Since when are Methodists godless?
/

Hooray! Another ID thread!

re: #3 Sharmuta

Hooray! Another ID thread!

Who is going to red herring first?

Ya know... life on earth will be so good when we get the basics worked out.

re: #3 Sharmuta

Hooray! Another ID thread!

::gets out the popcorn::

cre⋅a⋅tion⋅ism

–noun
1. the doctrine that matter and all things were created, substantially as they now exist, by an omnipotent Creator, and not gradually evolved or developed.
2. (sometimes initial capital letter) the doctrine that the true story of the creation of the universe is as it is recounted in the Bible, esp. in the first chapter of Genesis

Hope that helps with any confusion.

re: #1 Killgore Trout

Since when are Methodists godless?
/

Obviously, this once-proud institution has been subverted by atheists.

re: #8 Charles

Obviously, this once-proud institution has been subverted by atheists.

It IS a University

By the way, the last thread related to creationism was a week ago.

For the record.

Interestingly enough, I recently watched "Inherit the Wind" with my parents not too long ago (when I took a months' vacation and traveled back home to Cali). It was a good movie, showcasing how the creationists can be nuts and the atheists can be TOO condescending and glib.

(The movie was the infamous Scopes trial)

Why do people want less science in the classroom?
We need more science taught..

re: #12 HoosierHoops

Why do people want less science in the classroom?
We need more science taught..

Speaking as a practicing Marine Engineer, I agree.

Good, another thread about Texas.

It's a native Texan thing

re: #11 Hengineer

Interestingly enough, I recently watched "Inherit the Wind" with my parents not too long ago (when I took a months' vacation and traveled back home to Cali). It was a good movie, showcasing how the creationists can be nuts and the atheists can be TOO condescending and glib.

(The movie was the infamous Scopes trial)

Ah, who was a glib atheist?

re: #16 Walter L. Newton

Ah, who was a glib atheist?

Jack Lemmon? I liked him better in "Days of Wine and Roses"

re: #17 Thanos

Jack Lemmon? I liked him better in "Days of Wine and Roses"

Or was it Spencer Tracy?

Gene Kelly playing E. K. Hornbeck

re: #19 Hengineer

Gene Kelly playing E. K. Hornbeck

The journalist from the "big city"

With all that fancy book larnin'.

Now why was I thinking Jack Lemmon? Was he in it at all? I only saw it once, ages ago.

I never knew there was a Moonie connection to the Disco Institute.

Maybe 'glib atheist' is another code term.
[Link: www.google.com...]

re: #23 Killgore Trout

I never knew there was a Moonie connection to the Disco Institute.

... and Bill Gates.

Well, I don't have time for the video where I am. she said it was about an hour. In a nutshell, any legislation of religiously based ideas promotes more government intrusion, and increases it's capability to be totalitarian. This does not mean that we believe any differently about what is right and wrong. It means that we persuade, we teach, we influence - we do not force. If we force - the government gets power that we do not want it to have. It is simply not the best way to implement everything we believe in - to give yet more power to an already too powerful central government. It will be your undoing.
Now, why don't you stealth down-dingers come out and speak your mind, instead of just down-dinging. Teach me something. I have a record of listening and changing.

Baylor's really got a problem.

re: #17 Thanos

Jack Lemmon? I liked him better in "Days of Wine and Roses"

Well, I don't think that his character would properly represent a "glib atheist," since the character was modeled after H.L. Mencken (who actually covered the trial).

As a reporter, Mencken was glib no matter what he was covering or writing about.

I don't think the play (or movie) really shows "glib atheists," just a single character who was know for his cynic ramblings.

Jack Lemmon was in the 1990 TV remake .

(1999)

I'm starting the vid now, I think it's a good idea since you have to do a buttload of reading obscure links and sites to understand the full background. Most normal people aren't going to go to that trouble.

/arrgggg... did I just call myself abby normal?

re: #29 Abu Al-Poopypants

Jack Lemmon was in the 1990 TV remake .

Ok, thanks I knew I got that from somewhere, maybe I never saw the original. Think I'll have to look it up.

Lots of Wackos in Waco

re: #27 Sharmuta

Baylor's really got a problem.

Baylor backed Johnston off, but I think they took him back after a new board came in

Thanks for posting Charles. Just watching this now.

I have posted before that I was an IBM Field Engineer - one of my accounts was Oral Roberts in Tulsa OK back in the early 60s.

Our job was to keep their data processing equipment running. We did not judge them.

Very broad base support. Oral was a marketing master.

Women who worked for the HQ and University wore no make-up and dressed conservatively. I have no problem with that.

Very nice people but their belief systems were off the chart.

Oral was the biggest phony on the planet.

re: #28 Walter L. Newton

Well, I don't think that his character would properly represent a "glib atheist," since the character was modeled after H.L. Mencken (who actually covered the trial).

As a reporter, Mencken was glib no matter what he was covering or writing about.

I don't think the play (or movie) really shows "glib atheists," just a single character who was know for his cynic ramblings.

True, but at the end Spencer Tracy's character makes a comment that he dislikes people like Gene Kelly's character because of his condescending overtones and overly cynical view.

I rarely link approvingly to DKos diaries but......
Creationism: The Latest In Military Suicide Prevention

Who was the DI shill that flipped?

re: #26 legalpad

Gave you a down-ding, since you asked for one. No charge! Feel free to give me one back.

re: #36 Bobibutu

His name was "Oral." Should have been a clue!

I like her Trojan metaphor and how geek tops greek.

re: #36 Bobibutu

I have posted before that I was an IBM Field Engineer - one of my accounts was Oral Roberts in Tulsa OK back in the early 60s.

Our job was to keep their data processing equipment running. We did not judge them.

Very broad base support. Oral was a marketing master.

Women who worked for the HQ and University wore no make-up and dressed conservatively. I have no problem with that.

Very nice people but their belief systems were off the chart.

Oral was the biggest phony on the planet.

Phony doesn't begin to do justice to him. This was a bad and greedy dude.
I have no quarrel with religious folks, but this guy was the worst kind of fraud. I know.

re: #41 garycooper

His name was "Oral." Should have been a clue!

The guy could have given zero a run on who had the biggest ego.

re: #43 The Shadow Do

Phony doesn't begin to do justice to him. This was a bad and greedy dude.
I have no quarrel with religious folks, but this guy was the worst kind of fraud. I know.

You should have seen it from the inside!

Btw Charles, I apologize for my overly sarcastic and flippant comment you deleted in #2

re: #38 Killgore Trout

I would bet the house, and what's left of my 401k, that there are far more suicides amongst the young-moonbat contingent than there are in the military. Based on nothing but my slim knowledge of human nature, after 49 years of observation and personal experience.

re: #47 garycooper

I would bet the house, and what's left of my 401k, that there are far more suicides amongst the young-moonbat contingent than there are in the military. Based on nothing but my slim knowledge of human nature, after 49 years of observation and personal experience.

OT, I wouldn't bet on what's left of your 401K considering what the House and Senate Democrats want to do....

re: #43 The Shadow Do

Phony doesn't begin to do justice to him. This was a bad and greedy dude.
I have no quarrel with religious folks, but this guy was the worst kind of fraud. I know.

Yep, Oral Roberts was indeed a paragon of fraud-dom.

But, but...there's so much competition for that title! Robert Tilton, Jimmy Swaggart, Benny Hinn, Jim Bakker...the list goes on and on...

I like her breakdown of the code speak too. These are members of the right who learned well the ways of the left and are using very leftist tactics to push their agenda and get their way.

The shadows of evening lengthen across the canyons of the San Gabriel Mountains of California. The Towercam, Pacific time zone.

"...paradise is all around us and we do not understand."

— Thomas Merton.

These beautiful mountains stand the same as before, no matter what.

_{O sowers of discord in the name of religion, Dante has a place for you.}

Happy Sunday dinner, Lizards.

re: #44 Bobibutu

Pardon my ignorance...who is "zero?" Is it "The Big O?"

re: #52 garycooper

Pardon my ignorance...who is "zero?" Is it "The Big O?"

BHO. aka 0

been there, done that.

evolutionists will do anything BUT put forth any evidence to prove that life evolved itself. the concept of "settled science" is very disturbing; its the same basis for the climate change crowd. if all that is needed is a consensus, then why bother with debate? it is a good rule to always check and see what proponents of a particular view stand to lose. Do they have their jobs/funding/reputation on the line, and if so, can they truly be objective?

does it bother anyone that comtemporary evolutionists (including the ones that tend to post here) no longer claim that life evolved itself? Why don't they come out and say that they believe that life came from non-life? Who is hiding from the truth now? Even Stephen Hawking is now speculating that "panspermia" is a possibility.

re: #47 garycooper

That's certainly possible. I do find it repulsive that people are exploiting soldiers who are under stress to believe that Darwin was evil. It's really pretty shameless.

bbiab

re: #45 Bobibutu

You should have seen it from the inside!

I have been past his prayer tower money machine many times. Each time I resisted the impulse to go there and make a scene.

re: #51 Ojoe

Beautiful!

It's snowing hard here, in Detroit. Almost as pretty. ;)

You can skip the first 3:15

re: #53 Bobibutu

I like it. Will use it in everyday conversation. :)

Isn't it a big fricking conflict of interest for the authors to review their own work for the board of education?

re: #57 buzzsawmonkey

EK Hornbeck (i.e., HL Mencken), who gets told off by Henry Drummond (i.e., Clarence Darrow) at the end of the play/film.

I think everyone is missing my point. The comment said "atheists," as in plural, as in more than one. And I was pointing out that Menchen was the only glib one in the story, not like it was a hive of atheists or something.

And my other point was that Menchen was glib on almost anything he wrote about, even if he agreed with a subject. It was his nature and his style to upset the apple cart.

I am well familiar with the play, and I can tell you from all the dramaturgue I have seen on the show, Menchen was more representative of Menchen, the satirical reporter, than an over all representative of atheists.

Adnan Oktar likes Sarah Palin......

In the recent U.S. election, Sarah Palin was identified by some in the international press as a creationist. What is your position on the political situation in the U.S.?

I had seen statements by Sarah Palin in the press that creation should also be taught in schools. In my view, this is an excellent position. She says that students should learn about creation too and make up their own minds what is right and what is wrong. That is the logical, correct and democratic thing to do.

Could use editing, that video. But it has good parts. so far, (8:00).

re: #62 buzzsawmonkey

You mean, like Adam being created from the dust of the earth?

I want my other rib back

That video is 164MBytes! Very Good.

BBL

Getting the "spinning wheel" half way through the video.

re: #55 Killgore Trout

It's repulsive, and also sadly ironic. The battlefield being kind of a foreshortened microcosm of Darwinian principles of survival.

Whenever I try to read DKos diaries, I can only stand it for about five minutes, tops. Which is a couple of minutes longer than I watch clips from "The View." Which, in turn, is two minutes and thirty seconds longer than I can watch Olbermann.

re: #65 Killgore Trout

Adnan Oktar likes Sarah Palin......

I think he likes putting words in her mouth even more.

A hair cut, to take our minds off such issues as creationism vs evolution.

re: #74 A Kiwi Infidel

A hair cut, to take our minds off such issues as creationism vs evolution.

Red Herring!

May we, the Lizards, respectfully agree to disagree?

re: #63 Thanos

Isn't it a big fricking conflict of interest for the authors to review their own work for the board of education?

One would think so.

re: #67 HoosierHoops

exactly - say anything you want as long as you don't have to come out with your true feelings: that deep down inside you believe that rocks just wanted to come alive.

re: #74 A Kiwi Infidel

The reporter was nominated for "The Darwin Award." ;)

[Link: www.darwinawards.com...]

re: #75 Hengineer

Red Herring!

I know, I just couldnt wait for an open thread. Sorry.

re: #76 RubyTuesday
Well, I meant ME...and whomever else disagrees. I realize not everyone is on the same page here. Duh.

re: #10 Charles

By the way, the last thread related to creationism was a week ago.

For the record.

In creationist time, that's 5 minutes ago.

re: #40 garycooper

Gave you a down-ding, since you asked for one. No charge! Feel free to give me one back.

That's not what I asked for, and you know it. Why the dishonest statement?

What I asked for is:

come out and speak your mind, instead of just down-dinging. Teach me something

Are you able to do this, or is clicking a mouse the extent of your capabilities?

I know it's early yet, but given that this is a science thread I thought I'd throw in a technical observation I found interesting the last few days.

There was one on of those plugs for a CD on the LGF left sidebar the other day and I couldn't really make out the picture which looked like something on Mars, so I clicked on it. Turns out it was a Pinkerton CD for "Weezer", and as much I enjoy music, I know zilch about what's what, and I have never ordered a music CD online.

So I go to Amazon to look for a book, and they have all these "suggestions" based on what one has ordered before and so on; and surprise! the first item suggested is the same CD.

Spooky is what I think.

Now back to reality.....

re: #72 The Shadow Do

He also thinks Darwinism is responsible for terrorism.

And now, the RE-Discovery Institute: [Link: www.re-discovery.org...]

/Gravity is "just a theory"

re: #54 stretch

been there, done that.

evolutionists will do anything BUT put forth any evidence to prove that life evolved itself.

Charles has posted an article on Origins Of Life (OOL) theory. I note that it is different from evolutionary theory, which has to do with what happens when populations that reproduce with high but not perfect copying fidelity are confronted with the selection pressurs of surrounding environments.

the concept of "settled science" is very disturbing; its the same basis for the climate change crowd.

The idea that the majority of global warming (which apparently hasn't even been occurring for the last decade) was caused by human actions rather than by natural solar system cycles is bad science, which is why, just a few decades after it appeared, credible researchers are now running from it in droves, but it is still science, which is why the counterfactual evidence that caused these researchers to run from it in droves was able to be produced. Creationism, on the other hand, is not science at all, but religious dogma, which cannot be empirically tested at all.

if all that is needed is a consensus, then why bother with debate?

There IS no credible debate, since all the empirical evidence supports evolution. There are only groundlessly whingeing creationists, trying to trump up a 'controversy' that they can then demand to teach.

it is a good rule to always check and see what proponents of a particular view stand to lose. Do they have their jobs/funding/reputation on the line, and if so, can they truly be objective?

Any scientist who could disprove evolutionary theory would receive a Nobel Prize, fat grants and an Ivy League tenured professorship for life, and an enduring place in science history. The Disco Institute, otoh, makes its money off donations from rich creationists, selling creationist propaganda authored by themselves and printed in their pet publishing houses, and giving 'expert' testimony when creationism-in-public-education laws they get passed are challenged in court. They pay none of the fines or court costs when the laws are invariably overturned.

does it bother anyone that comtemporary evolutionists (including the ones that tend to post here) no longer claim that life evolved itself? Why don't they come out and say that they believe that life came from non-life?

See above re: OOL theory, remembering that it is a separate field from evolutionary theory per se.

Who is hiding from the truth now? Even Stephen Hawking is now speculating that "panspermia" is a possibility.

Panspermia merely kicks the evolutionary can down the road without, however kicking it off of it. Any life that fell on earth in meteorites would still have had to evolve elsewhere, just like any aliens that might have brought it.

re: #54 stretch

been there, done that.

evolutionists will do anything BUT put forth any evidence to prove that life evolved itself. the concept of "settled science" is very disturbing; its the same basis for the climate change crowd. if all that is needed is a consensus, then why bother with debate? it is a good rule to always check and see what proponents of a particular view stand to lose. Do they have their jobs/funding/reputation on the line, and if so, can they truly be objective?

does it bother anyone that comtemporary evolutionists (including the ones that tend to post here) no longer claim that life evolved itself? Why don't they come out and say that they believe that life came from non-life? Who is hiding from the truth now? Even Stephen Hawking is now speculating that "panspermia" is a possibility.

Are you kidding me? Do you really think trying to make the old evolution = biogenisis argument again, here on these very boards, where that deception has been destroyed countless times right in front of the eyes of everyone here, is going to fly?

What's wrong with you?

BiJ.

re: #86 gmsc

Wow. Some people have so much more time on their hands.

re: #76 RubyTuesday

May we, the Lizards, respectfully agree to disagree?

How about some respectful discussion, in the meantime? I know it's hard to keep the emotions in check on a subject like this, but you should have seen my family tip-toeing around politics, religion, nutrition, alcohol (several AA chapters represented, from different states...and several of us non-reconstructed types, too), etc. We parted on great terms, with no major tiffs. I've seen respectful, calm discussions of difficult subjects online in the past, including some at this forum. We Can Do It!

re: #27 Sharmuta

Baylor's really got a problem.

Yeah, it's called being Baylor.

re: #88 Brit in Japan

Are you kidding me? Do you really think trying to make the old evolution = biogenisis argument again, here on these very boards, where that deception has been destroyed countless times right in front of the eyes of everyone here, is going to fly?

What's wrong with you?

BiJ.

Some don't learn.

re: #78 stretch

exactly - say anything you want as long as you don't have to come out with your true feelings: that deep down inside you believe that rocks just wanted to come alive.

Rocks couldn't want anything...they're ROCKS, for Chrissake!

Evolution does not require conscious volition.

re: #86 gmsc

And now, the RE-Discovery Institute: [Link: www.re-discovery.org...]

/Gravity is "just a theory"

_________________________
Look at their list of "Elements"
Chemistry is a theory?
These people are IGNORANT!

re: #83 legalpad

It's "a joke," legalpad. Hey, they can't all be gems. Sor-ree!

I dinged you back up one.

re: #85 Killgore Trout

He also thinks Darwinism is responsible for terrorism.

I had no idea Darwin was the root of all evil. Live and learn I guess! / LOL

re: #89 Naso Tang

Wow. Some people have so much more time on their hands.

re: #95 right_on_target

_________________________
Look at their list of "Elements"
Chemistry is a theory?
These people are IGNORANT!

Just to be clear: The reDiscovery Institute web site is a PARODY. They are making fun of creationists and IDiots.

Is the reDiscovery Institute ORG site a joke? Are they serious?

re: #97 The Shadow Do

I had no idea Darwin was the root of all evil. Live and learn I guess! / LOL

It's the main premise of Ben Stein's Expelled pseudo-documentary.

re: #98 gmsc

Just to be clear: The reDiscovery Institute web site is a PARODY. They are making fun of creationists and IDiots.

_________________________________
I should has refreshed before posting ........whew!

re: #98 gmsc

For the record. I do understand that, and I think it's a good use of the time, but I still wonder where they find it.

re: #100 Charles

It's the main premise of Ben Stein's Expelled pseudo-documentary.

Clear Darwinism for dry Darwinism.

re: #100 Charles

It still baffles me. Ben Stein is really smart. He really should know better.

re: #100 Charles

It's the main premise of Ben Stein's Expelled pseudo-documentary.

What I find incredible is seeing Ben Stein as a major talking head on US economic and political issues on MSM TV.

re: #96 garycooper

It's "a joke," legalpad. Hey, they can't all be gems. Sor-ree!

I dinged you back up one.

lol - ok - I laughed this time - really!

re: #91 garycooper

Family is one thing. It is a different animal to confronting strangers whose opinion of you, good or bad, is not of any particular importance to you. That is compounded on the Internet because you have that big, fat TCP/IP shield that prevents you from, like, cutting out a piece of small intestine and strangling them to death with it.

Ad hominem is only to be expected.

re: #105 Naso Tang

What I find incredible is seeing Ben Stein as a major talking head on US economic and political issues on MSM TV.

I was a fan of what he had to say...before...all that...sillyness.

re: #88 Brit in Japan

Are you kidding me? Do you really think trying to make the old evolution = biogenisis argument again, here on these very boards, where that deception has been destroyed countless times right in front of the eyes of everyone here, is going to fly?

What's wrong with you?

BiJ.

really? that's the best that can be done now? After decades and decades of evolutionists claiming that life started in soup, with a little bit of lightning added in ('proven' by synthesizied amino acids), the claims now are that evolution never really intended to speak to origins after all? It was all a mistake then, all those books and dissertations; is that what you want us to believe?

re: #100 Charles

It's the main premise of Ben Stein's Expelled pseudo-documentary.

great movie - I really enjoyed it. Very enlightening.

re: #97 The Shadow Do

I had no idea Darwin was the root of all evil. Live and learn I guess! / LOL

James Burke has a great documentary, part of which includes an excellent discussion of Darwin's discoveries, and the attempts to turn those discoveries into a life philosophy. The full context of nature philosophy before Darwin's discoveries is also interesting.

It's episode 8 of his series, "The Day The Universe Changed". It's called "Fit To Rule", and is available on YouTube:

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5

re: #105 Naso Tang

I saw Ben refer to Ron Paul as "A brilliant guy" not too long ago. I think Ben's just gone insane.

Here is a shave and a haircut, F4.

LowFlight

re: #101 right_on_target

_________________________________
I should has refreshed before posting ........whew!

It probably wouldn't have helped - our posts were only 22 seconds apart!

re: #108 Wookieelips

I was a fan of what he had to say...before...all that...sillyness.

Silliness....? That's like calling the Discovery Institute Silly.

re: #116 Naso Tang

Silliness....? That's like calling the Discovery Institute Silly.

Hilarity?

re: #109 stretch

Explain hiccups and hernias.

re: #110 stretch

great movie - I really enjoyed it. Very enlightening.

Yep. Fantasy escapist fiction like the Ben Stein movie can often do that.

re: #110 stretch

You are aware the the information in the movie wasn't accurate, right? Some of it was outright lies.

re: #110 stretch

great movie - I really enjoyed it. Very enlightening.

Which parts did you enjoy and which parts did you not already know?

re: #110 stretch

great movie - I really enjoyed it. Very enlightening.

I should have mentioned- the enlightening part was evolutionists trying to run and hide from their history (kind of looks like some of the posts here - that evolution never really intended to speak to origns)

re: #109 stretch

really? that's the best that can be done now? After decades and decades of evolutionists claiming that life started in soup, with a little bit of lightning added in ('proven' by synthesizied amino acids), the claims now are that evolution never really intended to speak to origins after all? It was all a mistake then, all those books and dissertations; is that what you want us to believe?

While the scientists who did such work most probably embraced evolution (they WERE real scientists, after all), they were working in OOL, a different life science field. Now please list all of those "books and dissertations" to which you vaguely refer.

re: #118 Sharmuta

Is that the argumentam ad herniam?

re: #110 stretch

great movie - I really enjoyed it. Very enlightening.

It was an ignorance-confirming Michael Moore propaganda clone for willfully benighted people.

re: #58 The Shadow Do

I have been past his prayer tower money machine many times. Each time I resisted the impulse to go there and make a scene.

He had a "war room" with a huge map of the US on the wall. Every local radio station ID-ed on it and the radius of it's broadcast area marked out.

The amount of income from each area was calculated against the funds spent for the time purchased.

If it was profitable the effort continued. If not it was dropped and a new station selected.

The mail room (high security) would collect and count the money in. Much as little as $0.25.

The letters with their prayer requests would be highlighted and sent to keypunch - the punched cards then fed into 2 1401 computers with custom script keychains - ($10K for the keychains) which would generate a response letter.

Donations over $50 would be printed out on auto IBM Executive typewriters and signed with his name on auto signature generators.

Any donations over $250 - the letters would go to his desk for his personal signature.

He also had an IBM time-clock that controlled taped messages and prayers to be broadcasted internally.

We had to do some maintenance on the time-clock system one time and inadvertently triggered one of his prayers.

We shut it down as soon as we realized what had happened. Within minutes - the big man arrived - "Guys - if that happens again - fade me out - don't cut me off."

Another - a guy stole a mail sack with incoming mail. Oral refused to prosecute because he would have had to divulge the amount stolen.

Like I said - Oral was a marketing genius.

re: #124 jaunte

Look for my forthcoming book, Of Hiccups and Hernias by Dr. Sharmuta. ;p

re: #110 stretch

Bueller....Bueller.........Fry...........Fry.....

I'm watching the video right now. I very much appreciate that the speaker names the creationists and explains their associations. This is necessary in order to combat the ID crowd.

re: #122 stretch

I should have mentioned- the enlightening part was evolutionists trying to run and hide from their history (kind of looks like some of the posts here - that evolution never really intended to speak to origns)

I'm not sure if you are one of those God of The Gaps fans, or just don't realize you are talking of one thing while others are on another.

You are perfectly correct - that evolution does not speak of origins. Darwin alluded to that but did not claim to explain it, and that says nothing about the evidence for what transpired after.

What exactly is your point?

I've gotten almost halfway through Creationism's Trojan Horse. It's a little densely packed, but a lot of what it's packed with is quite amazing. Scary. They did an incredible research job on this.

re: #128 Sharmuta

Look for my forthcoming book, Of Hiccups and Hernias by Dr. Sharmuta. ;p

I liked your first book ' Profiles in Hernias'

re: #122 stretch

I should have mentioned- the enlightening part was evolutionists trying to run and hide from their history (kind of looks like some of the posts here - that evolution never really intended to speak to origns)

The origin of species to which they refer are a very small number of simple single cell populations, which mutated and evolutionarily diverged over time, under the influence of environmental selection, into a plethora of terrestrial species inhabiting practically every ecological niche.

re: #134 buzzsawmonkey

If you don't include hisnias along with hernias, I shall denounce your book for sexism.

Interesting that it's men who get hernias. In this aspect- women are much stronger than men.

This is rich. Mike Huckabee has Jackie Gingrich talking about plans to help improve science and math scores. Jackie's plan sounds decent.

But Huckabee is a hardcore young earth creationist who believes the earth is 6000 years old, and that human beings aren't related to "primates." (He pronounces it like "private" with an 'm'.) Irony drips from the screen.

re: #100 Charles

It's the main premise of Ben Stein's Expelled pseudo-documentary.

The argument is that terrorism is a natural development in the advancement of a select group's survival?

From RNA replication to gun toting amoeba to Mumbai murderers? I guess I'll have to see the movie after all and set aside my first impression of Ben Stein the Great (reactionary fool).

This insight seems an odd way to cast away all sorts of societal advancement ironically. If only life were simple.....If only life were simple I would be a Taliban? Or maybe a Christian instead? Confusing.

re: #91 garycooper
Sure. I should have said, "without being banned" at the end of the sentence.

re: #136 Sharmuta

My wife says that all the time. Must be true.

Comments telling me not to post on this topic will be deleted.

re: #138 Charles

This is rich. Mike Huckabee has Jackie Gingrich talking about plans to help improve science and math scores. Jackie's plan sounds decent.

But Huckabee is a hardcore young earth creationist who believes the earth is 6000 years old, and that human beings aren't related to "primates." (He pronounces it like "private" with an 'm'.) Irony drips from the screen.

Really?
how unfortunate.

re: #136 Sharmuta

Interesting that it's men who get hernias. In this aspect- women are much stronger than men.

Men get hernias, to balance out for women dealing with menstruation.

re: #137 nbenhaim

This isn't about the other issues with our education system. This is about science education. We don't correct the issues with our education system by weakening science with ID.

PMS makes women act for a week like men act all of the time...;~)

re: #144 gmsc

Men get hernias, to balance out for women dealing with menstruation.

That must be it.

re: #147 Salamantis

PMS makes women act for a week like men act all of the time...;~)

so they're smarter for a week?

/ ducks

re: #147 Salamantis

PMS makes women act for a week like men act all of the time...;~)

What? Rational and intelligent?

///ducking and running away fast

re: #149 Shug

re: #150 CynicalConservative

*WHACK*

The fact that creationists purposely use code words to further their deceitful agenda seems to suggest that they know that intelligent design is bollocks. No wonder Jihadists and creationists are on the same page.

re: #152 eclectic infidel

The fact that creationists purposely use code words to further their deceitful agenda seems to suggest that they know that intelligent design is bollocks. No wonder Jihadists and creationists are on the same page.

Surely you don't mean in every way?

re: #142 Charles

Comments telling me not to post on this topic will be deleted.

It looks like someone got the stick, too. I'm sorry.

re: #151 Sharmuta

re: #150 CynicalConservative

*WHACK*

Thank you sir (maam), may I have another?

//

{Sharmuta} (if that's not presumptuous )

re: #137 nbenhaim

Belief systems are primary as to who we are and what we do.

Charles has picked this one. We can argue over which is paramount - but it's his blog.

re: #146 Sharmuta

But don't you agree that we've already ruined science education with letting radical environmentalists seep through and take full control of it? It's already happened apparently many people just want to ignore that one.

re: #153 goddessoftheclassroom

Surely you don't mean in every way?

Of course not.

re: #158 eclectic infidel

Of course not.

Thank you for the clarification.

re: #139 The Shadow Do

The argument is that terrorism is a natural development in the advancement of a select group's survival?

No, Ben Stein's argument is an age-old creationist one -- that the Darwinian theory of evolution has directly led to materialism, atheism, pornography, juvenile delinquency, perversion, immorality, sodomy, and cell phones, because it replaces faith-based morality with a "survival of the fittest" jungle mentality.

In a reeking nutshell.

re: #157 nbenhaim

How would weakening science education help AGW get corrected? How will pseudo-science help correct bad science?

re: #95 right_on_target

_________________________
Look at their list of "Elements"
Chemistry is a theory?
These people are IGNORANT!

Well, seems like kind of a jokey, satirical faux ID-Creation Science web site. They're not serious?

I never saw Ben Stein's movie.

Tell me, does it ever mention Ernst Haeckel, Vladimir Ulyanov or William Sumner? If you're talking about social Darwinism and you don't mention those 3, you're missing about 99% of the complete picture.

Barbara Forrest mentions Robert Pennock's "Tower of Babel." He made some interesting points in the book about political issues within the "big tent" of the Intelligent Design movement. Clearly defining their goals is a danger to them because there are so many possible doctrinal disputes lurking beneath the surface. Don Mcleroy glossed over those potential future disagreements in his speech, too.

re: #157 nbenhaim

But don't you agree that we've already ruined science education with letting radical environmentalists seep through and take full control of it? It's already happened apparently many people just want to ignore that one.

As I've said before, you don't treat arsenic poisoning by dosing the pationt with strychnine.

re: #162 Joan

Well, seems like kind of a jokey, satirical faux ID-Creation Science web site. They're not serious?

As I mentioned in an earlier post, it is a parody.

re: #127 Bobibutu

He had a "war room" with a huge map of the US on the wall. Every local radio station ID-ed on it and the radius of it's broadcast area marked out.

The amount of income from each area was calculated against the funds spent for the time purchased.

If it was profitable the effort continued. If not it was dropped and a new station selected.

The mail room (high security) would collect and count the money in. Much as little as $0.25.

The letters with their prayer requests would be highlighted and sent to keypunch - the punched cards then fed into 2 1401 computers with custom script keychains - ($10K for the keychains) which would generate a response letter.

Donations over $50 would be printed out on auto IBM Executive typewriters and signed with his name on auto signature generators.

Any donations over $250 - the letters would go to his desk for his personal signature.

He also had an IBM time-clock that controlled taped messages and prayers to be broadcasted internally.

We had to do some maintenance on the time-clock system one time and inadvertently triggered one of his prayers.

We shut it down as soon as we realized what had happened. Within minutes - the big man arrived - "Guys - if that happens again - fade me out - don't cut me off."

Another - a guy stole a mail sack with incoming mail. Oral refused to prosecute because he would have had to divulge the amount stolen.

Like I said - Oral was a marketing genius.

Holy crap, pun intended.
You would not believe (I take that back) the crap they pulled on my father as my mother was slowly dying of ALS.
I dislike this bunch a lot.

A belief in creation calls for faith. Belief in evolution calls for proof. Even though those two things seem polar, someone much smarter than me said, right here, "Creation is what God did. Evolution is how He did it." That satisfies me in most ways. Except...show me the proof that there were apes in my lineage, and I'll take a step towards you.

re: #112 buzzsawmonkey

Intelligence in one field does not necessarily translate to other fields. Noam Chomsky is considered a capable linguist in addition to being a raving moonbat. Arthur Butz is considered capable in his field--engineering of some kind, I believe--but is also a slavering Holocaust-denying loony.

A fair point, to a degree, but the argument fails when it enters the realm of cross discipline analysis, and economics crosses many disciplines.

Stein is an entertainer with facts that would do well on a quiz show. As a human to respect....forget it.

re: #156 Bobibutu

It's not really a belief system. Science doesn't require belief. Facts are facts regardless of how you feel about them.

I downloaded the video and will install it on my daughter's flash drive.
Her science teacher will really like this video.

re: #168 RubyTuesday

A belief in creation calls for faith. Belief in evolution calls for proof. Even though those two things seem polar, someone much smarter than me said, right here, "Creation is what God did. Evolution is how He did it." That satisfies me in most ways. Except...show me the proof that there were apes in my lineage, and I'll take a step towards you.

Just for giggles, why would apes in your lineage concern you in the here and now?

re: #157 nbenhaim

But don't you agree that we've already ruined science education with letting radical environmentalists seep through and take full control of it? It's already happened apparently many people just want to ignore that one.

While I have some pretty severe things to say about environmentalists, and what they are doing to the education system, I fail to see how allowing the pure non-science of ID into the science class is going to help. Unless you actually think setting one piece of pseudo-science against another piece of pseudo-science will somehow do more than create muddle-headedness?

re: #168 RubyTuesday

Here- read this about retroviral DNA. Hope it helps.

re: #172 eclectic infidel
Because I just KNOW they could dance better than I can...and I want to know why! why! why!

re: #160 Charles

No, Ben Stein's argument is an age-old creationist one -- that the Darwinian theory of evolution has directly led to materialism, atheism, pornography, juvenile delinquency, perversion, immorality, sodomy, and cell phones, because it replaces faith-based morality with a "survival of the fittest" jungle mentality.

In a reeking nutshell.

Well that seals it. I will not watch the move. Besides I like some of the stuff you listed above. LOL

re: #167 The Shadow Do

Holy crap, pun intended.
You would not believe (I take that back) the crap they pulled on my father as my mother was slowly dying of ALS.
I dislike this bunch a lot.

And they were very creative in their auto responses to prayer requests.

I believe you 'cause I saw hundreds if not thousands of their con jobs while working on their machines.

*Retch*

re: #153 goddessoftheclassroom

This is one thing that really upsets me. Either the people who are claiming that Christians are the new Taliban are abysmally ignorant, or they are being deliberately misleading about what the Christian right wants to do. For example, I must have missed the Billy Gram special where he called for gays to be thrown off of buildings. It must have been in the same service where he advocated stoning adulterous women to death. And decapitating apostates, or flying planes into buildings.

Having executions in the local football stadium seems to have been missed as well.

re: #168 RubyTuesday

A belief in creation calls for faith. Belief in evolution calls for proof. Even though those two things seem polar, someone much smarter than me said, right here, "Creation is what God did. Evolution is how He did it." That satisfies me in most ways. Except...show me the proof that there were apes in my lineage, and I'll take a step towards you.

I'm with you on this, RubyTuesday ~ I don't have any uncles who are monkeys (remember that saying, 'I'll be a monkey's uncle?)

re: #168 RubyTuesday

A belief in creation calls for faith. Belief in evolution calls for proof. Even though those two things seem polar, someone much smarter than me said, right here, "Creation is what God did. Evolution is how He did it." That satisfies me in most ways. Except...show me the proof that there were apes in my lineage, and I'll take a step towards you.

Not apes necessarily, but we do have a common ancestor. This is pretty much proven by the remnants of matching viral rna sequences found in both species DNA.

re: #168 RubyTuesday

A belief in creation calls for faith. Belief in evolution calls for proof. Even though those two things seem polar, someone much smarter than me said, right here, "Creation is what God did. Evolution is how He did it." That satisfies me in most ways. Except...show me the proof that there were apes in my lineage, and I'll take a step towards you.

Okay. Although to be precise, great apes and humans share common ancestors.

Darwin’s Surprise
[Link: www.newyorker.com...]

Excerpt:

“If Charles Darwin reappeared today, he might be surprised to learn that humans are descended from viruses as well as from apes,” Weiss wrote.

Darwin’s surprise almost certainly would be mixed with delight: when he suggested, in “The Descent of Man” (1871), that humans and apes shared a common ancestor, it was a revolutionary idea, and it remains one today. Yet nothing provides more convincing evidence for the “theory” of evolution than the viruses contained within our DNA. Until recently, the earliest available information about the history and the course of human diseases, like smallpox and typhus, came from mummies no more than four thousand years old. Evolution cannot be measured in a time span that short. Endogenous retroviruses provide a trail of molecular bread crumbs leading millions of years into the past.

Darwin’s theory makes sense, though, only if humans share most of those viral fragments with relatives like chimpanzees and monkeys. And we do, in thousands of places throughout our genome. If that were a coincidence, humans and chimpanzees would have had to endure an incalculable number of identical viral infections in the course of millions of years, and then, somehow, those infections would have had to end up in exactly the same place within each genome. The rungs of the ladder of human DNA consist of three billion pairs of nucleotides spread across forty-six chromosomes. The sequences of those nucleotides determine how each person differs from another, and from all other living things. The only way that humans, in thousands of seemingly random locations, could possess the exact retroviral DNA found in another species is by inheriting it from a common ancestor.

Molecular biology has made precise knowledge about the nature of that inheritance possible. With extensive databases of genetic sequences, reconstructing ancestral genomes has become common, and retroviruses have been found in the genome of every vertebrate species that has been studied. Anthropologists and biologists have used them to investigate not only the lineage of primates but the relationships among animals—dogs, jackals, wolves, and foxes, for example—and also to test whether similar organisms may in fact be unrelated.

Sal again: every journey towards understanding begins with a single step in the direction of knowledge.

re: #54 stretch

been there, done that.

evolutionists will do anything BUT put forth any evidence to prove that life evolved itself. the concept of "settled science" is very disturbing; its the same basis for the climate change crowd. if all that is needed is a consensus, then why bother with debate? it is a good rule to always check and see what proponents of a particular view stand to lose. Do they have their jobs/funding/reputation on the line, and if so, can they truly be objective?

does it bother anyone that comtemporary evolutionists (including the ones that tend to post here) no longer claim that life evolved itself? Why don't they come out and say that they believe that life came from non-life? Who is hiding from the truth now? Even Stephen Hawking is now speculating that "panspermia" is a possibility.

So much idiocy in one post.

here's a good test for a rational and objective debater: can you name any one of the mistakes made by "contemporary evolutionary thought" over the past 100year or so? Could you speculate on how far that particular mistake got in academic circles? Do you think a retraction was ever printed by a textbook author? If the mistake was core to a number of dissertations, would you care to guess how many of the Dr.'s relented and gave up their degrees?

re: #184 stretch

What testable, falsifiable hypotheses does ID put forth? What testable, falsifiable theories have been presented by the DI? On what grounds can the DI claim that ID is a scientific theory?

re: #170 Jim D

It's not really a belief system. Science doesn't require belief. Facts are facts regardless of how you feel about them.

Yes - and your Belief can override facts staring you in the face.

re: #184 stretch

here's a good test for a rational and objective debater: can you name any one of the mistakes made by "contemporary evolutionary thought" over the past 100year or so? Could you speculate on how far that particular mistake got in academic circles? Do you think a retraction was ever printed by a textbook author? If the mistake was core to a number of dissertations, would you care to guess how many of the Dr.'s relented and gave up their degrees?

God only knows where you come up with this stuff. Are you even making sense to yourself?

re: #152 eclectic infidel

The fact that creationists purposely use code words to further their deceitful agenda seems to suggest that they know that intelligent design is bollocks. No wonder Jihadists and creationists are on the same page.

If the first few pages of the Holy Bible speaks of God creating all things, and somewhere in the koran it speaks of allah creating all things, that is the limit to which jihadis agree with christians. After that, the differences are galaxies apart. Stop trying to put Christians and islamists in the same boat solely on the basis of creationism. After all, and as you should know, the Bible is a Jewish book, written by Jews, and the islamists have an agenda to eliminate Jews from this planet. Petty comparisons between beliefs in creationism are just a smoke screen.

re: #184 stretch

Also- I'm still waiting for you to explain hiccups and hernias.

re: #168 RubyTuesday

A belief in creation calls for faith. Belief in evolution calls for proof. Even though those two things seem polar, someone much smarter than me said, right here, "Creation is what God did. Evolution is how He did it." That satisfies me in most ways. Except...show me the proof that there were apes in my lineage, and I'll take a step towards you.

Not apes. Creatures of the primate family, the ancestors of homo sapiens. Apes are a different branch on the primate family tree.

Our closest relative among the primate family seems to be the chimpanzee; our genetic codes are 99% identical.

re: #170 Jim D

It's not really a belief system. Science doesn't require belief. Facts are facts regardless of how you feel about them.

That's a bad argument to make. The word Belief is like the word Theory. It means what you want it to mean depending on circumstances. As an example, even an atheist scientist can say that they believe in a theory, and a Disco Institute pretend scientist will say they don't believe in the same, and proceed to prove why.

re: #178 Bobibutu

And they were very creative in their auto responses to prayer requests.

I believe you 'cause I saw hundreds if not thousands of their con jobs while working on their machines.

*Retch*

Thanks for the insight. Really. I feel bad for everyone that has been taken in by this bunch.

re: #189 A Kiwi Infidel

Islamists give a lot of support to ID- it's just the truth:

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

re: #191 Charles

And, at the gorilla display at the San Francisco Zoo, the placard informs me that gorillas can take blood transfusions from humans.

We're pretty darn close.

I've just finished watching the above video and I consent in also stating "...I hope Texas does the right thing" voiced by Dr. Barbara Forrest.

re: #187 buzzsawmonkey

Apparently you do not comprehend the difference between science and Revealed Word. The former has the duty to be wrong until it is right; the latter does not.

Buzz ... Could you elaborate a bit on that last sentence?

re: #191 Charles

Not apes. Creatures of the primate family, the ancestors of homo sapiens. Apes are a different branch on the primate family tree.

Our closest relative among the primate family seems to be the chimpanzee; our genetic codes are 99% identical.

A friend of mine the other day was wearing a shirt that said, "Jesus was 96% chimp." One person came up to him and said that they didn't care for his shirt, and said that his shirt was wrong.

My buddy asked this person what he thought was so wrong with this shirt. They guy replied with a smile, "It's 99%."

re: #173 Dianna

I think that the anthropogenic global warming theory is, well, batshit crazy. I can only presume that they believe in Martians that drive around all day releasing dreadful amounts of greenhouse gases. Because global warming is also happening on Mars.

But we need to destroy western civilization to protect us from certain death as the Oceans rise, and weather patterns change in ways that aren't easily predictable.

(Globull warming is a cult, not science, and the Goreacle is their prophet)

I live about 30 minutes from where Dr. Forrest teaches and am familiar with her political activities. While i commend her on fighting the creationists, unfortunately, she comes with the full array of fringe, left-wing baggage. This has had the negative effect of chasing mainstream voters away from the issue - who, if engaged - would stomp the creationist's ambitions into the ground.

re: #161 Sharmuta

Now I don't think it would help to weaken science but I do think that pseudo-science has already taken over science education, mostly in the environment related and health related areas. I remember a bunch of moonbats came to my middle school one year and did a play on how the world is going to overpopulate and that we should have less kids. So much for that one - since we are having less kids and the arab world is doing just the opposite.

re: #184 stretch

here's a good test for a rational and objective debater: can you name any one of the mistakes made by "contemporary evolutionary thought" over the past 100year or so? Could you speculate on how far that particular mistake got in academic circles? Do you think a retraction was ever printed by a textbook author? If the mistake was core to a number of dissertations, would you care to guess how many of the Dr.'s relented and gave up their degrees?

Actually, Darwin himself believed that progenitor traits were passed on to and inherited by their descendents by some sort of amorphous flesh-blending. It wasn't until Gregor Mendel deduced the laws of inheritance of dominant and recessive characteristics that we had a mathematical model for inheritance, and it wasn't until Watson & Crick isolated DNA that we had the physical substrate mechanism in hand by means of which Mendel's model could proceed.

It's called scientific advance.

re: #177 buzzsawmonkey

Economics is a very weird discipline. Basically, it involves creating a frame, holding it up to the world, and decreeing that everything within the frame is reality, and everything outside the frame is not. There is little difference between this view of the world on a financial basis, and using the same model to view other aspects of human endeavor.

And I still would love to see Ben Stein and Al Franken in a Hannity/Colmes format. Who wouldn't watch "Franken/Stein?"

I think you wrote all this as a frame leading to Franken/Stein.

Ding up for that.

As to the rest, waffle.

re: #192 Naso Tang

It doesn't matter what a scientist believes if the facts don't support his theory.

That's a bad argument to make. The word Belief is like the word Theory. It means what you want it to mean depending on circumstances. As an example, even an atheist scientist can say that they believe in a theory, and a Disco Institute pretend scientist will say they don't believe in the same, and proceed to prove why.

re: #203 Iron Fist

I think that the anthropogenic global warming theory is, well, batshit crazy. I can only presume that they believe in Martians that drive around all day releasing dreadful amounts of greenhouse gases. Because global warming is also happening on Mars.

But we need to destroy western civilization to protect us from certain death as the Oceans rise, and weather patterns change in ways that aren't easily predictable.

(Globull warming is a cult, not science, and the Goreacle is their prophet)

Some good news from one of my husband's college classes that he teaches. He asked how many out of about 150 students believed in manmade global warming and only about 15-20 raised their hands. I'm surprised he didn't pass out!

re: #160 Charles

No, Ben Stein's argument is an age-old creationist one -- that the Darwinian theory of evolution has directly led to materialism, atheism, pornography, juvenile delinquency, perversion, immorality, sodomy, and cell phones, because it replaces faith-based morality with a "survival of the fittest" jungle mentality.

In a reeking nutshell.

What you describe, I think, is scientism, isn't it? Has anyone drawn a distinction here between scientism and science? Many scientific breakthroughs have been appropriated, half-digested, and then spewed forth as justification for various negative things. Almost anything you can think of has at some point had "science" grafted into its lineage, and whenever possible, even the most tenuous links to actual scientific research are seized upon and claimed to lend credibility to spurious claims.

re: #191 Charles

Not apes. Creatures of the primate family, the ancestors of homo sapiens. Apes are a different branch on the primate family tree.

Our closest relative among the primate family seems to be the chimpanzee; our genetic codes are 99% identical.

He's not my uncle.

re: #166 gmsc

missed it, sorry.

re: #199 buzzsawmonkey

In San Francisco? Who'd be able to tell the difference?

The gorilla would probably be gentler, to go by the bruise I got last time I gave blood!

re: #195 The Shadow Do

Thanks for the insight. Really. I feel bad for everyone that has been taken in by this bunch.

You are welcome.

I remember as a kid in Oakland, CA (back in the 50s) a big black limo with a crown and sword logo (in gold) on the side ... guy offered salvation for 25 cents a week. Many bough into it.

Not only Oral - Oral just went nationwide.

re: #196 Sharmuta

Islamists give a lot of support to ID- it's just the truth:

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

I agree with you, and on that basis you do not want creationism being taught as science in schools because that wedge allows islam an opening into schools. My point is that is the ONLY point that islam agrees with Biblical teaching, and it may even be a stretch (no pun intended) given that God is God and allah is a moonbat.

re: #209 sadhu

Sadhu,
I am so, so sorry for your loss. Prayers to you and his family.

re: #205 nbenhaim

Your deflections won't work. This is about ID, not global warming. If you want to combat one, you should support keeping the other out of our education system.

You do not combat poor science (GW) by adding pseudo-science (ID).

maybe if I shortened my question, there would be one really honest evolutionist who would dare to answer (i'll take out the 'test for a rational and objective debater' part):

can you name any one of the mistakes made by "contemporary evolutionary thought" over the past 100year or so?

I'm sitting here wondering if I should re-post a somewhat lengthy comment on why legislating religion is bad and why "creationism" is not science. But then I realized that almost the definition of a creationist, is someone who has already made up their mind about the conclusion for reasons that have nothing to do with evidence. Basically, they neither believe in, nor understand, what evidence is. They are the very antithesis of the scientific method, which I believe is a necessary part of the Biblical "whole mind".

re: #213 Joan

missed it, sorry.

No problem.

The scary thing about that site is that it is so easy to believe that there are people who would believe in it.

re: #219 stretch

Explain hiccups and hernias first.

re: #204 goodin510

I live about 30 minutes from where Dr. Forrest teaches and am familiar with her political activities. While i commend her on fighting the creationists, unfortunately, she comes with the full array of fringe, left-wing baggage. This has had the negative effect of chasing mainstream voters away from the issue - who, if engaged - would stomp the creationist's ambitions into the ground.

Most unfortunate, if true.

re: #204 goodin510

I live about 30 minutes from where Dr. Forrest teaches and am familiar with her political activities. While i commend her on fighting the creationists, unfortunately, she comes with the full array of fringe, left-wing baggage. This has had the negative effect of chasing mainstream voters away from the issue - who, if engaged - would stomp the creationist's ambitions into the ground.

Got a link?

re: #209 sadhu

Not a cool comment. Did you read the rules at the top of the page. Recommending violence is a no no. Charles, clean up in aisle 209.

Trivia time: Who was Charles Darwin's maternal grandfather?

re: #219 stretch

maybe if I shortened my question, there would be one really honest evolutionist who would dare to answer (i'll take out the 'test for a rational and objective debater' part):

can you name any one of the mistakes made by "contemporary evolutionary thought" over the past 100year or so?

Can you?

re: #212 MandyManners

He's not my uncle.

this is beyond lol, this is side-splitting, bladder releasing funny . . . . , you come up with the best succinct points!

re: #184 stretch

I have to hand one thing to you, stretch. Your the only lizard I know with a -189 karma rating that hasn't assumed room temperature.

I thought Charles banned all opinions that don't run concurrently with his.
Another theory through the shitter...IB is calling for their award's safe return.

re: #209 sadhu

oh my, I am so very sorry . . . .

re: #219 stretch

maybe if I shortened my question, there would be one really honest evolutionist who would dare to answer (i'll take out the 'test for a rational and objective debater' part):

can you name any one of the mistakes made by "contemporary evolutionary thought" over the past 100year or so?

Didn't you read my #206?

re: #210 livefreeor die

In my opinion the Global Warming hoax is the ultimate form of hubris. They really believe that the planet will fucking die if we don't pull down our economy to pre-Industrial levels. At least they claim to believe that. With the Gorecle jetting around the globe and flagrantly using power in his Nashville compound one has to wonder how much of his bullshit he really believes.

re: #191 Charles
That one percent is kind of a big deal to me. When was it 98% the same? At what point in time were they only 90% like us with only environmental - as opposed to taught-skiils?
I'm not making the point I'd like to, because I'm trying to meds myself to sleep. When creationists ask for proof, they're not challenged to provide faith. With my whole heart I believe the God of the universe molded and shaped the earth, the skies, the waters with His hands. And in molding the earth, awesome things happened that science is constantly discovering. NO credit to God, tho, sadly. He created all kinds of living things that flew, crawled, walked. Adam gave them names.
Within my faith, I have no problem seeing that a great and mighty God could easily ''create" in 6 days. Know this: I am NOT an uneducated redneck sheeple either. I just have faith that when the world is over, God will give us the answers. And we'll smack our heads at the perfect simplicity of it all.
In the meantime, this is the best place to come to hear world news and put it in perspective. I don't want my beliefs getting me banned from here because everything else is so fascinating. I hope I don't ever step over the mystery line from where Lizards never return. It's all under the hand of God, so it fits in. WE are the ones who can't put the puzzle together, so we go off and start a new one that we can "solve."

re: #186 Bobibutu

Yes. People can be blinded by belief. But, in science, experimental results are evaluated by lots of different people. Results are reviewed by peers and experiments are repeated. Mistakes, misinterpretation of facts, and hoaxes are eventually found out.

re: #231 Salamantis

Didn't you read my #206?

I did, and I thought the same thing when I saw his post again. Stretch seems to be able to only ask questions, not read answers. Could be his browser?

re: #225 Walter L. Newton

Not a cool comment. Did you read the rules at the top of the page. Recommending violence is a no no. Charles, clean up in aisle 209.

agreed, clean it up

re: #212 MandyManners

He's not my uncle.

Boy, that should get old dinnerjacket hopping mad!

re: #138 Charles

This is rich. Mike Huckabee has Jackie Gingrich talking about plans to help improve science and math scores. Jackie's plan sounds decent.

But Huckabee is a hardcore young earth creationist who believes the earth is 6000 years old, and that human beings aren't related to "primates." (He pronounces it like "private" with an 'm'.) Irony drips from the screen.

Interestingly enough, I believe so is Bobby Jindal

re: #222 Sharmuta

Explain hiccups and hernias first.

inherited corruptions and degradations of genetic material

re: #228 outsidephilly

this is beyond lol, this is side-splitting, bladder releasing funny . . . . , you come up with the best succinct points!

I got it here but, I neglected to record the name of the Lizard who first posted it.

re: #232 Iron Fist

In my opinion the Global Warming hoax is the ultimate form of hubris. They really believe that the planet will fucking die if we don't pull down our economy to pre-Industrial levels. At least they claim to believe that. With the Gorecle jetting around the globe and flagrantly using power in his Nashville compound one has to wonder how much of his bullshit he really believes.

Look at it this way..When the natural cycle of weather goes into a cooling phase. Gore can claim he cured Global Warming..

re: #219 stretch

maybe if I shortened my question, there would be one really honest evolutionist who would dare to answer (i'll take out the 'test for a rational and objective debater' part):

can you name any one of the mistakes made by "contemporary evolutionary thought" over the past 100year or so?

Actually, as it happens, Dr. Forrest discusses such mistakes and their correction as part the ongoing process of scientific progress in her book. Why don't you read it and see?

re: #237 legalpad

Boy, that should get old dinnerjacket hopping mad!

Shit-slinging mad?

re: #229 jorline

PIMF Your should be You're

re: #234 Jim D

Yes. People can be blinded by belief. But, in science, experimental results are evaluated by lots of different people. Results are reviewed by peers and experiments are repeated. Mistakes, misinterpretation of facts, and hoaxes are eventually found out.

Further, scientists also detail and publish the procedures of their experiments, so that others can run the tests for themselves, or even find flaws in the procedures.

Here are a couple of links about Barbara Forrest. Her politics appear to be be moderately center-left.

The SELU website describes her civic contributions thus:
"Dr. Forrest actively participates in efforts to promote church-state separation, the integrity of public science education, and civil liberties. She serves on the National Advisory Council of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. She is also a member of the American Civil Liberties Union, having served on the board of directors of the Louisiana affiliate. Her other supporting memberships include People for the American Way, the Southern Poverty Law Center, the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, and the National Center for Science Education."

[Link: accidentalblogger.typepad.com...]

Here's a listing of Barbara Forrest's writings, from the Southestern Louisiana University website:
[Link: www2.selu.edu...]

re: #208 Jim D

It doesn't matter what a scientist believes if the facts don't support his theory.

I know what you mean, but I am simply counseling on the use of words. We know how Theory is understood by creationists, and the word Belief has even stronger meaning to the religious. Belief in that sense is instinctively, IMHO, taken to be a matter of faith by some, and as a matter of faith it is categorized as either right or wrong. End of argument.

re: #219 stretch

Piltdown man. A fraud. What is your point? Are you trying to justify a fraud of a different sort? Please state your premise and stop with the canned challenges.

re: #241 HoosierHoops

Look at it this way..When the natural cycle of weather goes into a cooling phase. Gore can claim he cured Global Warming..

It's actually been in a cooling phase for the last 7-8 years.

Her book, Creationism's Trojan Horse, is very good by the way. I'm reading it on my Kindle.

re: #189 A Kiwi Infidel

If the first few pages of the Holy Bible speaks of God creating all things, and somewhere in the koran it speaks of allah creating all things, that is the limit to which jihadis agree with christians. After that, the differences are galaxies apart. Stop trying to put Christians and islamists in the same boat solely on the basis of creationism. After all, and as you should know, the Bible is a Jewish book, written by Jews, and the islamists have an agenda to eliminate Jews from this planet. Petty comparisons between beliefs in creationism are just a smoke screen.

My comment only meant to note that as far as creationism is concerned, Jihadists/Islamists & Christians (the ones who reject evolution) do share a common thread. I already clarified this with another lizard. I certainly don't lump all Christians in with Jihadists/Islamists with respect to other issues. I do know better than that.

re: #212 MandyManners

He's not my uncle.

LMAO

Another very good book with more detail on the history of the creationist movement from the Scopes trial to the present: Monkey Girl: Evolution, Education, Religion, and the Battle for America's Soul, by Edward Humes.

re: #242 Lynn B.

Actually, as it happens, Dr. Forrest discusses such mistakes and their correction as part the ongoing process of scientific progress in her book. Why don't you read it and see?

still not an answer - no answer yet.... waiting.... waiting....

re: #241 HoosierHoops

Look at it this way..When the natural cycle of weather goes into a cooling phase. Gore can claim he cured Global Warming..

Ugh, I don't think I can take him getting more smarmy and stupid.

re: #251 eclectic infidel

Thanks for clarification.

re: #249 gmsc

It's actually been in a cooling phase for the last 7-8 years.

Well there you have it. Al Gore is saving humanity..He should run for President or something.

re: #241 HoosierHoops

Ah, but will his quelling Global Warming (which I had understood as being one of the miricles that would happen if the Obamessiah was elected) will cause a new Ice Age. Because humans have, like, controlled the weather for centuries.

re: #246 jaunte

Here are a couple of links about Barbara Forrest. Her politics appear to be be moderately center-left.

[Link: accidentalblogger.typepad.com...]

Here's a listing of Barbara Forrest's writings, from the Southestern Louisiana University website:
[Link: www2.selu.edu...]

Looks pretty moderate center left. I'm not seeing the loony left thing.

Walter, I will find a constructive way to channel the rage I am feeling about this. It doesn't belong posted here.

re: #239 stretch

inherited corruptions and degradations of genetic material

You're kidding, right?

re: #225 Walter L. Newton

Not a cool comment. Did you read the rules at the top of the page. Recommending violence is a no no. Charles, clean up in aisle 209.

Walter ... do you have a woodie with TMers or what?

And your comments about Deepak Chopra a few days ago seemed beneath you.

re: #257 HoosierHoops

Well there you have it. Al Gore is saving humanity..He should run for President or something.

done

re: #258 Iron Fist

Ah, but will his quelling Global Warming (which I had understood as being one of the miricles that would happen if the Obamessiah was elected) will cause a new Ice Age. Because humans have, like, controlled the weather for centuries.

Shhh-our evil conservative handbook says we're not supposed to let on about how we ontrol-cay the eather-way.