In general I donât take comedians/entertainers opinions on anything as relevant.
Their knowledge and talent lay in other areas.
For true consternation: Meredith Vieira hosting the Rose Parade
She make Steve Harvey sound like Jared Diamond
âWhy we still got monkeys?â
Well, the pet store was selling them for 5Âą a piece. I like monkeys.
And what would those areas be, in this case?
Now Iâm surprised we still got monkeys. At that price we shoulda sold out by now.
âIf youâre an atheist, youâre basing your goodness and morality on⊠what?â
On whatâs good and moral, Steve. Some of us somehow have the ability to know that things like rape, murder, and stealing arenât good. It says a lot that he thinks that without the Bible, people instantly donât know how to behave.
âWhat is an atheist? When I talk to people, [and they say] âIâm an atheistâ, I walk away.â
This is a guy whose career is built on his talk show geniality, and he doesnât even bother to interact with people who he doesnât understand. And he feels heâs morally superior? Heâs certainly ignorant as fuck.
âWhereâs your moral barometer?â
Maybe Steve should ask all those dudes in prison with crucifix tattoos.
Thatâs why I bought 200. Iâm giving them out as Christmas gifts!
According to him, my netbook that still dualboots to XP apparently disproves Windows 8.
My favorite reply to âwhy are there still monkeys?â Is to say âIf the Pilgrims came from England, why are there still British people?â
You know, strategically, it was a real mistake for the Christian institutions to keep doing their denial of science thing. The secularization thatâs always put up as a fear idol comes in large part from the fact that theyâve positioned themselves as the counterpoint to scientific advancement and education, which can lead people to turn away from their institutions when they access those resources. Sure, the strategic benefits of less religious dilution and a sense of us-against-them outweighed the risks of forgoing new technology in the past, but itâs really not a sustainable idea right now.
The rate of advancement in technology, in my view, is speeding up, so that being fifty years behind in 2050 will be the equivalent of being one or two hundred years behind a century before. The selective acceptance of technologies by fundamentalist Christians can mitigate these effects somewhat, but I think that either large Christian institutions will do an about face on the subject of new technology, or attempt a conversion into a system like Ultra-Orthodox Judaism.
I really donât think the institutions could or want to handle the inevitable drop in population in the latter scenario, so itâll be really interesting to see how the Christian institutions handle this issue in the future.
Entertain audience between advertisements
And quite joyfully so⊠blissful, even
He is an accomplished comedian.
Not everyone can be Dmitiri Martin.
Ah, the old favorite "why we still got monkeys?"ï»ż argument - a much loved part of the âyouâre dumb because I donât understand scienceâ stance. Iâm sure he thinks itâs a really good argument because itâs never actually been used, given that he immediately walks away.
Plus itâs not even a good âwhy are there stillâ argument.
Is âweighing less than a cat and eating bugs in treesâ something humans are particularly good at?
Only our larvae are even close to small enough, and theyâre kind of useless.
Scientists hate this one weird trick!
Steve Harvey walks into a bar. He orders a drink, then strikes up a conversation with the guy next to him, âHey buddy, do you believe in God?â
The guy replies âyes, of course.â
âGreatâ says Steve, âwhat church do you go to?â
âThe Church of Satan.â
Wait wait, I know this! It has something to do with coconuts, right?
