Praise the Lawd, the Sky Is Falling!

A day after ordained Baptist minister Mike Huckabee finished first in the opening round to choose a Republican candidate for the White House, scientists warned Americans against electing a leader who doubts evolution.

Insert Chicken Little hysteria here.

"The logic that convinces us that evolution is a fact is the same logic we use to say smoking is hazardous to your health or we have serious energy policy issues because of global warming," University of Michigan professor Gilbert Omenn told reporters at the launch of a book on evolution by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS).

The problem with your "logic" is that it would turn a contortionist into a pretzel. Complete with Sesame seeds. It's amusing how "academics" promote atheist/agnostic or Leftist dogmas as fact, and anyone who presents the slightest scepticism about their gospel must be so rude of intellect that he makes australopithecus look sophisticated.

"I would worry that a president who didn't believe in the evolution arguments wouldn't believe in those other arguments either. This is a way of leading our country to ruin," added Omenn, who was part of a panel of experts at the launch of "Science, Evolution and Creationism."

Translation: "I'm terrified that someone who embraces scripture at face-value or rejects left-wing principles might become president."

A poll conducted last year showed that two-thirds of Americans believe in creationism, or the theory that God created humans at a single point in time, while 53 percent believe that humans developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life -- the theory of evolution.

So if two-thirds of Americans believe in creationism, what possibly could be more ridiculous than electing a leader who shares their belief? That whole "representative" aspect of our political system has your stomach in knots, doesn't it, Herr Omenn?

By the way, notice this "objective news reporting" from the linked article:

The evolution versus creationism debate has crept into school classrooms and politics, where it is mainly conservative Republicans who espouse the non-scientific belief.

Yep. No bias there. The implication is that evolution is scientific, while creationism isn't. The reality is that neither are scientific, in the sense that they are subject to testing or observation.