This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← Who Was More Important: Lincoln or Darwin?

Who Was More Important: Lincoln or Darwin? - Comments

squinky's Avatar Comment 1 by squinky

This is a stupid juxtaposition. Why, because they share a birthday? What a great hook for an article (sarcasm).

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 06:32:00 UTC | #191558

hungarianelephant's Avatar Comment 2 by hungarianelephant

Because slavery could never have been abolished without Lincoln.

*cough cough* Somersett's Case *cough*

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 06:45:00 UTC | #191563

Stevie B's Avatar Comment 3 by Stevie B

Unfortunately, as with the case of a lot of American articles, the gist seems to be - American hero = world wide importance, everyone else = not so important

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 06:53:00 UTC | #191574

Border Collie's Avatar Comment 4 by Border Collie

The fewer pirates/more global warming guys will love this one ...
To me, this article verges on the tabloid. But, then it seems to be the purpose of American media to attempt to associate things that have little or no relation whatsoever except some artificial thing like a birthday. Maybe there's just nothing to write about any longer.

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 07:16:00 UTC | #191596

HourglassMemory's Avatar Comment 5 by HourglassMemory

Does one really have to choose?
Isn't this a sort of false dichotomy?

They're important people... I don't think there's a need to generate a conclict bewteen the two.
Unless you want your mind entertained to the point of writing a 3.655 word paper and send it to a magazine...

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 08:07:00 UTC | #191617

brainsys's Avatar Comment 6 by brainsys

Which is the more important: Newsweek or Nature?
They are (gosh) coincidently both printed on paper and have websites.

In defence of Newsweek - it makes better bog roll.

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 08:37:00 UTC | #191646

BlueButterfly's Avatar Comment 7 by BlueButterfly

yes, silly comparison. I would've chosen Darwin though, influencing the entire world, not just an amnesia-suffering country. Though heralded, Lincoln had his land-grabbing 'manifest destiny' side too, hanging many innocent Dakota Indians the day after signing the emancipation proclamation in order to steal their lands in MN. What Indians did Darwin kill, and what land did Darwin steal?

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 08:38:00 UTC | #191649

notsobad's Avatar Comment 8 by notsobad

WTF is the point of this comparison?

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 08:46:00 UTC | #191659

Elles's Avatar Comment 9 by Elles

"As soon as you do start comparing this odd couple, you discover there is more to this birthday coincidence than the same astrological chart (as Aquarians, they should both be stubborn, visionary, tolerant, free-spirited, rebellious, genial but remote and detachedâ€"hmmm, so far so good)."

Wow! This is so accurate about me too! Except... I'm not an Aquarian.

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 09:01:00 UTC | #191671

mordacious1's Avatar Comment 10 by mordacious1

Some writer got an assignment to write something about Darwin, because he's "hot" right now, and this is the best he could do.

edit: Malcolm Jones joined Newsweek as the Art Editor in 1989. This is their cover story, btw. He might have given himself the assignment, which makes it worse.

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 09:08:00 UTC | #191678

Sciros's Avatar Comment 11 by Sciros

Who would win in a fight, Lincoln&Spiderman, or Darwin&Batman?

Now THAT would be a proper Newsweek story. Oh and Batman would win.

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 09:29:00 UTC | #191685

WilliamP's Avatar Comment 12 by WilliamP

The title of this article makes it sound like it was written by a fourth grader. It sounds like something that Ralph Wiggum on the Simpsons would write for an essay contest. I'm not even going to bother to read it. I'm sure Lincoln wins anyway, unless Newsweek wants to face the wrath of Fox News.

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 09:48:00 UTC | #191696

mikecbraun's Avatar Comment 13 by mikecbraun

Lincoln, coz he done kickt the Confed'racy's ass! Yeeeeeee-haw! Ahem, sorry. I don't see the point of the comparison either. One, a great statesman. The other, a great scientist and philosopher. It's like comparing apples and nipples. And Sciros, Benjamin Franklin & Ghost Rider would whip both of those teams you came up with. Lightning, fire, and chains my friend!

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:14:00 UTC | #191715

Sciros's Avatar Comment 14 by Sciros

Benjamin Franklin and Ghost Rider??? Seriously? Man, looks like someone's been watching National Treasure a bit too frequently!

Batman can own pretty much every superhero with the exception of the top-tier powerhouses like Superman and Darkseid. And even then some of the more Bats-friendly writers haven't quite conceded that :-) (I used to be a huge comics fan...)

For realz this article is silly and I agree with everyone that the comparison makes little sense from basically every perspective.

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:17:00 UTC | #191716

mikecbraun's Avatar Comment 15 by mikecbraun

I resent that. I have seen neither "Ghost Rider" nor "National Treasure." Here's a secret: I hate Nicolas Cage. Like you, I used to be a huge comics fan, and Ghost Rider was my favorite. Benjamin Franklin was a mind exercise--first guy I could come up with... Anyway, we're so far off-topic, it's almost as zany as the gist of this article.

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:20:00 UTC | #191718

mikecbraun's Avatar Comment 16 by mikecbraun

Ben Franklin was a kick-ass scientist and inventor, along the lines of Batman. Just think if Batman and Franklin teamed up.

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:21:00 UTC | #191720

Apathy personified's Avatar Comment 17 by Apathy personified

Wow, pointless comparisons -
'Who'd win in a chess game between Michael Jackson and King Arthur?'

Answer: Chuck Norris

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:32:00 UTC | #191725

Sciros's Avatar Comment 18 by Sciros

Chuck-mate!

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:37:00 UTC | #191728

AoClay's Avatar Comment 19 by AoClay

Jefferson and Darwin both seemed to share my headache problem (mine might be more intense than theirs), and I'm quite the scribbler as well.

As far as the question of who had the bigger impact, it's no contest. Darwin influenced the whole world and seemed ahead of his time with more than just his intelligence while Lincoln had the occasional immoral sign o' the time over his head. I like Lincoln a lot but Darwin might have the best idea ever and Lincoln might not be the best president. Darwin's beard>Lincoln's.

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:44:00 UTC | #191730

mikecbraun's Avatar Comment 20 by mikecbraun

Yes, Darwin's beard was much better because the lack of moustache just made Lincoln's beard seem incomplete and wanting something. A little too Amish to be considered Most Important Gentleman of All-Time in the Universe in the World Ever. Although both had a proclivity for hats, Darwin always seemed to pick more tasteful items from the haberdashery. Lincoln's stovepipe hat only amplified his gangling awkwardness (the Marfan's syndrome did not help, either). Style points to Mr. Darwin.

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:51:00 UTC | #191734

Elles's Avatar Comment 21 by Elles

Chuck Norris is a creationist. Darwin would fry him like an egg on a newly formed white dwarf.

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 11:21:00 UTC | #191757

steve8282's Avatar Comment 22 by steve8282

Hellboy/Sam Harris


Would definitely kick ass in the superhero scientist wars.

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 11:30:00 UTC | #191759

Apathy personified's Avatar Comment 23 by Apathy personified

In response to comment 201924 by Elles.

In that case King Arthur beats Michael Jackson in the chess game.

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 11:31:00 UTC | #191760

mikecbraun's Avatar Comment 24 by mikecbraun

But Chuck Norris would kick all of the pieces and declare victory! Then he would force MJ and King Arthur to submit to Christianity and admit how much ass the U.S.A. kicks! Then it would end with sappy music and a slow-mo shot of Chuck, probably with a headband, in a steamy jungle.

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 11:58:00 UTC | #191772

Stafford Gordon's Avatar Comment 25 by Stafford Gordon

"All comparisons are odious" Shakespeare.

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 11:59:00 UTC | #191774

squinky's Avatar Comment 26 by squinky

We're on to something. Atheists as superheroes. Here is my list of X-men (A-men (atheist men?!)):

Sam Harris: Wolverine
Richard Dawkins: Professor Xavier
Dan Dennett: Beast
Christopher Hitchens: Cyclops

Bad Guys:
Pat Robertson: Magneto
Dinesh D'Souza: Green Goblin
Rabbi Shmuley Boteach: Schmucko
Ted Haggard: Tailgunner
Jerry Falwell: Earthquake
Joel Osteen: Skidmark

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 12:25:00 UTC | #191793

Sciros's Avatar Comment 27 by Sciros

See, the whole thing about Xavier and Magneto is they have a common enemy but Xavier wants to win with love and Magneto with hate. Sorta. So... Magneto shouldn't be one of the religious guys; rather a very "militant" atheist.

Also Sam Harris is too young to be Wolverine. ^_^

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 12:28:00 UTC | #191796

ggab7768's Avatar Comment 28 by ggab7768

Sciros I'm ashamed of you!!
You used to read comics and you didn't see Batman kick Supermans steely ass in the Dark Knight?
CLASSIC!!
It seems that some of you also don't realise that Lincoln was an avid wrestler. I've heard through the grape vine that it was only one of his rather homoerotic hobbies. Okay, that last part was a joke but he was very much into wrestling.

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 12:42:00 UTC | #191801

Sciros's Avatar Comment 29 by Sciros

ggab my friend, do not doubt my Batmania!

First off, I despise Frank Miller and submit that he has not matured past age 13, and think that basically everything he's written save about 30% of Batman: Year One is total trash. Plus TDK is not considered Batman canon.

If you want to point to a more canonical showdown of Bats and Supes then I think our best bet is HUSH, where an Ivy-controlled Superman tries to take out Batman, and Bats survives long enough to actually break Supes from the spell. Kryptonite ring, blinding flash bombs, tricking Superman into punching some huge powerline in downtown Metropolis, etc. ^_^

Batman was also indirectly shown to be able to take out Superman in JLA: Tower of Babel, where Ra's had Talia break into the Batcave and steal all of Batman's plans/means to incapacitate the entire JLA should they ever "go rogue." The plans all worked, more-or-less. In the end of course Ra's was outdone and Batman was kicked off the JLA for being so distrustful of them or whatever. Of course he was later let back in in JLA: United We Stand, once the JLA realized that without Batman they're rubbish.

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 12:48:00 UTC | #191803

ggab7768's Avatar Comment 30 by ggab7768

HA HA HA FANTASTC!!!
Sciros, I bow before you.
I'm actually a comic illustrator and I didn't know most of that!! I have kinda been out of the feild for about 15 years though.
Since I am a little old school I would certainly have a heated debate with you about Frank Miller, but I would defend his art more than his writing. I can't say that I would disagree with you on that one.
Really well done sir.lol

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 12:56:00 UTC | #191806