Former sitcom star Kirk Cameron (Growing Pains) recently posted a YouTube video explaining his plan to distribute a doctored version of Darwin’s The Origin of Species that contains an introduction promoting creationism. Cameron, a vocal Christian advocate, intends to distribute 50,000 copies to college campuses around the country on Nov. 19, two days before the 150th anniversary of the book’s publication.
Featured Video
OscarWatch TV: 'Avatar' as underdog?
Dave Karger and Missy Schwartz on the rise of ''Hurt Locker,'' Sandra leapfrogging Meryl for Best Actress
More 
Today's Most Popular
-
-
-
-
-
Doc Jensen on 'Lost' 'Lost': 'Kate' expectations
Special Coverage
Totally 'Lost'!
Get up to speed for the final season:
New theories and news from Doc Jensen, exclusive video, photos, trivia, and more
More
Comments (1-15) of 173 Add your comment
What a moron.
Seconded.
Thirded. >.<
Fourthed.
I’d like to clarify. I don’t think he’s a moron because he’s a creationist. I think he’s a moron for attempting this with The Origin of Species. I don’t want scientists to take revered religious texts and release doctored versions, and I don’t want laypeople to take revered scientific tests and add non-science to doctor them up.
fifthed?
sixthed?
seventh?
eighthed!
I’d say it takes courage to stand against the masses and declare your own convictions. Don’t they teach that in school?
Isn’t it fascinating that only those who follow one particular brand of Christianity oppose evolution? It’s not two groups of scientists (like the genuine debate of Stephen Jay Gould’s punctuated evolution.) It’s always a specific religious point of view trying to insert itself into science. Mr. Cameron has been promoting his dogma for years, even after being repeatedly humiliated in debates with people who actually have knowledge on the subject. He’s only going to himiliate himself more, which for a veteran of a terribly cheesy sitcom, is quite an accomplishment.
I agree completly with you on this Grover. I am a Catholic and I believe in parts of creationism… but I am also a realist and believe that I as a woman came from Adam’s rib.
Opps… I meant to say I am a realist and DO NOT believe that I came from Adam’s rib. I do believe in evolution.
If you believe you came from Adam’s rib,then you’ll always be second to a man!
I see it as a testament to his faith that he continues despite being “humiliated in debates”. Part of being a Christian is having to experience suffering on behalf of Jesus. According to the Bible, it is something to take strength and joy in. I’d say Kirk is doing something wrong if he’s not coming up against some sort of opposition for his faith. I say the same for all Christians, in fact.
Are you saying that if a person has never had to suffer because of their faith in Jesus, then they aren’t a true Christian? That’s ballsy of you. I assume you mean WILLING to suffer. And it occurs to me that perhaps if we Christians didn’t do our best to stomp on everyone else’s beliefs, we wouldn’t have to feel like victims when people mock us…it kind of seems like some people deliberately push their faith in others’ faces just so that they can feel superior for being made to “suffer” when those justifiably annoyed people push back.
Agree with Kerry – Christians try to impose their beliefs on the rest of all the time. Any “suffering” seems to be invited. If you put yourself out there in such a significant way, then you you are bound to get a reaction.
It’s one thing to profess your faith and be mocked for it. It’s quite another to ignore the other side of the story and scientific facts and make an idiot of yourself. I am a Christian, and, like most Christians I know, I believe in both science and creationism. I resent the idea that science and religion are incompatible. I discuss my faith if asked about it.
In spreading his ideas, Mr. Cameron is giving the impression that Christians are single-minded, uneducated people who do not accept any veiws other than their own. I agree with his idea that athieism has grown, but Mr. Cameron could hand out Bibles instead of his version of Darwin’s work. Instead, he is alienating athiests and Christians who believe in both creation and evolution.
He’s not suffering for his faith. He’s losing debates on science. He may be able to quote the bible, but he is ignorant on science.
Sorry this has nothing to do with suffering for Jesus. This guy needs an education and until he understands evolution academically he will never be a credible critic of it.
Boo-freekin hoo!
Maybe I’m naive, but is that legal to change a previously published material and then hand it out?
It is in the public domain.
Well, one, any copyright that may have existed at the time would be long gone by now. If there IS a valid copyright out there, I believe it would depend on the nature and extent of the changes. If all that was done was to add an introduction and annotate the existng text to explain how it supports creationism, I would think that would be fine.
Nothuing has been altered, they just inserted a 50 page intro. This is actually what Darwin wanted… for his theiory to be challenged if it couldn’t be proven. So they are simply doing what is beneficial to society. It’s time this mankey tale gets exposed for the fraud it really is.
I have always wondered why evolution (or creation) was ever part of science. It seems more a part of the humanities with history and archeology. Can scientists create life in a test-tube out of chemicals? No. Have we evolved species into new and different species in the laboratory? No.
Well, considering evolution usually takes thousands or millions of years, I doubt we could have evolved an entire new species with modern technology in the few years that we’ve had it. Also, we have the capabilities to change organisms by introducing new genes, so could that be considered an evolution?
How could anyone know it takes millions of years if you can’t be around to watch it happen? There is absolutely no possible means to prove one species can evolve into another species, and nothing in the fossil record reveals such a phenomenon. Think people!
Hi, Kim. Thanks for your questions – I can answer them! Archaeology is most definitely a science. In the US, students learn that it is part of anthropology, but the UK considers it a separate discipline. You can argue that it’s a social science, but it’s in no way one of the humanities. Archaeology dealing with evolution in particular combines biology, geology, chemistry, and other disciplines in order to analyze data.
To answer at least your second question – YES. In a way. People have been evolving species since the domestication of the dog, because the different dog breeds we have today are a result of articial selection (done by humans, as opposed to natural selection) – we have more or less turned wolves into chihauhuas, St. Bernards, collies, etc. The different breeds are not quite different species, but scientists HAVE seen evolution from one species into a completely different species in the giant lab that is nature! Not just from looking at bones, but from observing actual living wildlife as it changes.
Last comment, I swear. (It’s just the teacher and the love of evolution in me!) Back to the bit about why evolution is taught in science: because it’s biology. Because it helps inform us about climatological and environmental changes (because if a species changes a little and we can figure out why, it helps us figure out what drove those changes.) Because science is entirely about understanding the natural world, and evolution is part of that understanding. Creationism is a matter of faith. Because it cannot be tested scientifically, it doesn’t count as science. Not to say that only idiots are creationists, because that wouldn’t be true – just that it’s faith, not science.
It`s only science if the preferred outcome is not predetermined (or preconceived) before the theory is proven or disproven. It`s only science if the evidence is allowed to point to any number of end results, one of those probable causes being Creation by an intelligent designer. No faith required to believe the cause of this massive effect is God.
seriously?
I’ve known for years that Cameron is off his nut, but this really pisses me off. People like him need to stop trying to make other people as willfully ignorant as they are!
Kim, as a former science teacher, comments like yours cause me pain. The lack of proper science education in this country is shocking. Evolution is the foundation, the bedrock, the keystone, for modern biology. It is also very important in sciences such as geology. Creationism is not science. It is religious dogma pretending to be something else.
Kim, ignorance is not cute. Evolution has been seen, in a labratory. Additionally, the chemicals that form life were created in test tubes from the gasses that were in the Earth’s atmosphere billions of years ago…not six thousand years ago, billions. Read, educate yourself, and then open your mouth.
He played Mike Seaver for crying out loud. He needs to get off his high horse!
What an idiot. What amazes me is that there are actually COLLEGES out there that teach creationism EXCLUSIVELY! And they can still get accreditation! How is that possible?
I went to a college that taught creationism as being the correct school of thought, but they did not teach creationism exclusively. I can’t speak for all, but I believe most teach both. In a Christian high school, I was taught evolution in both my science and Bible classes. And we were not taught it in a way that said that it was incorrect. We were free to make our choice between evolution and creation after learning the facts. I can tell you that every person chose creation, even those who were not Christians. However if this eases your mind, the accreditation those colleges receive is usually not recognized outside of the realm of Christian universities.
I went to both Catholic grade school and Catholic high school and I was taught both creationism and evolution. I guess it depends on the school.
It creeps me out how much I used to love him on Growing Pains. Seeing what he has become is frightening. I hope that Fred Savage remains normal. I need to preserve some of my childhood.
Origin of Species is public domain so it is legal. I wonder if it is legal to publish and distribute copies of the Bible with a 50-page intro about all the inconsistencies??
hmmmmm good question!!!!
50 pages? That’s all? How about 500?
As long as it’s the King James version you’re adding an intro to, it’s legal. Other modern translations such as NIV, RSV, etc. are copyrighted and not public domain.
good luck with that.
I plan on becoming famous then publishing a version of Genesis with a preface indicating it’s all a bunch of childish hokum and you really should treat it with all the scientific integrity of a Grimm’s Fairy Tale.
Yes! Word.
This will be a difficult concept for you I am sure, but not everything is meant to be taken literally. Even in the Bible.
except….that is precisely what creationists believe (that the Bible should be taken literally)
I agree with you Little Timmy. Problem is millions don’t. They take The Bible as literal truth from the mouth of God.
This guy is probably perfectly nice in person, but he’s an extremist zealot. And given how his career has been going lately, I wonder how he plans to pay for those 50K copies.
Are you aware that he just starred in the highest grossing independent film of last year? I don’t think money is a problem for him. You’d probably be happier with him if he were spending it on drugs and hookers…
That seems like a bit of stretch. I wouldn’t wish that, BUT I would wish he would stop proselytising.
What a whackjob!
Evolution is a fact. Why is this still an issue?
Talk to the state of Kansas, which has banned teaching evolution in its classrooms.
“Talk to the state of Kansas, which has banned teaching evolution in its classrooms.”
As a Kansan, I have to say that this isn’t quite true. Schools have the choice to include evolution, or not to include it. My high school, as well as others in my district and nearby districts (in an affluent suburb of Kansas City), actively taught us about evolution. You only get evolution scares in the more rural, less educated areas. However, the areas where the most people live all have evolution in the curriculum.
Not everyone in Kansas is backwater, uneducated hick.
I’m in the same boat as Kelsey. I’m from an affluent suburb of Kansas City and my high school biology teacher was featured in Newsweek talking about how he taught evolution but he was a very devout Christian. They still teach it.
Evolution is not Fact.
It is a theory.
I hope people realize that gravity is also just a theory. The confusing terminology is because in the scientific community a “theory” is the closest thing to fact you can get which is the opposite in normal life.
Thank you Tom for pointing out that what we know about gravity is also “just” a theory. Fear of the theory of evolution comes from ignorance. If Darwin and evolution had not been turned into bogey-men by ignorant people there would be no conflict to discuss. Darwin was a religious man, it was never his intention to challenge faith.
My question is will this make it easier to distribute copies of the Bible with an introduction stating the following could very well be total B.S.?
Won`t have any affect on those who already know the bible`s author and have realized His power to save them and transform them from their wretched sinful condition! To God Be All The Glory!
zealot
I hate that people have made this a mean-spirited debate. I’m Catholic, and I used to teach human evolution at a large state university. It’s fascinating, and it’s completely separate from anything to do with my religious beliefs because it’s SCIENCE. It deals with the natural world. My FAITH deals with the supernatural, and because of that, there’s no overlap other than thinking “Isn’t the way the natural world works just amazing???” I see God in nature, including the rules of biology, astronomy, physics, etc. Pitting science against religion is my ultimate pet peeve with people.
I agree. Why does everyone assume that it has to be one OR the other? I think extremists on BOTH sides of this argument are wrong to even debate this in the first place.
If viewed in their correct contexts, there should be no conflict between science and religion. It’s the religious fundamentalists who started this war against evolution (and geology, astronomy, etc., as the world is apparently only 6000 years old, lol), despite overwhelming evidence that evolution is fact and that the world is approximately 4.6 billion years old.
Lorrie, I also love the one where creationists claim that humans and dinosaurs lived together. How they can use the bible to claim that is puzzling. I don’t remember Jesus riding a T-Rex.
Agreed. Discussions about evolution invariably turn into religious debates because the religionists who don’t even understand evolution hijack the discussions. For example, evolution does not say that humans evolved from apes; rather, apes and humans have a common ancestor. Evolution also is not the theory of how all life started (abiogenesis); it’s a scientific explanation supported by tangible, physical evidence of how life adapted and changed over millions of years into many different species of plants and animals. Creationism is nothing more than faith. It pretends to explain everything by saying, “Well, God must have done it!” How convenient: Creationism is not provable. Religionists have been trying unsuccessfully to debunk evolution for 150 years. Evidence keeps supporting evolution, but creationism doesn’t require any evidence for its adherents to believe in it. It’s embarrassing and unfortunate that creationism and evolution are both taught in America as if the two deserve equal consideration.
I did a scientific study on your faith and it seems to be lacking. You cannot be Catholic and deny the Genesis account. You`re a fake.
It is not your job to judge another believer’s level of faith. According to the Bible, that’s God’s job. You seem to want to make a show of what a good and true Christian you are, so why don’t you know this?