Ray Comfort Apologizes for Misrepresenting Darwin's Views on the Origins of the Sexes

[BurtWorm]

Pointed out by "captainhowdy of AK" in the comments to Comfort's reply to Eugenie Scott on the US News blog "God and Country," which is running a dialogue between Comfort and Scott about the Comfort-sponsored edition of The Origin of Species with a creationist "introduction." Comfort's organization is planning to distribute hundreds of thousands of copies to college students for free this month to mark the 150th anniversary of the book's publication:

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/god-and-country/2009/11/02/ray-comfort-responds-to-genie-scott-on-creationist-origin-of-species/comments/#4672128

Ray just apologized on his blog for misrepresenting biology!
On November 2nd, Ray in his reply to Dr. Scott tells us that:


"Scott quoted a famous geneticist, who said, "Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution." I would like to drop one word, so that the quote is true. It should read, "Nothing in biology makes sense in the light of evolution." For example, evolution has no explanation as to why and how around 1.4 million species of animals evolved as male and female."


Then on his blog, THE VERY NEXT DAY, MIND YOU, Ray apologizes for misrepresenting the Darwinian account of the evolution of sexual reproduction. Here it is:

A Genuine Apology


I'm going to try and put this so that it can't be taken out of context. I sincerely apologize for misrepresenting what Darwinian evolution says about the origin of males and females. I have checked out the references you have given me as to what the theory has to say about their genesis, read them again and again, and I still don't understand what you believe. It doesn't make sense to me because I can't reconcile what I see in creation with what you would have me believe about evolution. Still, that doesn't give me the right to misrepresent your beliefs, even if it was done in ignorance.


I know that many of you will not accept this in the spirit it is given, and will demand apologies for my non-acceptance of your supposed transitional forms and how a true atheist believes that nothing created everything. Sorry, no apologies there.


The reason for the apology is because my agenda isn't primarily to convince you that evolution is wrong, or even that God exists. It to see you saved from a very real Hell through repentance and faith in Jesus, and I don't want to unnecessarily offend you by something that doesn't matter in the light of eternity.

You can read it yourself on his blog: http://raycomfortfood.blogspot.com/


Oh, as far as his agenda goes, Ray's already told us what his agenda REALLY is, also on that very same blog:


"I have never hidden my agenda. All I want is for people to doubt evolution enough to re-examine the claims of the gospel."


--Ray Comfort 9/27/2009


Ray Comfort, a smarmy televangelist, is lecturing an actual biologist about biology, and in mid-debate actually apologizes for misrepresenting biology in another venue.


I hope Dr. Scott is reading this. Ray Comfort will say absolutely anything to gain a convert to his religion. Ray Comfort is the Billy Mays of televangelists.

[TxRider]

1. I just want a free book

Gonna tell my atheist nieces and nephews in college to get me one.

[drm604]

2. If he truly doesn't understand it, as he claims, then how does he know that he misrepresented it?

He's actually made a larger concession here than he realizes. He's admitted that he doesn't understand the theory of evolution (or at least an important part of it). He has stated that he doesn't understand something that he's spent a great deal of time and effort arguing against.

Granted, it's been obvious to many of us that he doesn't understand it, the infamous banana video is just one reason why, but now he's admitting that he doesn't understand it.

I'll use myself as an example. I have a basic grasp of Newton. I sort of understand some of what Einstein was saying. I have a tenuous grasp on a small part of quantum theory, but I'm pretty much bewildered by it. I'm not going to go around claiming that I can debunk string theory. In fact, I would be pretty much laughed out of the room if I tried to debate someone with a PhD in physics, and deservedly so.

I would never spend a lot of time and effort trying to disprove a scientific theory that I've admitted I don't understand. Neither should Ray Comfort. He should be laughed out of the room.

[BurtWorm]

3. His lack of seriousness about the facts of the argument he's making

speaks volumes about how seriously one should take him on anything. What a fucking joke! Where does he get his money?

[BolivarianHero]

4. Ray Comfort?

He sounds like a male prostitute...But then again, that wouldn't make much different from most other televangelists.

[Ozymanithrax]

5. Ray Comfort speaks from a purely religious point of view in which FAITH is the central feature.

He can only understand God in the light of his faith, because God demands that "only through faith" the blind acceptance of an idea that can not be proved, will he be saved.

In his world view, he doesn't need to understand evolution because his faith requires that he be against it.

If he can argue for the existence of God without understanding the how or why of God, then, in his world view, he can argue against evolution without having a clue. You can not convert the Christian to science by arguing logic. Faith and scientific evidence are mutually exclusive.