Very discouraging. I didn’t know that Ron Paul was on the anti-science dark side:
.
I think that this part of his comment is especially noxious and stupid:
Well, first I thought it was a very inappropriate question, you know, for the presidency to be decided on a scientific matter.
I’m sorry, but epistemology matters. As Zack Beauchamp at the Daily Dish puts it in another context:
[F]lat-out denying the theory of evolution or anthropogenic climate change…involves denying the fundamental epistemological values that undergird the scientific project.
Prometheus Unbound 
Yes, Ron Paul is merely the best possible kind of Christian wacko. I mean he wouldn’t want to impose his creationist stance on others, but it is worrisome. It also goes in line with his pro-life stance, which bothers me as well. I’d still vote for him because of all the things we do agree on (I think ending the wars is a much bigger issue), but Gary Johnson would be my pie in the sky President.
Gary Johnson? Who is he? I’ve never heard of him.
I’ll google him later this afternoon.
—Santi
Ron Paul doesn’t “reject” the Theory of Evolution. He thinks that it is a pointless wedge issue for a debate about POLITICS. The only reason this comes up is because of government run schools. His actual position is more nuanced, basically he doesn’t ‘believe’ that science has proven abiogenesis.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKAaps6mFYk From Reddit Interview, where they asked him TWICE about this.
Good article. I think the 2012 election is going to make or break us. Personally I’m a fan of Ron Paul and I think his policies would take care of this right here. I’ve done quite a bit of thinking about it and even some blogging here http://crookedamerica.com