

As with democracy, no one actually believes in evolution. This is clear by the way that its supposed champions always shy away from the straightforward applications of its logic. Ironically, if recent demographics are any guide, the survival of the fittest points very strongly to a world without college-educated feminists, Europeans or atheists, all evolutionary dead-ends who cannot be troubled to reproduce themselves.

Liberal scum

Paul Jacob points out a pair of uncompassionate liberals:

When Kerry was in a tough 1996 race for his U.S. Senate seat, Jeff Jacoby reported, “During the previous six years, it turned out, Kerry had given less than $5,000 to charity — a minuscule seven-tenths of 1 percent of his gross income for the period.”

The Democrats’ 2000 standard-bearer, Al Gore, proved no better. His 2000 tax return on an adjusted gross income of $197,729 listed charitable donations of $353. When eyebrows were raised, Gore’s spokesman explained, “Contributing financially to charitable organizations is certainly noble and should be encouraged and is something that the Gores have done when the resources were there. However, to truly judge a person’s commitment to helping others, you need to consider what they have done with their lives and how they have spent their time — and by that standard the Gores are extraordinarily committed.”

And yet, both men love to tell you how much they care… and imply how morally superior they are. What a pair of despicable jokes. Anyone dumb enough to have supported these charlatans should be deeeply, deeply embarrassed.