WND: Rev. David Rives — He Loves Science

We just got the thing installed yesterday, after the old one had crashed in the line of duty, and this morning we were awakened by the blaring sirens and flashing lights of our Retard-o-tron™. Instantly alert, we rushed to the computer and were directed to an article in WorldNetDaily (WND) — described in the Cast of Characters section of our Intro page.

The Retard-o-tron™ directed us to WorldNetDaily’s presentation of the latest video by the brilliant and articulate leader of David Rives Ministries. WND’s headline was Darwinian evolution is anti-scientific theory.

Anti-scientific? That got our attention. The rev’s video is titled I hate science! Yes, we’ve always known that. But if you look closely, the word “bad” is halfway inserted into the title. With that modification it reads: “I hate [bad] science!” Hey — that’s really clever.

The rev rebuts the criticism of atheists who claim that he dislikes science. Not true, he says. He loves science! But it has to be good science — the kind that’s consistent with the bible. That’s why he hates evolution. It has no evidence, and one day it will be discarded.

This thing takes less than a minute (before the commercial). Surely you have an extra minute laying around. Go ahead, take a look.

As we’ve done before with the rev’s videos, please feel free to use the comments section as an Intellectual Free Fire Zone. You know the rules. Okay, now go to it.

Copyright © 2013. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

7 responses to “WND: Rev. David Rives — He Loves Science

  1. Can we offer to Sen. Walsworth the Rev. Rives as evidence of a human being devolving into an E. coli bacterium?

  2. Charley Horse

    Intellectually speaking…
    One definition of curmudgeon: noun. a bad-tempered, difficult, cantankerous person. Origin: 1570–80

    Then there is this one that I like to think is more apt to describe our
    enlightened blogger:
    A curmudgeon’s reputation for malevolence is undeserved. They’re neither warped nor evil at heart. They don’t hate mankind, just mankind’s absurdities. They’re just as sensitive and soft-hearted as the next guy, but they hide their vulnerability beneath a crust of misanthropy. They ease the pain by turning hurt into humor. . . . . . They attack maudlinism because it devalues genuine sentiment. . . . . . Nature, having failed to equip them with a servicable denial mechanism, has endowed them with astute perception and sly wit.
    Curmudgeons are mockers and debunkers whose bitterness is a symptom rather than a disease. They can’t compromise their standards and can’t manage the suspension of disbelief necessary for feigned cheerfulness. Their awareness is a curse.
    Perhaps curmudgeons have gotten a bad rap in the same way that the messenger is blamed for the message: They have the temerity to comment on the human condition without apology. They not only refuse to applaud mediocrity, they howl it down with morose glee. Their versions of the truth unsettle us, and we hold it against them, even though they soften it with humor.

    - JON WINOKUR

  3. Charley Horse says: “A curmudgeon’s reputation for malevolence is undeserved.”

    I thought I told you to stay off my lawn.

  4. AlpsStranger

    If part of your “science” is checking an ancient book of prophecies and fables to make sure it’s okay then you don’t love, or understand, science.

  5. doodlebugger

    Has anyone else noticed that the word Rives fits into the word scrivener
    if you move the s?
    Also, if you play the reverend’s video backwards at 78 speed it says, “Beezlebub” and “Crassostrea virginica” very clearly.
    Could the revs videos be so very short because they are trying to
    avoid detection by the black Darwinist conspiracy helicopters near the studio?

  6. Am I the only one who wants to strangle this guy? He uses Darwin as a whipping boy but if you look at his web site he sells books on astronomy with a secular astronomy warning. So you can be sure it isn’t just Darwin he is going after it is science. He claims that evolution will one day be refuted, but if you deny all historical science how could it ever be refuted other than with a time machine?