What is your opinion of banana man

[Lemonvariable72]

I have watched both videos (the second some time ago)
All I can say is that I'm dumbfounded by this man's udderly rediculous understanding of evolution. Yet he does see how stupid this is abd thunks he better then darwin himself. Instead he should read and make sure he has a good solid understanding before he criticizes. For cuthlu's sake even william lane craig accepts evolution. In short he's so stupid it hurts.

You're assuming that Comfort is actually interested in portraying evolution correctly: he isn't. The fact is, he can make a lot more money by pretending he doesn't understand simple concepts and distorting them in order to sell his videos to equally inept creationists. For evidence, I submit that both Aronra and the Atheist Experience folks attempted- fairly successfully- to explain evolution to Ray, and he didn't modulate his argument at all, even during the damn interviews themselves.

He's just a fraud, plain and simple.

Okay your right on that point.

[Cyberman]

Not for nothing did he win the coveted Golden Crocoduck for 2009.

[Esquilax]

Given that he and his idiot lackey invented the Crocoduck, it would be weird of him not to win one.

[Cyberman]

Yes, but I doubt he expected it to turn round and bite him in the banana the way it did, since it's awarded to the creationist voted to be in the biggest breach of the ninth commandment in the creationist cause. That is, the person who knows what they're selling is total shit, but since they're doing it for Jesus it's ok.

Hilariously, the following year he lost the award to NephilimFree. That's like Mo Farah getting knocked out of the record books by the special needs kid who was taken to watch him for his birthday.

[Esquilax]

Ray's actually kind of unique in just how many of his little stunts backfire in major ways. I mean, all creationist arguments fall down at the merest hint of critical analysis, but they never penetrate the community to memetic levels like the atheist-nightmare-banana, or the Crocoduck, or even his new stupid movie thing. It's what keeps me thinking that Ray's an idiot in every field but crowd manipulation.

Kent Hovind (or possibly Harold Camping) had the most catastrophic failure on record, but Ray's definitely had the most.

[Faith No More]

Given that he and his idiot lackey invented the Crocoduck, it would be weird of him not to win one.

Wait, the crocoduck was actually proposed as an argument? I thought it was something that was made up just to make fun of creationists. I didn't think it was possible, but my opinion of Comfort and Cameron has gone further down.

[Esquilax]

Wait, the crocoduck was actually proposed as an argument? I thought it was something that was made up just to make fun of creationists. I didn't think it was possible, but my opinion of Comfort and Cameron has gone further down.

Oh yeah, it totally was. In a televised debate, and everything.

http://youtu.be/a0DdgSDan9c

The madness starts at around 3:49. Enjoy.

[Clueless Morgan]

I don't think it's a con. So I have to go with the idea of stupid or just very zealous. According to his wiki page he became a minister in his 20s. Seems like a lot of work to con people.

That's never stopped others from conning people; the only requirement is that they think the con is less work than a legitimate job would be. Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't.

Wait, the crocoduck was actually proposed as an argument? I thought it was something that was made up just to make fun of creationists. I didn't think it was possible, but my opinion of Comfort and Cameron has gone further down.

I was describing Ray Comfort, Kirk Cameron and the crocoduck thing to my best friend the other day and she about went into convulsions because she was laughing so hard. She followed her laughter up with an anecdote about when she was in Germany and went to a taxidermy shop (don't ask, I didn't) where they mixed and matched animals parts to make the equivalent of taxidermied crocoducks and all the things Ray Comfort keeps squalling about.

It got me wondering whether you could present Comfort with such a taxidermied creature, what he would make of it and how he would change tactics when you showed it to him, assuming he believed it might be real (could he be that stupid?).

Alas, it would probably do evolution a disservice to pull such a prank. Too bad.

[Bad Writer]

Wait, the crocoduck was actually proposed as an argument? I thought it was something that was made up just to make fun of creationists. I didn't think it was possible, but my opinion of Comfort and Cameron has gone further down.

Oh yeah, it totally was. In a televised debate, and everything.

I especially liked the "What a numbnut" comment as Kirk hefted the picture of the Crocoduck. The atheist reaction? Priceless.

[Cyberman]

Even other xtians think he's a joke. Here's a review of his latest Wollyhood blockbuster Evolution vs. God by Evangelical xtian Tyler Francke.

Its goal is not really to show us wayward, misguided evolutionists the error of our ways, as the filmmakers claim. How do I know this? Well, ask yourself: If you wanted to make a documentary that convinced its viewers that a scientific claim accepted by most people is, in fact, incorrect, how would you go about it?

You would probably do a ton of research, gathering all of the relevant, canonical materials on the subject, while also locating a handful of accomplished experts in the field who support (or are, at least, sympathetic to) your view and who will agree to appear in your documentary. Then you would make a film that explains, in detail, where the prevailing theory fails to explain the available evidence and why an alternative scientific theory better fits the observable universe.

Of the many, many possible ways to make an effective documentary, perhaps the last one you would choose would be to go up to random people, put a camera in their faces and ask them a series of leading questions about an incredibly complex topic (interspersed with non sequiturs like “Are you a good person?”), until you get at least a few of them to arrive at your preconceived conclusion.

You wouldn’t use this technique, because it’s not very convincing. And it’s dishonest and unfair and fallacious and other even more colorful words. Unfortunately, this sums up the basis of “Evolution vs. God.”