"The View"--Elisabeth Hasselbeck Attacks Evolution
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 10 ก.ย. 2024
- Hot Topics--December 12, 2008
The Ladies on The View talk about believing in both evolution and religion. All of the Ladies offer their take on the issue, including Elisabeth who slams the idea of believing in only evolution.
**THIS VIDEO COURTESY OF ABCNEWS.COM AND IS BROUGHT TO YOU IN BOTH STANDARD AND HIGH QUALITY VERSIONS. FOR AN OPTIMAL VIEWING EXPERIENCE HIGH QUALITY FORMAT IS RECOMMENDED WHEN WATCHING THIS VIDEO.
Whoopi is so creative with her words lol.
"Cockroaches are a reminder never to give up" lol
I love how Hasselbeck uses the same argument for creationism that I would've used in 6th grade. I am not saying that anyone who believes in creationism is an idiot, I'm just saying that she is.
Really annoys me when people dismiss evolution with comments like "It makes no sense to me". Well try watching some videos or reading some fucking books then. There's no excuse to be ignorant with such a wealth of information available to us all for free.
but then they do read books, like the one she quoted. OK i give up
Then who designed the designer?
The designer's designer.
Deeson Jame lmfao
and who designed him? I can't wait to hear your answer.
Hasse Aouled George Clooney.
Deeson Jame I asked that question at 3. I still don't know, but I still believe in God. If we had all the answers, life would have no point.
Science and faith can co-exist. Don't put words in my mouth. Thanks.
Everything that Elisabeth said, sounded like she'd memorized a page from a book having never read any of the arguments against her position.
All her bullet points were written by the producers
Did we just witness Elizabeth Hasselbeck describe her "understanding" of Evolution via a designer shoe/bag analogy?
Remember, half of the population has a below average IQ. There’s a good chance that she’s legitimately stupid.
"A child or the human eye"......Clearly have no idea about evolution!
damn...I just came from Dawkins, and Hitchens videos to this and I thought my head will implode.
I love Dawkins and Hitchens, try out Sam Harris, too.
Peggy Farrell I know Harris and Dennett and Krauss...all of the bunch. :)
The title is deceiving. She's not even attacking evolution, she's giving her opinion.
moonmaiden6546 She's assaulting our intelligence, that's for sure.
Wulf I can see why you think that but to me it's her opinion and I won't get worked up about it.
moonmaiden6546 Maybe we should get worked up about it. As a society we're spinning our wheels. I believe in human potential. What if instead of being incredibly ignorant like this woman, or being like those people who make a living off instragram, we were a society dedicated to growth and exploration?
The fact someone like this exists is sad in its own right. The fact she's given a platform to speak to millions of people that actually believe as she does is down right depressing.
Wulf She has her opinions just as everyone else does. I'm not saying I agree with her, but she was put on the show because she has different views from the other women. I almost feel sorry for her because she is the only conservative, while all the others are democrats. Her potential is probably sharing her views with the world (free speech) and having faith in God. I don't want to get into an argument with you. I respect your opinion and this is mine.
moonmaiden6546 what's the difference?
it really bugs me when people use the "Evolution relies on coincidences" argument, because it simply isn't true. Just because we are around to see things working properly (like the complexity of an eye) doesn't mean there wasn't a trial and error period that spanned million of years to make the biological eye what it is today. The eye isn't that perfect anyway. We see ourselves as "perfect" because we don't know how it could be better, and as evolution tells us, it could be infinitely better
My favorite line of the year “cockroaches are here to remind us to never give up!” - love it lol.
I look at the digestive system of rabbits and I ask "Who designed that?". I mean, what god would force a creature to eat its owns shit to absorb nutrients?
I'm sorry but this was actually a good talk on ALL their parts. It was a civil discussion and was actually open minded on all their parts
Good job gals on the view
you gotta love ignorance
Elisabeth is such a nut. Glad she is with her own kind now.
Thank you Jesus for dying on the cross for me paying for my sins in full and giving me eternal life.
Why does the universe have to be "created" by somebody...
Creating something requires “order” the same way a building requires “order”. That’s why construction of a building or a home requires planning. Look at the universe, look at the distance between the earth and the sun or the order of planets. Can you imagine what would happen if everything was random and not organized?
I guess it's easier to read one book (the bible) than it is to read a bunch of hard books like science and medical text books. Only stupid people believe in a creator.
Plenty of scientists believe in a creator. Go do your research.
Chris Jackson Christian scientists aren't really scientists now are they dear?
Thanks for coming out tho ;)
Johnny Topside Haha - if you'd bothered to read my post properly, I didn't even use the word Christian, dear :-)
Chris Jackson
"Plenty" is not a percentage. "Plenty" of people have STD's, but that doesn't mean the majority, and if the majority of scientists believed in "a creator", you wouldn't use the word "plenty".
Dan J Your rather obscure and meaningless comment misses my point entirely. I'm not interested in semantics. My comment was intended to refute Topside's idiotic assertion that 'only stupid people believe in a creator'. I personally know an astro-physicist who, although he doesn't call himself a Christian, believes the universe was created by a higher intelligence. Even if he is the ONLY scientist to believe in a creator, he is definitely NOT a stupid person thus proving JT's 'theory' to be complete rubbish.
If stupid is a drop of water Hasselbeck would be an ocean.
Sure, you can believe in a god while also understanding and accepting evolution. However, you cannot accept both evolution and the creation myth in the bible. These are two competing concepts, and one has to prevail. All of the evidence is in favor of evolution. The Adam and Eve story is too improbable to be accepted as factual, based on our understanding of evolution and our origins.
Couldn't agree with you more.
Ok so where the the universe evolve from where did animals evolve from where did humans evolve from? If humans and apes are of the same species then apes shouldn’t be kept in zoo’s right? They should be free among us because we’re the same correct?
@@millennialaviation Don't be a moron. It's not good for your health. Try reading a book other than the bible. Also, take a biology class.
All yall realize that you have to have faith to believe in God OR Evolution right???
Either way it still goes back to Faith!!!
@@sherrisheppard4599 you don’t need any faith to believe in evolution. DNA evidence alone supports the theory. Don’t equate your childish, evidence-lacking belief in a god with my adult, reasoned, and evidence based understanding of the theory of evolution by natural selection.
I think my IQ just dropped by 30 points just by watching this video.Elizabeth Hasselbeck compares the evolution of humans to somebody created a handbag.
God didn't create man, man created God
The View is pretty blind.
***** ;)
Whoopi is 100 percent correct.
I don't understand when they say "believe in evolution". Evolution isn't like Santa Claus or a religion it's a proven FACT. There's no in between. And many would like to debate that evolution is just a theory, but do you really understand what theory means? Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. So Evolution is a fact, but there are various theories concerning the mechanism of evolution. So it will always be true whether you choose to believe in it or not.
The frizzy haired girl doesn't know the world is round. True story.
The "frizzy haired girl?" That is nice, asshole!
Thank goodness for Joy, the voice of sanity in a sea of superstition.
Poor Joy during this segment… she’s like, “these fools” lol 😅
I can’t stand Joy.
"Its too perfect.. Someone had to design it... It just cant have 'pfffff' come from thin air" - i just have one question for elizabeth. Who designed god? ... Pfff
also please dont say you love me, you dont, you dont know me nor have ever met me. To say you love me demeans what love is. Love is not between strangers on the internet.
I don't understand why people compare bags, or shoes, or things that are crafted by the hands of man to natural occurrences and biological certainties. Also, Elisabeth says the human eye is perfect, all the while staring down Whoopi who is wearing glasses.
Wow, that was scary to listen to! Help!
The argument from design again... _sigh_
The reason Elizabeth was fired was because she was an outspoken Christian. There is a perception of people when the C word comes up. Some is valid and some is not. Becoming a Christian is a process a person goes through, a process that is well worth the time and effort. The best part of it is getting to know Christ, hence becoming a Christian. Unfortunately, early on, a lot of humanity gets in the way and it takes time to reach a place of humility which requires a great deal of spiritual strength and patience. The best thing to do is to be still and focus on becoming humble or more Christ-like and seek Godly wisdom.
I can make analogies too Elizabeth. When you look at a rock you never ask anyone "Oh who's the designer?", people would look at you like you're insane and after all the earth is just one giant rock.
The only reason we see "coincidence" or "patterns" is because that's how our brain functions. We look for patterns as a way to understand how things work, but that doesn't mean that this pattern truly exists. It's like if you keep looking at the clock when it's 12:34 over and over and you think "Wow, what a coincidence." it's not because there's something more going on, it means that your brain is recognizing a pattern and is now paying special attention to it. The odds don't change.
Behar gives whole new meaning to the term, "rude".
+Buck Weet Sorry but one can only bite the lip for so long when hearing such ignorance being spewed from Ms. Hasselbeck.
How can someone's strongest argument be "someone invented a designer bag...so something must have designed the universe!" How do you compare an accessory to the universe? Wtf.
What really bothers me is that each of them who claimed to believe in God and the Bible and claimed to be Christian kept saying "I think, I feel, etc." Not ONCE did any of them refer back to the Scriptures to reason with. Of all of them, I felt the most respect for Joy because she admitted she didn't know and that she wasn't going to believe in something until she had satisfying answers to her questions. Oh and if anyone wants to know from the Bible where bad things came from, let me know.
The sad part is that many people build their beliefs off people like this.
What a ridiculous conversation. To deny evolution is to deny logic.
Fun fact - early editions of the bible were packed with margin notes saying things to the effect of "if you edit this God will smite you." Not sure how many people listened...
Elizabeth is a very passionate person and I don't think she was "attacking" evolution. It's her belief. No attacking involved.
David Attenborough responding to religious viewers who criticized him for not crediting God in his nature episodes:
They always mean beautiful things like hummingbirds. I always reply by saying that I think of a little child in East Africa with a worm burrowing through his eyeball. The worm cannot live in any other way, except by burrowing through eyeballs. I find that hard to reconcile with the notion of a divine and benevolent creator.
I'm a Christian..... And I believe in Evolution.
This clown doesn't speak for me.
It boggles my mind that there's still people in this day and age in a developed country who choose to believe ancient superstition before science, which created this modern society will all its great progress we live in.
In science, the word theory has a completely different definition:
A body of descriptions of knowledge is usually only called a theory if it has fulfilled these criteria:
It makes falsifiable predictions with consistent accuracy across a broad area of scientific inquiry (such as mechanics).
It is well-supported by many independent strands of evidence, rather than a single foundation. This ensures that it is probably a good approximation, if not completely correct.
very nice. i worked four or so years on the HGP back in the nineties when i was living in germany. now i'm a medical administrator for a home health care facility. i guess the subject has shifted off of 'perfect design' now.
one more thing, your previous comment where you said complicated living structures wouldn't be regarded by evolutionary biologists as mere chance may be biased towards your profession.
I think Hasselbeck displays that she hasn't even looked into evolution because she explains that the result of how natural selection works but can only attribute it to intelligent design. Though truthfully it seems like most people who don't believe in evolution/science listen specifically to people who only agree with them and have equal or lesser knowledge. A key difference in intelligent versus the ignorant.
"lol you think atheists are more "intelligent" than theists?"
Not all of us. I, personally, think that atheists are more rational and more skeptical about religion than theists are. Theists can and do have those high standards in every facet of life except religion. Thats all. One of my favourite biologists is a catholic.
These outlandish comments on this show made by everyone except Joy are so embarrassing, it is cringe-worthy. Sherri has the dimmest light when it comes to reason and intelligence-based comments and it is baffling that she was allowed to represent a talk show in any form. It's so embarrassing! She had no idea the earth wasn't flat! She believed it was! "I never really thought about it...", she states. Unimaginable ignorance (lack of facts).
I wouldn't say that she "attacks" evolution. I would say that she was just giving her opinion. A bit forcefully, but rather polite for Elizabeth.
That's like saying, "in my opinion the world is flat, and just because I hold that opinion, doesn't make me uneducated." Yeah, yeah it does!
That's a common fallacy. In fact, people who trash the bible have read ALL of the bible, not just the part that says love thy neighbor. They've read about stoning people, about slavery, about illogical mythology, about condemning homosexuals, etc, etc.
Wait, I shouldn't try and be educated on the opposing argument? You should be educated on both sides of an argument, otherwise you have no right to argue... That makes no sense.
I can't bring myself to watch this video to the end
Why do creationists always cite the eye as an example of God's 'perfect design?' It has a blind spot on the retina that has no explainable use, it's just a vestige of evolution. When so much about this world can clearly be explained and yet people still go back to the old 'God's design' argument, it just shows how immature society as a whole still is.
Believing that there is a God who caused Evolution in the first place is smarter than not believing because of a lack of evidence for a God. The reason is, because unlike how it is smarter to require evidence before we believe things in our everyday lives in our World, Its not when it come to the question of a higher power. That's different and it requires faith and most of the time it results in very positive spirituality which can be of great value to the believer.
Boy, you know you're in trouble when Whoopi Goldberg is the smartest, most rational person in the discussion...
Interestingly, I don't think Hasselbeck realizes that when she says all you need to do is look at the wonderful things blah blah to realize there was design behind it in trying to say you can believe in evolution & that god created it. Then she says the extinction of the dinosaur was because it was an imperfect design. What the heck? She is basically saying here that god is like a scientist himself, creating things, and he made a mistake with the dinosaurs.
The very first definition from Webster's is "the analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one another." That's a very basic way of saying exactly what several others and I have been explaining. A scientific theory is formed based on a large base of evidence (or facts) and used to explain the world around us.
The second definition, "abstract through: speculation" is how theory is used more often in common speech.
5
: a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena (the wave theory of light)
6
a : a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigation
b : an unproved assumption : conjecture
c : a body of theorems presenting a concise systematic view of a subject (theory of equations)
She actually had a good point behind her statement because what she was trying to say was that if we know that a creator is behind a simple object like a purse or shoes, why should we wonder about a creator being behind more complex things like the earth, animals and humans? It doesn’t make any sense and Evolution is in direct conflict with the bible.
4
a : a belief, policy, or procedure proposed or followed as the basis of action (her method is based on the theory that all children want to learn)
b : an ideal or hypothetical set of facts, principles, or circumstances -often used in the phrase in theory (in theory, we have always advocated freedom for all)
"Zeus and jesus are as likely as any other myth" No other myth is like the new testament. It amazes me when I hear people on youtube say that. Just look at the history.
"Santa and the Boogyman" Is there any good reason to believe santa or the boogyman exist? The thing is, everyone loses their belief in santa at one point. However, many people (like myself) come to believing in God. The thing is, I (like Einstein) believe this universe
i never even said i was christian or followed the bible. i only said i believed in a higher power
all those variations are what ultimatly effects a species...the design is always changing, that fits with what she said.
I’m my goodness so much ignorance in that conversation. Joy was the only one there with some common sense. There is what we know and what we don’t know. That’s it. No need to come up or believe fairy tales because they make you feel better about your own ignorance. It’s ok to say I don’t know when we actually don’t know.
She's not "attacking evolution" here, she's basically taking the theistic evolution position, that is, that God was still behind evolution.
Elisabeth, we know that handbags are designed because we have learned to distinguish naturally occurring things from man-made. Evolution has a perfectly good explanation how naturally occurring things come about over time. If you say God created evolution too, it would seem that you win that argument, except how can we tell a god-created evolution from a natural one? As far as the universe being created so perfect for life (the fine-tuning argument), if you asked the winner of the state lottery what his odds were of winning and he says "10,000,000:1" is it really so remarkable IF you are talking to the winner? Isn't it far more likely that we are the result of billions of years of evolution in a massively large universe and just haven't found the answer to "Why" we are here yet? No need to make things up. Better to devote our energy to getting along and understanding what we can about our universe.
What's with all the hate :S
She doesn't affect you personally, move on with your day...Jesus.
"There's a missing link. You can't prove evolution. Why are there still monkeys? The eye is so perfect it needs a designer. Evolution is the devil"
Yeah, there is a reason why the world laughs at us.
Actually, patrick is right. Creatures than can see do have a greater advantage over creatures that can not. Typically, creatures that didn't evolve "sight" didn't do so due to a particular niche that they carved out in their environment. If that environment changed drastically or the creature left it's native environment, it would be at a great disadvantage in terms of survival when compared to creatures with sight.
You're right, natural selection isn't a creative force, but it will "select" the best suited individuals for survival and reproduction, hence we see a clear step-by-step transition from one species to another.
The lady proclaims.. "I try to read the bible, I don't do it.." stating she's a 'Christian' at the same time. You know, if a person is going to base their entire life on a book, I think it would be wise to actually read it.
Evolution does NOT try explain the creation of earth. It sets out to explain the changes that have happened AFTER earth's creation. Changes that are in FACT occurring.
That last argument made me facepalm.
Because it was so improbable, it must have been God.
That's like me saying, "Go out to the beach and pick a single grain of sand." and when they came back "It's so improbable that you picked that single grain of sand, that you couldn't possibly have picked that one"
Well, they fucking did.
The United States National Academy of Sciences defines scientific theories as follows:
The formal scientific definition of theory is quite different from the everyday meaning of the word. It refers to a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence. Many scientific theories are so well established that no new evidence is likely to alter them substantially.
im not a fan of Elisabeth and I'm not christian but there is nothing wrong with what she said. Those are her beliefs, she's entitled to them.
I guess Elizabeth's never heard of the law of large numbers when she's spouting on about "so many things needed to go exactly right".
The burden of proof is on those making a positive claim. If somebody says the universe is teleologically guided and I say "sorry, not buying it", I am under no obligation to present evidence contrary to their position. People say she's an idiot because she's basically saying "I believe in A, even though I have no way of knowing that A is true".
She's pretty but when she opens her mouth all I see is red and the word "stupid" pop up 😐😐😐
Equivocation error, & false dichotomy @ 0:40. She's talking about Abiogenesis, not evolution. Simply put, evolution deals with changes in the gene pool AFTER life arose; and Abiogenesis deals with life from non life i.e. how we got here.
Religion is slowly dying out and I’m here for it 💁🏽♂️
"Tide goes in, Tide goes out."
Seeing her line of thinking now clears up for me why she is the way she is. She is unopened to other ideas. I am an atheist, and if some one or something were to prove to me that a god does indeed exist, I would alter my line of thinking. But with most believers, the feeling I get is that even if it was proven that no god exists, they would still ride the religious train and ignore the information. I hope that I am wrong.
It is consistent with pre-existing theories and other experimental results. (Its predictions may differ slightly from pre-existing theories in cases where they are more accurate than before.)
It can be adapted and modified to account for new evidence as it is discovered, thus increasing its predictive capability over time.
It is among the most parsimonious explanations, sparing in proposed entities or explanations.
I think we get confused thinking that god is in our image rather that god is our planet earth. Fact, earth gave birth to humanity, and the way we treat our earth should reflect how we treat our god.
Why is this titled "The View"--Elisabeth Hasselbeck Attacks Evolution?? I don't particularly like Elizabeth or agree with her point of view on most things, but she in no way attacked evolution. This was a civilized debate where everyone gave their opinion and were heard by their counterparts. "Desperation for likes on my upload" is what this should be titled.
Elisabeth Hasselbeck is one of the people in the universe that believes the complexity of the universe is equal to a bag.
Elisabeth "someone is behind the big bang and it was all too much of a coincedent?" . Why is she even here for a person who is neither smart or attractive.
She's not atacking it. She's just comparing the current state of things to footwear, designer footwear that is...... and designer bags to. That's all folks!
I disagree with alot of things Elisabeth Hasselbeck says but I don't like it when the other panelists keep on interrupting her when she is trying to get her point across.
The problem is, there are data sets that suggest evolution. For example, if you look at embryo development of vertebrate animals, you notice at the 2mm stage of development, they all look the same. This goes for fish, sheep, chickens, humans, ect. this suggests that we all come from a common ancestor. Also, when we look at the expansion of the universe and see where everything is headed, then we can tell that it must have originated from one central point.
ok, first of all, inversions and deletions are the cause of errors in transcription and translation, so don't call me a fool if you are trying to make sense with your apparent fifth grade education. second, my premise was that a tv can be compared to things like the bombadier beetle, a sentient object, who through variation led out by design from a diety was able to survive. and i was augumenting liz's argument saying that perfect design could be the cause- she didnt want to ask the questions.
Religion sigh
I know what you mean. Though i think, its more "fundamentalist" religion gets on peoples nerves. When I was an atheist I found very religious people irritating. I lived in England for a while with a Catholic family and they were the nicest most caring people I've ever met. They always made me feel comfortable and I could seriously never tell when they were in a bad mood. The people who go around with banners condemning others, are the ones I think people should direct their frustrations at.
A scientific theory summarizes a hypothesis or group of hypotheses that have been supported with repeated testing. If enough evidence accumulates to support a hypothesis, it moves to the next step-known as a theory-in the scientific method and becomes accepted as a valid explanation of a phenomenon.
It's more CONVENIENT to believe someone was behind it all, Ms. Hasselback, not more BELIEVABLE.
You mean it's more convenient to not believe someone was behind it all. Then they can continue deciding what they want and what is right or wrong - which is why most people believe in evolution. Believing in evolution has moral implications that actually explain why people do or don't believe much more than the content of the theory itself.
I didn't believe in evolution until I actually read about it and discovered how much of an indisputably awesome theory it is. Now I can't understand how anybody can argue against it unless they are either ignorant about how it works or are just purely in denial.
I don't think that belief in a god and evolution are necessarily incompatible. If a god or gods designed the universe with the constants and the scale to render life possible, that would mean that there doesn't have to be any "divine" intervention for life to survive and also explains why religions are wrong. Atheists need to realize that there can be a god outside of religion. It just wouldn't be an interventionist god and it would be possible for there to be a god and no afterlife.