I find it rather humorous that the liberal, yet usually interesting Boing Boing is not below the sort of unintelligent analysis that they oftentimes like to criticize others in society for with one of today's stories titled: Against Ben Stein's wishes, lizards rapidly evolve after introduction to island. Linking a story from National Geographic about a merely interesting development of a certain lizard species to a recent movie (Ben Stein's Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed) which is about a completely different subject is laughable if it weren't such a serious problem in our society today.

Debating the origins of the universe is far different from the debate about how life has either evolved or been created. (or both, depending on one's worldview) The blogger from Boing Boing exposes his apparent prejudice against 1) the debate about the origins of all things, and 2) the debate about the origins of life by poking fun at a movie which he seems to disagree with by claiming that this article at National Geographic somehow automatically proves evolution and all origin of universe questions as unquestionable because it all "evolved."

If he wishes to claim that this article offers conclusive evidence for evolution of life, fine. He may not be correct, but the argument is valid. But if he wants to argue that this one lizard species on one island off of the coast of Croatia which appears to have had a distinct evolutionary advantage once they were ARTIFICIALLY introduced to the indigenous life of the island can somehow disprove the existence of God, and intelligent designer of life and the universe is a ludicrous stretch of logic. It's ludicrous because it argues that one effect (a lizard species evolution over a few decades) explains all prior causation of unrelated topics. (the mere existence of life, the earth, and the universe)

This type of behavior by Boing Boing writer Mark Frauenfelder is sadly endemic of our broader American and Western society where freedom of thought, speech, and beliefs are lauded... as long as you don't make someone else uncomfortable. It's not merely that we should have the freedom to think and speak as we wish without causing physical injury to someone else; no, we need to make sure no one else's feelings (whatever they think) gets hurt by those things that we think, say, or believe. Relativism (the "don't tell me I'm wrong!" - even if you are - philosophy) rears its ugly head once again.