Anchor Suzanne Malveaux’s introduction for the correspondent’s report highlighted the 150th anniversary of the printing of Charles Darwin’s “On the Origin of Species,” and how Dawkins was a “controversial successor [to Darwin] carrying the torch for evolution.” Foster gave a very basic description of Dawkins’s career during his report, only mentioning his controversial stances only in passing. Video straight from the Richard Dawkins Foundation ran on-screen as Foster, an anchor for CNN’s sister network CNN International, gave his voice-over.
Story Continues Below Ad ↓
FOSTER: Evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins first came to prominence with his 1976 book ‘The Selfish Gene,’ which explores the origins of life. An outspoken critic of creationism, Dawkin’s atheist views have put him at the center of controversy. Today marks the 150th anniversary of the publication of Charles Darwin’s seminal work, ‘On The Origin of Species.’ Darwin’s description of a theory of evolution, that populations evolved over the course of generations through a process of natural selection, is the very basis on which Dawkins builds his thesis. The scientist’s latest argument for evolution, versus creationism, is titled ‘The Greatest Show on Earth, The Evidence for Evolution.’ Max Foster, CNN, London.A CNN graphic during the report also described the biologist as “Charles Darwin’s Rottweiler,” but this doesn’t describe the extent of Dawkins’s intolerance for religion, specifically Judaism and Christianity. MRC President Brent Bozell highlighted one key quote from the atheist’s best-selling book, “The God Delusion” in a 2008 column:
“The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, blood-thirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.”
Here’s a clue, CNN: Richard Dawkins is no mere “outspoken critic of creationism.”
—Matthew Balan is a news analyst at the Media Research Center.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Hmmm, OK
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 16:18 ET by newstogodI am one of those rare Republican Atheists -- Dawkins is cool with me.
Me too!
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 19:43 ET by Legacy76I love Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, all those guys. I think its too bad that most conservatives all are bent out of shape about Darwin, God, evolution, etc. It doesn't have to be this way. Just ask fellow agnostic George Will.
Who's bent out of shape?
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 02:05 ET by KarmaLove all the men you want to, 76. I simply don't consider you or George Will or other man fawning Republicans, conservative. It's just the way it is. Live with it. Doesn't mean we can't work together to out-vote the progressives, agnostic or not.
Hi. My name is John Q. Public, but some just call me racist.
I'm not bent out of shape.
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 02:56 ET by Legacy76I don't believe in god. I am not a "man fawn"-er. I am conservative, despite whether you consider me to be or not. Its just the way it is. Live with it.
Maybe I misunderstood, Legacy.
Sun, 11/29/2009 - 00:50 ET by KarmaIf I did I apologize. Between your love of "those guys" and your name dropping of George Will as if he were the epitomy of a conservative, it just doesn't add up in my book. It appeared as if you idolize these men. Conservatives like myself, idolize no man. Call yourself whatever you like, I can't stop you. My point is to say we obviously do not agree what defines a conservative, but we can, at least temporarily, join votes to achieve a somewhat common cause.
I belive in God. I'm not bent out of shape. What makes you think most conservatives are? I'm using extremely calm keystrokes here and don't know how else to convey my unbendentedness. Oh well.
Hi. My name is John Q. Public, but some just call me racist.
Wow. So Karma, you now
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 09:52 ET by Jcon96Wow. So Karma, you now decide what constitutes a conservative, huh? And we
who fall into that category just have live with it, right? (Sounds like
Mr. "We won" in the Whitehouse) Anyone who believes in scientific
origins, as opposed to miraculous origins, is a man fawning man lover,
correct?
All the understanding of different ideas we have come to expect from the Taliban. Congratulations.
Karma, with all due respect, you
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 13:46 ET by BO STINKSallowed the three conservative posters above you to redefine the argument. The argument is not whether they are conservative in their beliefs. The argument is Dawkins' hatred, bigotry and intolerance of Jew and Christians. As a Christian, I have participated in these types of discussion many times. Never let em see ya sweat, Karma. Stick to what is important!
"How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the Plain Meaning of Words!" ~Sam Adams
No sweat, BO.
Sun, 11/29/2009 - 01:21 ET by KarmaBut I did lose you. Tell me what is important. Tell me what conservative beliefs are. I'm not sweating but I'm truely interested in how others define "conservative".
Hi. My name is John Q. Public, but some just call me racist.
Wow, Karma, I'm on your side.
Sun, 11/29/2009 - 18:06 ET by BO STINKSJust that I didn't see where the conservative posters were doing the same thing as the guy in the article. That's all. The hate, intolerance, etc. illustrated in the article didn't come across from the three guys on this thread, did it? If it did, I apologize...I just didn't see it.
"How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the Plain Meaning of Words!" ~Sam Adams
No problem, BO.
Mon, 11/30/2009 - 08:58 ET by KarmaIt's just that I didn't see where I accused anyone of the same hate or intolerence illustrated in the article. Simply a disagreement over who we prefer to listen to and follow.
Hi. My name is John Q. Public, but some just call me racist.
Cheers!! Karma! :-)
Mon, 11/30/2009 - 18:41 ET by BO STINKS"How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the Plain Meaning of Words!" ~Sam Adams
Wow, Jcon.
Sun, 11/29/2009 - 01:10 ET by KarmaI see my mistake. I should have written, "WE simply don't consider you or George Will or other man fawning Republicans, conservative." I didn't really mean I when I said I.
So those who believe that "miraculous" origins have lead to scientific discoveries are God fawning God lovers, correct?
Hi. My name is John Q. Public, but some just call me racist.
Dawkins is a good example
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 16:25 ET by scarebear83Dawkins is a good example of a majority of atheists who will slice and dice Christianity because they can. What's worse is that again, a majority of them think those without religion are better people and morally better...
Again, I said majority, I don't think all atheists are this way.
__________
Shazbot!
But he doesn't have the
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 18:09 ET by RowaneBut he doesn't have the guts or honesty to talk crap about is-lame, after all no Christian is likely to murder him for it.
"You know, when I was asked earlier about the issue of coal, uh, you
know — Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would
necessarily skyrocket" - Barack Hussain Obama
God
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 16:46 ET by iveseenitallLook at Dawkins' adjectives for God----jealous,petty, unjust, unforgiving control freak, vindictive, racist, megalomaniacal, infanticidal, capricious....Now I know why "liberals" believe Obama is "The One"
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
Great insight, isia..
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 13:51 ET by BO STINKSWonder if Dawkins, in the wee hours of the morning, has any fear of the Lord at all? We can only pray.
"How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the Plain Meaning of Words!" ~Sam Adams
Atheism is just a belief
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 16:43 ET by MidAmericaAtheism is just a belief system similar to any religion. However atheists have the advantage of being able to critisize any religion's beliefs but don't have to defend what they believe in because they don't call their beliefs and myths a religion.
I never trust anyone who
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 16:48 ET by RogerCfromSDI never trust anyone who cannot or will not believe in something greater than themselves.
A nation cannot be free without a free, unbiased media. We are not free.
Today marks the 150th
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 16:58 ET by MidAmericaToday marks the 150th anniversary of the publication of Charles Darwin’s seminal work,.......
150 years and it still has to be defended based on circumstantial evidence. Why has evolution stopped? Scientists have discovered countless thousands of species in the modern world and none of them are half one thing and half some unknown creature not yet 'evolved'.
there are many examples of
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 18:02 ET by dr2bthere are many examples of evolution at work and its not really circumstantial at all
Evolution or species
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 18:07 ET by MidAmericaEvolution or species adaptation? They are two very different things.
depends on your manner of a
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 18:10 ET by dr2bdepends on your manner of a definition I suppose. An adaptation in my books is a trait that resulted from natural selection. obviously the climb from unicellular bacteria to humans is a stretch to me and i struggle with that concept but when you look at current species now it has been shown that natural selection causes populations to evolve
You're at the crux of
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 18:22 ET by MidAmericaYou're at the crux of the problem. No one knows what causes a new species to appear. They just do. Darwin postulated that natural selection happens over long periods of time until a new creature is developed however he wasn't familiar with all the different periods in the earths history where nearly all the earths species were wiped out and in a short time (by geologic time) the earth is again filled with all manner of new species. There is something happening that can't be explained by natural selection alone.
The invisible hand of the creator?
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 19:39 ET by SideShowTime scale...it's the time scale and the ability to understand billions of years of evolution.
SideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
divergent definitions
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 22:16 ET by konoIt's been awhile since I reviewed my notes on this stuff, doc; but it sounds like you're holding onto Darwin 1.0 (or 'evolution lite'), which posited random genetic mutations as the driving mechanism behind the evolution of new traits. Not a lot of random mutations are both advantageous and reliably transmitted to offspring, though; meaning the frequency of mutations would have to be much higher than what's observed, if it were to account for the historical diversity of speciation.
I've heard modern evolution proselytizers finesse this by positing a kind of self-directed character to evolution, as if giraffes grew longer necks SO THAT they could reach the higher leaves. (That's like Darwinism 2.2 or something, while Darwin might have stopped at saying whatever caused giraffe necks to grow longer gave them an evolutionary advantage, making it a prevalent trait among the species.)
As far as I'm concerned, natural selection was probably a key part of the way creatures came to be in the variety of forms we see today and in fossil records. But random mutations aren't nearly enough to be the sole engine driving the process.
lamarckian evolution
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 01:51 ET by Bull Moose ProgressiveYou're talking about lamarckian evolution which if you call Darwin 1.0 would make it 0.5 as Lamarck came before Darwin.
A lot in the scientific community before Darwin were already Atheist, Deist, or Mystic and latched onto anything they could find to try and "explain away" G-d. Which is why evolution was so popular, finally anti-theists had an excuse for beliefs that had been widely laughed at. Now they've just got to protect it from all the criticism and inspection it won't bare.
→ Yeah, dr2b
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 18:12 ET by Cool ArrowIt's documented that a few male Black Widow spiders do escape the dreaded afterglow of connubial bliss which befalls most of their less nimble brothers.
So maybe you can tell me how/why the phenomenon of the Black Widow killing her mate hasn't disappeared from the mating ritual.
But then again, maybe you're saying they've evolved beyond other species and have discovered, as humans are learning, that males are not necessary.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
kin selection. the male
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 18:25 ET by dr2bkin selection.
the male allows himself to be eaten in order to provide resources for his mate. therefore the mate will survive better and produce the male's offspring. the cost of being eaten must be outweighed by the benefit of his genes being passed on to his offspring. therefore, if not allowing himself to be eaten risks the offspring or if he has a low chance of mating again it does not benefit him evolutionarily to live.
→ I get it
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 18:34 ET by Cool ArrowSo the male chooses a mate he suspects will be a poor provider? How is it that you've interjected rational thought into the workings of spiders?
Now it all makes sense.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
very rarely is there male
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 18:39 ET by dr2bvery rarely is there male choice in species. the choice is usually with the females because her fitness is limited by resources and eggs and the males fitness is only limited by number of mates. it hasnt been studied how successful male black widows are at multiple matings so i cannot comment. but usually in other species the female chooses the mate.
→ Makes sense
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 18:45 ET by Cool ArrowSo you're saying the female will prefer the weakest male?
I'm not the one twisting Darwin here. All I'm saying is that explanations are being offered to fit a theory. An alternate explanation may exist that doesn't fit the overall theory, and is thus rejected.
Sounds like "settled science" to me.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
no the female tries to find
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 19:24 ET by dr2bno the female tries to find the best male and then eats him! lol. but I get what you are saying, basically i believe in evolution of species by the process of natural selection. I believe there is a lot of current examples of how species became they way they are. I have seen the evidence and I buy into it. The other theories within evolution basically just try to reason an end result to fit NS. as of yet, no other theory has experimental data that can reason otherwise. im content by saying God started it all and in His infinite wisdom, knew how it would play out and man just tries to figure it out. Natural selection makes the most sense. but the main point is, believing in God and evolution are not mutually exclusive like Dawkins would like people to believe
→ Me too
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 19:36 ET by Cool ArrowBut I've never made the leap of faith from "Natural Selection" to Evolution.
To me they are different concepts. Greyhounds and racehorses are proofs of natural selection. The owner will "naturally" disallow mating between desirables and undesirables.
How does the crododile choose which birds he will allow to pick his teeth clean? Certainly this isn't passive behavior on the part of the predator that is bred into the species?
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
Get Your Bacteria Motor Runnin'
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 21:19 ET by miss911ninjaWhat it comes down to, I believe, is "bacterial flagellation." Don't laugh yet! It's been studied under electron microscopes, and describes an irreducibly complex system which could not have come from a Darwinian gradual process. It's truly fascinating, because the cell's swimming device--the flagellum--is composed of three parts: A paddle, a rotor, and a motor. Unique proteins are involved as well. Just google for more info!
→ Seen it
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 21:31 ET by Cool ArrowI saw it on TV once and looked it up on the net to verify.
Interesting stuff when science can't even begin to explain the evolution of something they can build in shop class.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
Totally!
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:00 ET by miss911ninjaTotally!
Are you going to use the
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 10:03 ET by Jcon96Are you going to use the eyeball argument as well? Perhaps the banana? Maybe the crocoduck? These are wornout, tired discussions, and have been show time and again to be debunked under an evolutionary system. Darwin was the beginning, and the science has moved beyond him in scope and understanding. There is nothing "Darwinian" about it. And "unique" proteins are nothing of the sort. They are chemicals adapted to a particular function, and may change in the future if the need and ability are there.
→ Jcon
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 10:39 ET by Cool ArrowWell, yes and no.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
Jcon's minds is firmly shut, locked and
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 14:01 ET by BO STINKSbarred. It's so amusing that people who supposedly espouse 'science' can only look for (make up) evidence for the religion they so faithfully follow.
"How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the Plain Meaning of Words!" ~Sam Adams
Michael Behe: Darwin's Black Box
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 01:54 ET by Bull Moose ProgressiveBehe's work still holds pretty firm and unchallenged. It has not been moved past, it has simply been avoided. To Quote Chesterton "(Intelligent Design) hasn't been tried and found wanting, it has been found difficult and left untried."
Seen that too.
Sun, 11/29/2009 - 01:36 ET by RESTLESS 1Wasn't it postulated that the "motor" was initially for a different purpose, but the organism "adapted" and used it as a means of motion?
"If the man, with the power, can't keep it under control...some heads are gonna roll." -Judas Priest
E stopped
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 19:22 ET by newstogodEvolution has not stopped -- come back in a million years you will see it then. Its taken 6 million years to get here.
Hmm
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 19:54 ET by Bull Moose ProgressiveThus all the missing links which lead to the theory of Punctuated Equilibria... because according to fossil record evolution can be static for hundreds of millions of years and then suddenly leap into overdrive "overnight".
Natural Selection is well established as a biological force. It is not however the theory for everything that Athiests want it to be.
Well, I waited for several
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 16:07 ET by Willis_Leon_JohnsonWell, I waited for several hundred million years and the crocodile hasn't 'evolved' a bit.
Obama, the first "alleged" president
http://gjresult.com
Dawkins is yet another false
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 17:08 ET by Old EuropeDawkins is yet another false prophet along with Buddha, Mohammad and Al Gore. Funny how Dawkins can only criticize the OT God. What about the New Testament? Can he criticize Jesus and Paul? What would the world be like if we all followed Jesus? Would there be murder, fraud and rape? I used to be a hardcore atheist until I was born again. I now know that all the laws that God set forth in the Holy Bible make sense. The reason God allowed entire populations to be killed be others was their superstition, sexual immorality and cannibalism incl. human sacrifices. They deserved to be ousted by other peoples. And God proved his mercy by the greatest gift of all: Jesus. He could have wiped us all out easily. But he loved us all so much that He gave us salvation for free. All we need to do is give our lives to Jesus and accept His eternal gift.
So many problems we face stem from our disobedience. Just look at extramarital sex and homosexuality and you can see the havoc it wrought on society with venereal diseases, abortions and emotional traumas. can you imagine a soap opera without casual sex? Impossible! And it's preposterous to assume that our ability to form thoughts and ideas and pictures in our heads could have come about from dead matter! DNA cannot emerge out of random data. It needs a codifier. And in the face of eternity, all materialistic approaches to the beginning of life and time fall flat on the nose because no materialist could ever find the primeval reason for the universe. I believe that God equals eternity, something we cannot comprehend and that's where my arguing about the emergence of life ends. I don't need to prove anything beyond that. Materialists though are adamant about their approach and subscribe to a methodology that they could never prove.
The powerful word of the Gospel is proof enough for me to know that it is the truth. What do evolutionists have to look forward to? Why would I be following Dawkins lies? Can I pray to him and Darwin when I'm in dire straits? Did Dawkins cure me from my panic attacks? No, it was Jesus Christ and praised be His name into eternity. And I'm asking you, Jesus, to show Dawkins your grace and love just like you converted the apostle Paul. May Dawkins too see your truth the way and life.
book proof
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 19:27 ET by newstogodYou believe in god without evidence. Your proof of god comes from a book --- you can't prove a book with another book.
no book needed
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 20:04 ET by Bull Moose ProgressiveHmm, as much as my professors tried to push the mantra that it isn't. It seems to me that everything from evolution in biology to Entropy point to the existence of a creator.
Entropy and the Big Bang theory both point to a creation of the universe and an ending. How can you have a creation without a creator? For something temporal to exist, something must be eternal. To believe otherwise means you disbelieve all the laws of physics and biology (That matter and energy are created, that life comes from non-life, etc).
It takes an incredible leap of faith to be an Atheist. You believe in universal negative without proof against the evidence we have.
Can you PROVE that belief
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 20:21 ET by Willis_Leon_JohnsonCan you PROVE that belief in God comes from a book?
Or is that an assunption given to you by yer bestest, mostest favoritest perfesser in colleeg?
I have absolutely no intention of trying to convince you from your current belief system, because a person, self blinded by their own dictum shall forever remain blind until they removes the blindness themselves.
Your 'assumption' that you know where a persons belief system comes from gives me a very good insight into the level your brain functions at.
Obama, the first "alleged" president
http://gjresult.com
Without evidence?
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:17 ET by RukusHuh? Your here aren't you? Big bang. Well where did THAT come from? Just happened, huh? Out of nothing? Yeah, right! Something had to cause all of this, life, planets, the universe, etc... What else could be responsible but a higher being? Think about it, it all started somewhere, somehow, some way. Nothing else makes sense but something beyond all of us: A Higher Being! Been there all along. I'll stick with that. Have a nice life that God gave you. : )
Gary
Old media species: Moonbat-a-saurus-rex. Getting more endangered by the day.
newstogod, then prove it... right here and right now or else
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:22 ET by pahuberconsider that you have to have some faith in that your viewpoint is the actual correct one.
"You believe in god without evidence. Your proof of god comes from a book --- you can't prove a book with another book."
I will readily admit that to believe in God one must have faith.
Will you admit that you too need faith to believe in your viewpoint?
You are correct Paul
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:36 ET by RukusThe Book is for teaching, Faith is in Believing. I believe, always have. He/She is moving the goal posts, duh. He/She only believes what the progressive agenda tells he/she to believe. Figures, huh? : )
Gary
Old media species: Moonbat-a-saurus-rex. Getting more endangered by the day.
Absolutely, Rukus... they cut and run when cool arrow and other
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 23:03 ET by pahuberNBs starting getting to the crux of the matter.
I worry about them Paul
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 23:20 ET by RukusAll I can do is pray for them. The rest is up to them. God has the last word. I'll pray for them, hope that works... ; )
Gary
Old media species: Moonbat-a-saurus-rex. Getting more endangered by the day.
Hi Paul
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:46 ET by shawn228I was definitely wrong about you. When you first started posting, all I saw was namecalling, pile ons and just nastiness. So nasty I thought you were a undercover democrat.
Now you back up all of your points and present excellent arguments. That is nice to see.
Hi Shawn... LOL... yeah I jumped in after reading for quite a
Sun, 11/29/2009 - 05:59 ET by pahuberbit of time... usually, with two knifes and biting anything I could chew... basically, I cannot deny what you have said about being nasty.
Now, I am just trying to chillax and see why the other side is as angry as I was... what is their reasons yada yada blah blah.
I guess I've lost my anger after awhile rediscovering my faith. If you have not noticed I've got a freekin' MDiv...whoopdee freekin' dah... but I honor God by not going into the ministry because of my temperament. I do other work in my home business now.
Basically, I love most if not all... people here on NB now regardless if they even like me. To love and be positive and pray for those who do not love you is a strength, as I am learning regardless of others thoughts toward me. I've a looooong way to go... anyhow take care : )
Paul
proof????
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 07:43 ET by WarmanNeither sir can you. darwin does have a book doesn't he?
BAWWWWWWWKINS
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 17:38 ET by someloudthunderI see no problem other than they were comparing him to Darwin who actually did something while Dawkins doesn't do much other than write boring books.
Richard
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 17:40 ET by sevenRichard Dawkins claims that teaching religion to children is a form of child abuse.
He also claims to be a scientist and hasn't tested and shown anything to support his false claim.
I can vouch that the exact
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 17:51 ET by nolotrippenI can vouch that the exact oppostie was true for me. My parents listened to the smart folks of the day who told them not to "force your religion on your children." Thus, it took me a long time to learn the truth of Christ.
“It is almost impossible to distinguish a politician from a gangster.” (Will Durant, 1931)
I predicted tea parties would return. Now I'm predicting dueling will return.
It's called indoctrination.
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 19:54 ET by SideShowAll religions use it.
Whether you like it or not, it's part of the rituals, traditions, and fabric of creating a following. Dawkins defined it correctly. The truth hurts.
SideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
All religions use
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 20:02 ET by Radical1979All religions use it.
Don't you think that's a bit of a reach? Many religions hold various forms of eductional activities, such as Bible studies, to help their followers answer questions about their religion. I don't know much about Judiasm but I believe they have quite heated discussions about the Torah and it's interpretations.
Call it what you want.
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 20:17 ET by SideShowRedefine it, narrow the focus, dice it, slice it, education to some, indoctrination to others. Yep. You do know Judaism. The Old Testament. A lot of Evangelicals like to refer to the Old Testament to scare the living crap out of you. If you're a Christian, Jesus was Jewish and practiced Judaism to the very end. History and fiction. It's like a Michener novel. The Torah has been around a lot longer than the New Testament. Antiquity breeds Authenticity.
SideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
Well, substitute darwinism
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 20:26 ET by Willis_Leon_JohnsonWell, substitute darwinism for religion in your posts, and you pretty much prove that evolution is a religion.
Now that that's settled, who makes the most money from your religion du jour?
I know that algore makes a ton from his religion of gloBULL warming.
The various heads of teachers unions make a ton of money pushing their religions in the government indoctrination centers.
The lists of phoney religions are lengthy, shall we start with yours and tear it down with FACTS that cannot be scientifically proven?
Can you prove a false religion by citing another false religion?
Obama, the first "alleged" president
http://gjresult.com
Well, not true.
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 20:59 ET by SideShowYou believe in religion. You believe in defining anything you don't understand as a "religion"? Atheism is defined by what it is not- a lack of belief in a god. It is not a "religion". There are no houses of non-worship, temples to the lack of belief, or mosques to unpray in. Science and Religion are separate from each other in the way of their approaches to the truth. You might think there are science authorities in the same way you think of the Pope as the primary authority on Catholic Doctrine. This is incorrect. There are science experts, not authorities. Experts in a scientific field of study is much different from a religious authority on theology. Does that make sense? I'm not trying to pick a fight. Just clarifying definitions and misconceptions.
SideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
Sorry if you misread I
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 21:17 ET by Willis_Leon_JohnsonSorry if you misread I wrote.
I only label as religions, those beliefs that are fervently held and worshipped.
Like the 'muslim' religion, all other beliefs must be discarded and any writings based on those beliefs must be discarded and destroyed.
eberlushun is a religion, and any SCIENTIFIC findings or discoveries that do not fit the religious mold are destroyed and/or kept from public view. and before you ask, yes, the evidence against this religion is immense and not open to debate. Otherwise the believers would be willing, even eager for open, public debate.
The same holds true for algores "church of the hot money machine" jokingly refered to as the theory of gloBULL warming.
Obama, the first "alleged" president
http://gjresult.com
Complex science is not simple.
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 21:31 ET by SideShowClimate change is complex. The PR to villify it is simple. Sound bites are easier to understand then the actual science behind the workings of our atmosphere. We live within the experiment. Will we see a change in our lifetime? Probably not. So, the debate changes to an economic one. Easier for all of us to grasp. We pay now, see no result, it should be considered a waste of our money. Saving the world is not about saving the Earth. It's about saving us and our future generations of humans. Our existence on this planet is not a given. Think Dinosaurs. Now, what's the problem in investigating whether or not humans have had a dramatic impact on the climate? I'd like to see that it is purely a natural event...but...what if it isn't? Throw our hands up and let God take care of us?
SideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
Wrong, 'climate change' is
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 21:49 ET by Willis_Leon_JohnsonWrong, 'climate change' is extremely easy to understand. It happens. has since day one, and will continue to change for the rest of eternity.
It only becomes 'complex' when a person, or group of persons feels the need to profit from natural science.
There is more than ample evidence that the Earth was much warmer numerous times in the past, as well as periods much cooler than currently.
There is ZERO evidence that man has the ability to influence global temperatures in any manner.
Man can start a forest fire, and let it burn every tree, weed and blade of grass on the planet and the only effect will be temporary and shortlived. The blockage of sunlight to the Earths surface will result in a slight cooling period, probably less than one year.
There is nothing man can do that will increase the temperature of the atmoshpere or the Earths surface.
That my friend is fact based on real science.
That algore is attempting to lie his way into a fortune has alwyas been visible to those with anough functional brains to recognize a snakeoil salesman when he sees one.
Obama, the first "alleged" president
http://gjresult.com
→ Watch out Willis
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 21:53 ET by Cool ArrowHe's going to explain the "Little Ice Age" with all those campfires the Indians built before we killed them off.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
I'se reddy fer it. I gots
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:06 ET by Willis_Leon_JohnsonI'se reddy fer it.
I gots me a shiny new timnfoil bonnet with two freshly folded spairs....
Obama, the first "alleged" president
http://gjresult.com
→ Side Show
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 21:51 ET by Cool ArrowEliminate ALL CO2 from the atmosphere, and what is the result?
Increase those levels and what happens?
Has it not occurred to you that this "insulating effect" CO2 will have on the planet is either a scientifically replicable event, or it's not?
But what we're seeing in the case of AGW is a bunch of pontification.
If suddenly governments were paying out loads of cash to scientists toward a proof that Global Warming is not happening, the consensus would swing the other direction overnight.
Take over the Biodome and fill it with varying percentages of Air to CO2 ratio. Whatever happened to scientific experimentation under controlled conditions?
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
Biodome
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 16:29 ET by CiampinoI don't beleive the Biodome has an ocean, which is absolutely crucial to the whole argument, but a good starting point Cool Arrow.
Biodome is a dud movie..
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 17:32 ET by upcountrywaterBiodome
There is a Bioshere 2
Biosphere 2 contained representative biomes: a 1,900 square meter rainforest, an 850 square meter ocean with a coral reef, a 450 square meter mangrove wetlands, a 1,300 square meter savannahfog desert, a 2,500 square meter agricultural system, a human habitat,[...]
The problem with some of the biophere 2 projects is they forgot to seal it from the ground..
They did have problems with high CO2 levels, the plants loved it..
No plans to try a CO2 experiment and I looked on their site.
→ ucw
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 17:39 ET by Cool ArrowWhy should these scientists bother with controlled experiments when they already know the result they seek?
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
yea Cool,
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 18:37 ET by upcountrywaterWouldn't want some DATA screwing up all that tax payer funded consensus.
Problem
Sun, 11/29/2009 - 01:28 ET by RESTLESS 1Everything is scaled, except for the animals. Bad experiment right off the bat.
"If the man, with the power, can't keep it under control...some heads are gonna roll." -Judas Priest
Hello Sideshow, you are correct in saying:
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:35 ET by pahuber"Now, what's the problem in investigating whether or not humans have had
a dramatic impact on the climate? I'd like to see that it is purely a
natural event...but...what if it isn't? Throw our hands up and let God
take care of us?"
Nobody here or that I know has advocated the throw your hands and God take care of us approach.
However, I do believe you are missing the larger picture. It is how we investigate global warming and the methods involved in doing so that concern many an enlightened individual on this site. When most legitimate meteoroligist disagree with the pseudo intellects espousing pop science (e.g., Al Gore) with misinformation and sometimes deliberate disinformation as illustrated for us a few days ago here on this site it does indeed concern us.
Please stay above the usual cat calls and straw man illustrations here at NBs.
Thank you,
Paul
Well there were no
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 17:44 ET by Quasi-socialisthouses, temples, or mosques of Marxist worship either--yet atheists like to attribute "secular religions" just so that they can throw more atrocities back over to the religious side of things. So lack of houses, temples, and mosques is not an illustration that atheism is not a religion, or "secular religion" and it's relation to murderous Marxism is a non sequitur.
Universities
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 20:10 ET by Bull Moose ProgressiveWhich is why Atheists in Universities try to present Neo-Darwinism and the opposition to it openly? Oh wait... no they don't. They try to present everything one sided because they're afraid of open debate and discussion. In fact when has Neo-Darwinism ever been open to debate and discussion from any other point of view? I've never found it in all the history of scientific journals. So maybe the truth does hurt... them.
On the other hand, most of the Universities were founded by Christians in this country. Even the secular Universities of today almost all have origins from Christian movements which tried to openly educate as many people as possible. How many Universities were started by Atheists? How many of them allowed open debate of opposing religious points of view?
I've attended a Christian University, a Jewish University, and a secular State University. By far the most stifling and closed minded was the secular state University. By contrast the Jewish and Christian University both allowed all kinds of debate, including religious debate that confronted their very founding beliefs. It never seemed to me that either the Christian or Jewish University were afraid of any Truth.
Interesting with lots of assumptions.
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 20:24 ET by SideShowWhat do you know about Socrates and the Greek philosophers?
SideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
→ Nothing
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 20:28 ET by Cool ArrowHe only knew that he knew nothing.
Then he drank poison and died.
Obviously he didn't even know poison was poisonous.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
Actually, what you know is from where?
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 21:02 ET by SideShowSideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
I don't know
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 21:05 ET by Cool ArrowDid he say "I only know that I know nothing"?
Did he drink poison?
Would you drink poison if the State told you to?
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
"An unexamined life is a life not worth living."
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 21:13 ET by SideShowOne of the reasons why Socrates drank the Hemlock potion. He made the choice. He could have lived if he so desired. Society tells all of us what we can do and what we can't do. Do you drive without a seatbelt?
SideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
→ No I don't
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 21:24 ET by Cool ArrowI try to remember my seatbelt.
"An unexamined life is not worth living" It's a good saying, but it doesn't do much more than suggest killing off the polar bears might be a good idea.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
It's a Socrates quote on
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 21:38 ET by SideShowIt's a Socrates quote on his decision to drink the hemlock...{shaking my head}
I'm done here.
Goodnight. Happy T-Day.
SideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
Sideshow, I wish you would have stayed and answered the
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:42 ET by pahuberprevious question posed to you. I wish to know why some feel the intense need to defend atheism on campuses and even have professors denied tenure like at Iowa State University simply for not accepting evolution as the answer. The 'religion professor' at ISU had a professor denied tenure because he did not accept evolution as truth even though his department was physics.
I feel that evolution, when you see many of it's followers, has become a religion like scientology.
Why?
→ pahuber
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:47 ET by Cool ArrowSide Show left outta here mumbling something like "Might as well kill myself on account of nobody wants to examine my life"
Then he went off sniffing drainpipes and reciting the alphabet - Bob Dylan
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
Cool one, your posts were very very sharp and cool to the core
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 23:04 ET by pahuberbaby ; ) I loved reading the dialogue between you two!
Keep on keeping on bro!
CA - poor Side Show hadn't a clue...
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 22:27 ET by BO STINKSThank you for illustrating so sweetly the conundrum that is Socrates. Methinks t'went over 'is 'ead!
"How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the Plain Meaning of Words!" ~Sam Adams
I find it extremely
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:50 ET by Radical1979I find it extremely interesting that a physics professor does not accept evolution as truth. I know when I studied science in college it's what made me accept religion. The universe is too complex, ordered, and beatiful to have happened randomly. A little scientific knowlege might lead one towards evolution, and abundance of it (and logic) leads one away.
Hi Rad, yes I agree with you and yes it did happen at ISU
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:59 ET by pahuberI submitted a story to NB from a fox story posted all weekend long last week concerning this Hector Avalrez... last name close ;) who is now getting students to stand up for atheism. I am sure the story is still in Fox somewhere, but this guy also got the other professor's tenure denied. I believe that the Ben Stein movie may have touched upon it as well tho I have not seen it before. I need to see the movie. You NBs all bring joy to my heart.
God bless you all : )
Scientists
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 00:45 ET by Bull Moose ProgressiveLots of scientists and PhDs don't accept Neo-Darwinism as Truth. (I don't use the term evolution because it is too broad and vague). Most that I've known however work in private industry or religious Universities because the University clique will make your life a living hell.
GTG...short and sweet.
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 21:09 ET by SideShowIslamic scholars were able to protect the information on the ancient Greeks as the Church tried to destroy all heretical documents, artifacts & writings. Freedom of religion also means Freedom from religion.
SideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
→ Side Show
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 21:19 ET by Cool ArrowPlease don't tell me you're referring to the Library at Alexandria.
Islam was only about 10 years old when that "could have" occurred.
How old do you think Islam is?
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
Sorry...Arabian scholars.
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 21:35 ET by SideShowThe purging of documents happen later anyways in the middle ages by decrees of the Church. Of course, you knew this fact.
SideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
"middle ages"? How old is
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 21:51 ET by Willis_Leon_Johnson"middle ages"?
How old is Islam?
Obama, the first "alleged" president
http://gjresult.com
→ Willis
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:00 ET by Cool ArrowI knew the switch from Islam to Arabian was coming.
Liberals don't pass up a chance to show their admiration for Islam, going so far as to attribute significant contributions to them that occurred before the religion even existed.
Truth is, not much of anything has Islam contributed to the advance of humanity since that old man was trudging around the desert with his very young wife.
What you just witnessed was nothing short of "OH Islam, thank you for saving Western Civilization"
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
Well, mohammed was just
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:27 ET by Willis_Leon_JohnsonWell, mohammed was just such a nice, sweet, little old man that never once harmed any person or thing.
Why, when he went for a walk, he even apologized to the dirt for stepping on it.
His love of literature and scientific knowledge is legendary.
He treated his wonderful wife with the utmost respect and courtesy. Well, clear up until he was tired of her than all bets were off.
Destruction of anything he didn't approve of was the order of the day.
Such a sweetie....
Obama, the first "alleged" president
http://gjresult.com
Hegira and the Alexandrian Library
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 21:59 ET by UnsaneActually, the Hegira from Mecca to Yathrib (modern Medina) occurred in 632. This is the date from which the Islamic calendar gets its start. The Alexandrian Library was destroyed at least 200 years before that.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
→ Right Unsane
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:02 ET by Cool ArrowI was allowing for a revisionist theory that has it destroyed contemporary to Mohammed.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
Sideshow, this is an incorrect interpretation of freedom of
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:45 ET by pahuberreligion.
True. You have a choice to believe or not to believe. However, you have no inalienable right to not ever see religious symbols on the court houses or monuments of Government.
Perhaps you would like to rethink the interpretation of freedom of religion.
Funny
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 23:18 ET by ChristianRebelChrist himself spoke of how traditions and rituals were useless, said it to the Pharisees.
Faith, not religion. That's what I believe in.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places." -Ephesians 6:12
new age pantheist relativism
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 22:40 ET by konoSorry to differ with you, rebel. But religion is simply how one shares or exercises one's faith. To truly have faith without religion is to believe without living-out any of those beliefs. (Which, of course, calls into question the sincerity of those beliefs.)
It's popular these days to call oneself 'spiritual but not religious'. But that's just a bunch of amorphous gobbledygook that usually gives away modern pantheistic tendencies aimed at getting along, not at knowing and living the truth. It's related to the whole warm and fuzzy "nobody's right and nobody's wrong" attitude that calls all beliefs simultaneously valid and invalid.
True
Sun, 11/29/2009 - 14:29 ET by ChristianRebelI guess I should've explained myself a bit.
EDIT: OK what I meant to say (but said poorly, may God forgive me) was that Christ was commenting on the practice without the faith (aka meaning, heart, and relationship with God)
My pastor and the people I go to church with are better at explaining this than I am, something about religion having baggae and unneeded rituals that faith and relationship to God doesn't have.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places." -Ephesians 6:12
dawkins' views and manner in
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 18:07 ET by dr2bdawkins' views and manner in which he conducts himself probably does the most damage in getting others to understand evolution and understanding that belief in a God as a ultimate creator and evolution aren't mutually exclusive. He spoke at my school recently ( i couldn't attend) and I heard that most people were put off by his criticizing manner and attacks on religion. this was at a very liberal school as well
Antidote For Dawkin's Rant
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 18:10 ET by miss911ninjaGod, I can push the grass apart
And lay my fingers on Thy heart.
~Edna St.Vincent Millay
Gaia.
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 19:49 ET by SideShowVery Gaia, indeed.
SideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
Dawkins is ignorant
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 18:58 ET by rfpzzzzzThoughout history ,God has revealed Himself to men. It is a simple fact that cannot be undone with a book. I do not need a book to prove it to me. Rich ,poor, educated ,simple , prominant and insignificant all tell the same story. At some point they became aware of the Living God and often His mercy. It is interesting that an educated man can have so little awe for the world in which he lives to understand there are things he might not know.
Like most hucksters
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 19:18 ET by MidAmericaLike most hucksters today, Dawkins has found a way to earn a comfortable living 'feeding the sheep'.
What's the Chance?
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 19:23 ET by evilcontractorSo, with this ringing endorsement to go buy this book, two of the six people watching CNN ran out and immediately bought the book bringing the total number sold to six (Mom, Dad, Sister and Aunt bought the other 4).
www.coastaldecorations.com
Dawkins Waffles.....
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 19:23 ET by DaMamaWatch "Expelled" with Ben Stein. Dawkins digs his own grave with his tongue. He is exposed and sued to stop the distribution of this movie on DVD.
It takes more faith to be an atheist than to be a believer. To look at this vast creation all over the world and to honestly believe that it evolved from some goo or slime is the height of improbability.
Dirt
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:29 ET by Ciampino"To look at this vast creation all over the world and to honestly
believe that it evolved from some goo or slime is the height of
improbability."
And even if it did, where did the slime come from?
This joke always shuts up the Big Bang/Evolution supporters:
God is sitting in Heaven when a scientist says to Him, "Lord, we don't need you anymore. Science has finally figured out a way to create life out of nothing. In other words, we can now do what you did 'in the beginning'."
"Oh, is that so? Please tell me..." replies God.
"Well", says the scientist, "we can take ordinary dirt and form it into the likeness of man and breathe life into it, thus creating man."
"Well, that's interesting. Show Me. "
So the scientist bends down to the earth and starts to mold the soil.
"Oh no, no, no..." interrupts God, "get your own dirt."
Very profound and eloquent. I doubt most atheists even grasp
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:47 ET by pahuberthe understanding of this... : )
Hydrogen, helium, gravitional forces & a few other things.
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 16:58 ET by SideShow"To look at this vast creation all over the world and to honestly
believe that it evolved from some goo or slime is the height of
improbability."
Are you misrepresenting the scientific position and proceeding to refute the misrepresentation rather than address the scientific position itself?
You want to know how it all started, yet, will not ask the question and investigate the answer. Sounds like you are satisfied by what others tell you.
Simply- Question authority.
SideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
So...is he or isn't he?
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 19:33 ET by SideShowDe 29:23. The vengeance of a righteous God, inflicted on all these
kings and their subjects, for their wickedness, should make us dread
and hate sin. The fruitful land bestowed on his chosen people, should
fill our hearts with hope and confidence in his mercy, and with humble
gratitude.
2 Samuel 6:7
7And the anger of the LORD
was kindled against Uzzah; and God smote him there for his error; and
there he died by the ark of God.
"And it came to pass, that
at midnight the LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the
firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive
that was in the dungeon; and all the firstborn of cattle. And Pharaoh rose up
in the night, he, and all his servants, and all the Egyptians; and there was
a great cry in Egypt; for there was not a house where there was not one dead."
(Exodus
12:29-30)
The problem lies in the fiction...not the messenger. One should ask Why God hates so much?
For a website that despises religious conversation and debate, you really know how to fuel the flames.
SideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
You are speaking to an MDiv grad now, Sideshow... your question
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:50 ET by pahuberThe problem lies in the fiction...not the messenger. One should ask Why God hates so much?"
Do you even understand what this is all about from a Judaic or Christian perspective? You only see hate?
Shaking my head... please refrain from something you clearly have no knowledge about lest you show how little you genuinely know.
Paul
easily warped
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 22:48 ET by konoIf you extract the alternator and a couple of spark plugs from an engine, they'll appear to be without purpose and won't move anything anywhere.
Similarly, if you take out all the context and explanations, nothing in the Bible will make any sense.
Let's not forget it is
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 19:34 ET by Radical1979Let's not forget it is called "The Theory of Evolution" because there is no proof of it.
evolution is the change in
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 19:41 ET by dr2bevolution is the change in allele frequencies in a population overtime. This does happen and is the fact of evolution. the theory of evolution is the mechanisms it happens such as natural selection
→ OK
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 19:49 ET by Cool ArrowSo my question to you is this; is Downs Syndrome trying to emerge as the evolutionary leap, or is it a phase we've already gone through as a species?
Were our predecessors great banjo pickers, and then the guitar was invented?
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
may be a little confused
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 20:16 ET by dr2bmay be a little confused with the question but I'll try to answer...
Since Downs Syndrome does not infer any selective advantage of that person over others in a population then NS is not working on increasing the frequency of Downs Syndrome. Also, for natural selection to work, it is best to have a trait that has a high heritability and can be passed on. I don't believe you could call it a phase because then you would need evidence that some ancestor of man has trisomony 21 and it was either reverted back to a normal diploid stage later.
-confused on th banjo/guitar questio. don't see the connection
→ Anomaly
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 20:27 ET by Cool ArrowAre we seeing autism as a negative when maybe it's an evolutionary leap? Allegedly its occurance has increased ten-fold in the last generation (or have several maladies been balled together to raise the alert level and grab some funding?).
Are we working against Darwinism when we prolong the lives of Sickle Cell sufferers? Diabetes? HIV?
Was Darwin aware of Eugenics, the path his cousin, Galton had taken Natural Selection?
Now, all of a sudden, science does some serious backpedalling.
I think the guitar is more evolved than the banjo.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
Well, the 57 chevy evolved
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 20:34 ET by Willis_Leon_JohnsonWell, the 57 chevy evolved into a classic.
General Motors evolved into gubermint moturs.
Steam engines evolved into diesel electric.
Moonshiners evolved into NASCAR.
I dunno know CA, there may be something to this eberlushun stuff after all.
What do you say we begin a discussion of 'evolution' and how mankind has destroyed the world because we hate living here?
Or... we could continue to argue with idiots and confuse the readers.
Obama, the first "alleged" president
http://gjresult.com
→ I'm in, Willis
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 20:38 ET by Cool ArrowThat is, of course if the choice is "Or... we could continue to argue with idiots and confuse the readers."
I'm fixin' to ask the most probing question of all, "Are you sayin' Adam and Eve had belly buttons?"
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
so you two are saying that
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 20:43 ET by dr2bso you two are saying that anyone who believes in NS and evolution are idiots?
→ Not at all
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 20:57 ET by Cool ArrowI'm trying to figure out why you would capitulate so quickly with the old "You calling me stupid?" meme.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
lol mostly because you and
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 21:02 ET by dr2blol mostly because you and I were going back and forth the most and above you referenced idiots. thanks for not calling me an idiot...
...yet :)
→ You're not an idiot
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 21:10 ET by Cool ArrowDid the train leave the tracks? Depends on what you mean.
Maybe the tracks were laid for the train and weren't left by the train at all.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
I didn't call anybody an
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 21:22 ET by Willis_Leon_JohnsonI didn't call anybody an idiot.
I usually toss out terms of endearment and wait to see who whines about being offended first. ;=)
Obama, the first "alleged" president
http://gjresult.com
Sure Willis... it
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 21:47 ET by JerSure Willis...
it wasn't at all obvious that you were referring to dr2b, but then basic honesty has never been one of your strengths.
Jer
Well, when trolling for
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 21:58 ET by Willis_Leon_JohnsonWell, when trolling for trolls, don't be surprised when a troll takes the bait.
"I usually toss out terms of endearment and wait to see who whines about being offended first. ;=)
"
Hi jer, you made it first again I see. Did I wake you by stomping on your bridge again?
Obama, the first "alleged" president
http://gjresult.com
Good move, Willis... Try
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:08 ET by JerGood move, Willis...
Try to fib your way out of the hole your digging. As I said, honesty is not your strong suit.
Jer
Willis
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:24 ET by MrShyThe patron saint of honesty just lowered his judgement on you. Seriously, I kid you not... look....
:)
Shy...
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:29 ET by JerIs it simply impossible for you to refrain from taking behind the back potshots?
That's at least five times you've done it in just the past four days. Man up, son.
Jer
HEY! yer my troll, leave
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:34 ET by Willis_Leon_JohnsonHEY! yer my troll, leave MrShy alone.
Obama, the first "alleged" president
http://gjresult.com
Well, Willis, I must admit you're
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:47 ET by Jerthe expert on trolling, lying and smearing.
Jer
Nah little buddy, don't cut
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:55 ET by Willis_Leon_JohnsonNah little buddy, don't cut yourself short.
lying and smearing are the tools of your trade.
As far as 'trolling' goes, I can pop you out from under your bridge at will.
Kinda fun to watch you squirm for a while before I put you away until the next time.
Like now.
Tomorrow is Thanksgiving. A day when I share my good fortune with friends and family and put my little toys away for another day.
You are hereby put away until I feel the need to jerk your chain.
Obama, the first "alleged" president
http://gjresult.com
jer is predictable. I was
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:33 ET by Willis_Leon_Johnsonjer is predictable. I was trolling and found him lurking in the shadows hoping for an excuse.
He can spout to his little hearts content, he has no credibility, and he finds it irritating that I can bring him out so quickly on command, so to speak.
He will follow me around like a lost puppy until he finally gets tired of looking foolish. Then it's back to his bridge until the next time we go trolling.....
Life is certainly fine today.
Obama, the first "alleged" president
http://gjresult.com
OK, I haven't read every post, but...
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:46 ET by RukusWhen my neice was raped and murdered last year, Jer was one of the first to offer prayers to my family, I appreciated that. Yes, Jer has a different view of some things, but he is a good guy. I disagree with some things he says, but I appreciate that he has a different view and is willing to discuss it. Jer is good people. A little left, but good. I say give him some slack, he means ok with us NB'ers.
Let the pile on Rukus begin! LOL! : )
Gary
Old media species: Moonbat-a-saurus-rex. Getting more endangered by the day.
ca ca ca can cant we just all ge ge ge get a a a loooong?
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:55 ET by pahuberjust kidding. Hey all!
: )
Rukus
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 23:08 ET by MrShyI'm so sorry about your neice. I didn't know this happened... :(
Shy...
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 23:20 ET by JerIf you spent less time following me around like a four-year-old and devoted more time to being aware of matters like the terrible tragedy experienced by Gary and his family, you wouldn't have to be apologizing now for your ignorance.
Jer
Come on now Jer
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 23:27 ET by shawn228Granted lots of people knew what was going on with Gary's situation, but for implying and tell me if I am wrong., shy is too self absorbed to know about what was going on.
Kind of harsh Jer or did I not interpret it right.
I don't want to derail the thread but...
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 23:41 ET by RukusThe monster's trial has now been delayed indefinably, what ever that means... jeesh! And he may get out! Great holidays, huh? Sigh! : (
Gary
Old media species: Moonbat-a-saurus-rex. Getting more endangered by the day.
Sorry to hear that Ruk
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 00:03 ET by RESTLESS 1We are all praying that justice is done, and that it brings peace and closure to your family.
"If the man, with the power, can't keep it under control...some heads are gonna roll." -Judas Priest
You're right, Shawn... It
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 23:45 ET by JerYou're right, Shawn...
It was too harsh, and I apologize to Shy and to Gary.
But, please understand, I've tried ignoring Shy. He still follows me around taking shots. I've tried engaging him in straightforward debate. He can't resist the personal shots. He stalks me on threads and attacks me indirectly with obnoxious comments about me to others.
It gets old. Its disruptive. Its juvenile. He just can't control himself. And yes, it caused an overreaction on my part with that comment.
Jer
No you didn't Jer
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 00:06 ET by RESTLESS 1You are correct, actually. Hell, even below he is threatening to link to his favorite "baby picture". I just can't tell if that pic is supposed to be you, or shy crying about his lack of record deals.
Shy, don't you think it's about time you tried a new schtick?
"If the man, with the power, can't keep it under control...some heads are gonna roll." -Judas Priest
Rest1
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 00:21 ET by MrShyShy, don't you think it's about time you tried a new schtick?
Like playing nice-nice with libs? Nah, that's your schtick.
Let's stick to our schticks, shall we? Besides, I like mine. A lot.
Gotta say shy
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 00:33 ET by RESTLESS 1You're looking more immature with every keystroke. I mean, you're losing it man.
Good luck with whatever it is that has you tied in knots.
"If the man, with the power, can't keep it under control...some heads are gonna roll." -Judas Priest
Jer gets on people about
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 00:38 ET by MrShyJer gets on people about honesty, and Rest1 gets on people about maturity.
I think I see why you two get along. :)
Please, don't respond to this... we are tying this thread up in knots (derailing it, I mean.)
".....or shy crying about
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 10:54 ET by shawn228".....or shy crying about his lack of record deals"
Ouch, wow come on now R1, its TG, there will be great food and the Cowboys are on.
shawn
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 12:38 ET by MrShyThat's just "mature" Rest1 being "mature" Rest1. :)
Good morning Shy
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 12:54 ET by shawn228Happy Thanksgiving. I hope everyone today has a blessed day, and we can all go more than 2 days without some sort of flaming match.
Happy Thanksgiving to you, too, Shawn.
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 17:29 ET by JerHappy Thanksgiving to you, too, Shawn. I agree wholeheartedly about avoiding the flaming for a couple of days [forever if it were up to me]. Unfortunately, Shy and Willis couldn't restrain themselves for even a couple of hours following your request.
Jer
Jer
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 22:41 ET by MrShyUnfortunately, Shy and Willis couldn't restrain themselves for even a couple of hours following your request.
What can I say, I can't control myself.
No cheating, shawn
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 22:22 ET by UnsaneHey, Shawn, what the hell are you doing? You can ONLY celebrate Thanksgiving once a year, and you did that back on the second Sunday in October.
WE will all have a blessed day, and will enjoy - well, SOME football - and otherwise have a great Thanksgiving, but this is a normal Thursday for you, dude. So, Happy Ordinary Thursday In November to you!
:-)
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Shy,
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 23:19 ET by RESTLESS 1Until you can stop following a certain poster over all the threads, taking cheap shots with no content whatsoever, you are not one to talk.
You have been asked by more than just me to cut it out, but your immaturity and sense of self worth ensures you can't
Happy Thanksgiving.
"If the man, with the power, can't keep it under control...some heads are gonna roll." -Judas Priest
chose?
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 23:25 ET by MrShyIs that you?
????
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 23:27 ET by RESTLESS 1Dude, you are seriously losing it.
"If the man, with the power, can't keep it under control...some heads are gonna roll." -Judas Priest
double post
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 23:48 ET by MrShysorry 'bout that...
Rest1
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 23:46 ET by MrShyIt's just a hunch.
And Happy Thanksgiving to you, too.
Yikes Jer
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 23:32 ET by MrShyYou really ARE a mess.
That's ok Shy
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 23:30 ET by RukusYou can go to WKRG or WPMI and search for Briann Parish and get the time-line. Thank you for your concern. I appreciate it friend.
Gary
Old media species: Moonbat-a-saurus-rex. Getting more endangered by the day.
Thanks very much, Rukus...
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 23:10 ET by JerThanks very much, Rukus....
I would LOVE for these flare-ups to end.
But it very hard when there are gratuitous, absurd, personal attacks to deal with.
I made a completely harmless, light-hearted quip about Shannon Doherty on another thread a little earlier--"Shannon Doherty fantasizes about Calvin Coolidge"--and Willis pops up out of the blue with...
"jer has some deeply rooted inadequacies and needs to make up lies about people that are not here to defend themselves against his slanders."
This ridiculous behavior is getting old. It's totally uncalled for and its time it was exposed and condemned by the many good people here.
Jer
I'm with you here Jer
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 23:18 ET by shawn228I don't get it either. I mean just the accusations alone is kind of creepy, but what is with the accusation of you following him with puppy dog eyes. What a laugh, but then his motto is he doesn't have to back up anything with facts, he will just ask you to disprove him. Isn't this exactly what conservatives get on liberals for?
But it very hard when there
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 23:29 ET by MrShyBut it very hard when there are gratuitous, absurd, personal attacks to deal with.
Hahaha.... don't make me take out my favorite baby pics, Jer. :)
Who wants to change his diaper this time? I hate the smell....
Thanks Jer
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 23:43 ET by RukusI love you and yours, thank you! We'll deal with it, God will deal with him in the end. That is His will. We'll see...
Gary
Old media species: Moonbat-a-saurus-rex. Getting more endangered by the day.
Willis
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 23:00 ET by MrShyI still can't believe he had the courage to call another person out on the "h" word, when he knows we know all about him.
oh, he's predictable.
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 13:35 ET by Willis_Leon_Johnsonoh, he's predictable. Ever sinceI made a remark that hurt his feelings and he failed in all his attempts to present any credible evidence that I might be wrong, he's been on a crying jag.
He threw out the gratituous slander bit on Shannon Doherty and I slapped his little face for poor behavior, which was similar to stomping on his bridge.
He follows me, hoping for the tiniest of openings to start his name calling, whining and crying, of which I could care less.
His actions are obvious and his tactics are expected of people of his ideologies.
But, it is good to know the power I hold over him.....
Obama, the first "alleged" president
http://gjresult.com
Willis
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 15:05 ET by MrShyHe's indeed a whiny one... and an odd one all around. He's made a few posts that literally had me scratching my head.
Happy Thanksgiving, btw!
I'm saying that when God
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 20:44 ET by Willis_Leon_JohnsonI'm saying that when God created Adam, he created a HUMAN, he did it his way, and NOBODY questioned it for thousands of years.
God also create the apes.
The liberals evolved from the ape lineage to the point of where they appear nearly human, but obviously the brain has not fully evolved yet.
Liberals know they look, and act, like monkeys, but they can't help themselves....
Obama, the first "alleged" president
http://gjresult.com
Moonshine
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 23:53 ET by CiampinoMoonshiners evolved into NASCAR.
That was hilarious - I had a mental picture of the Beverly Hillbillies at a Nascar event.
Personally, I rely on
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 20:38 ET by Trix RabbitPersonally, I rely on Darwinism. It will keep loserettes like Olbermann, Maher, Maddow, and Garofalo out of the gene pool.
For the MSM: In your pomp and all your glory, you're a poorer man than me. As you lick the boots of death born out of fear.
Ian Anderson "Wind up"
I don't think you can apply
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 20:42 ET by dr2bI don't think you can apply NS to humans anymore. We don't let the "weak" die, we kill offspring before it is born which doesn't improve "fitness" and for the most part man has overcome selective pressures except of course "global warming" oops i mean "climate change" :)
I still loved deliverance ; ) lol just playin' around this
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 05:00 ET by pahuberT'day holiday!
"I think the guitar is more evolved than the banjo."
;)
Correct.
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 19:44 ET by SideShowJust like the Theory of Gravity and the laws of gravitation. Science uses the theory of evolution to explain and predict certain outcomes in biological organisms. Ever take an antibiotic? Vaccine?
SideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
There are "laws" in science
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 19:55 ET by Radical1979There are "laws" in science that are proveable. Evolution is not. Not quite sure where you're going with the anitbiotic and vaccine questions so I can't address that.
i am assuming that he was
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 20:19 ET by dr2bi am assuming that he was talking about antibiotic resistance which is evidence of NS. You have a population of bacteria. A selective pressure is introduced (the antibiotics) this selects for mutant bacteria that produced some resistance. These mutants have a fitness advantage and survive and produce more offspring. Therefore the population changed from a susceptible bacteria to a resistant one. Therefore the bacteria evolved through natural selection
2b, Like standing in the sun and getting a tan..
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 23:42 ET by upcountrywaterAdapted , not evolved.
EDIT: While you're twitching about that, show me 1/2 of a feather, in the fossil record.
obviously the fossil record
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 00:30 ET by dr2bobviously the fossil record is very biased and incomplete.
I am twitching about the adapted, not evolved b/c i have no clue what part of my response it was geared towards
→ Fossil record
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 00:58 ET by Cool ArrowI used to have a copy of "Shrimp Boats" by Jo Stafford on 78 RPM.
I've got my Grandpa's windup RCA Victor Victrola.
I know a little bit about fossil records.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
ⶼ Hay Fossil, How about living stereo
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 11:36 ET by upcountrywaterLiving Stereo
Since Darwin put forth his
original theory, scientists have sought fossil evidence indicating past
organic transitions. Nearly 150 years later, there has been no evidence
of evolutionary transition found thus far in the fossil record. In
Darwin's own words, if his theory of "macro-evolution" were true, we
would see a vast number of fossils at intermediate stages of biological
development. In fact, based on standard mathematical models, we would
see far more transitional forms in the fossil record than complete
specimens. However, we see none -- not one true transitional specimen
has ever been found.
State controlled health care ! music video.
Archaeopteryx
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 17:04 ET by SideShowSideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
Too bad for your example
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 19:02 ET by NL207Too bad for your example that we have learned in recent years from better preserved specimens that a great many of the Theropod dinosaurs actually sported feathers. They, too, are flightless "birds".
⚡⚡
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 19:05 ET by upcountrywaterFeathers as in 100% feathers, no 1/2 feathers are visible.
You either get a fossil with a feather, or no
feather. But never half a feather.
The X-MEN are here.. can he fly?
evolve vs select
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 00:02 ET by CiampinoEvolved if the antibiotic induced the production of some enzyme that neutralized the antibiotic and subsequent generations retained that ability;
Selected if the antibiotic just killed the sensitive ones and left those individulas already there in that population that were capable of neutralizing the antibiotic even before first exposure.
no one in this debate is
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 00:27 ET by dr2bno one in this debate is using universal definitions
evolution-change in allele frequency in a population over time
adaptation- a trait brought about by NS (heritable trait that gives selective advantage to an individual and is passed down to viable and fertile offspring)
adaptive-a trait that increases fitness of individual but did not arise from selection (skull sutures in humans help pass thru birth canal, passed along from common ancestor with birds who also have sutures but obviously did not go through a birth canal)
Provable how? By deduction
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 08:09 ET by troglodytProvable how? By deduction from other laws. And where do these laws come from? What is it you would count as proof.
Hardly
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 20:15 ET by Bull Moose ProgressiveRead very many scientific journals?
Scientists make predictions based on natural selection all the time... which are then outright contradicted. The contradiction is then explained away using Natural Selection anyways...
Natural Selection is the Atheists "God of the Gaps" that they simply use to hand wave away all biology.
i do read journals.. not to
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 20:20 ET by dr2bi do read journals.. not to be "that guy" but you have an example of predictions based on NS and then contradicted? I'm just interested in looking into it
So many
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 01:04 ET by Bull Moose ProgressiveSo many to choose from. Scientific journals are rife with people making a natural selection based prediction.. getting the opposite result and explaining it with natural selection.
But my favorite two of course are from Darwin's Origin of Species. Darwin was an excellent scientist and postulated ways of disproving his theory of the evolution of species over time. One involved the fossil record, that it would eventually show gradual transitional forms from one to another as we found more skeletons. But mostly what we get are matches to skeletons we've already found and new discoveries are more rare. New discoveries are also pretty much never "transitional" forms. Punctuated Equilibria (which is not religiously based) was devised to explain this and does a good job of it. But it has been brushed aside by the Neo-Darwinist crowd and isn't given a serious place at the table.
Another from Darwin was that as we discovered the workings of the cell we would discover simpler and simpler evolvable structures as we got to the smaller organisms which were supposed to be the underpinnings of evolution. The rediscovery of Mendel's work was actually a crisis for evolution which had to be explained away with the Neo-Darwinian synthesis. The Neo-Darwinian Synthesis doesn't really address this prediction and why it was opposite of predicted, they just show that simpler biological structures (i.e. Genes) can evolve as well and move the goal posts for disproving "Macro Evolution".
→ Bull Moose
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 01:16 ET by Cool ArrowNow I find my Grandma was a lemur named Ida.
Of course you can see the family resemblance.
Well, I didn't inherit her tail, and she was about 1/10th my size, she was my Bush baby Babushka.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
Missed something
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 19:54 ET by DarasenI would like to point out that Dawkins is not an atheist. He is an Anti-theist. He is vehemently opposed to God, Christ, Jesus, Christains, and Christianity in general. Actually the way he speaks I would go so far as to say that he hates Christains in general.
Well, People that believe
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 19:58 ET by Willis_Leon_JohnsonWell, People that believe in a God generally have strong moral and ethical values.
Strongly held definitions of right and wrong with very few 'grey areas' to contend with.
Religious people are more likely to be mentally and emotionally stable.
Religious people usually do not need to 'find themselves' because they already know what the mirror looks like.
Believers in God are usually less likely to arm themselves and go kill innocent people.
Darwinists believe in the bastardization of darwins works.
Muslims believe in the bastardization of words written by a murderous madman with a lot of power and a distinct hatred for anybody with a differing opinion of him and his desires to rule the world.
ohhh.... that last reminds me of obama....
Obama, the first "alleged" president
http://gjresult.com
To quote George Orwell,
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 20:09 ET by Trix Rabbit"...the sort of atheist who does not so much disbelieve in God as personally dislike him."
That is Dawkins - a scientist who is so smart that he is an idiot. I expect to see his newest screed come replete with pictures and crayons.
For the MSM: In your pomp and all your glory, you're a poorer man than me. As you lick the boots of death born out of fear.
Ian Anderson "Wind up"
i see
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 20:43 ET by rona great big oops in dawkins future. there might even be a bowing of the knee and confession with the tongue that Jesus Christ is King.
Atheism is a religion
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 21:56 ET by xraynovasideshow said, "Atheism is defined by what it is not- a lack of belief in a god. It is not a "religion". There are no houses of non-worship, temples to the lack of belief, or mosques to unpray in. Science and Religion are separate from each other in the way of their approaches to the truth."
A religion is 'any system of beliefs, practices, ethical values, resembling, suggestive of, or likened to such a system.' (Webster).
The athiest has faith that the underlying assumptions of an observed phenomenon are true for all times and for all conditions (e.g., evolution, radioactive decay constants, etc.). That faith collapses when athiests backward extrapolate from current observations, to applying them to past phenomena (a failure of the application of the scientific method). For example evidence of evolution in rapidly reproducing fruit flies, or bacteria, cannot be scientifically backward extrapolated to the origins of man.
The Christian, too, has faith that what God said in the Bible is true for all times & conditions. Some athiests argue that the New Testament Apostles were fishermen, etc. and so are not credible when they make statements about God being the creator of man as a full, complete being... but the Christian falls back on the ultimate authority of Jesus Christ (yes, authority) when he makes known (in the New Testament) that He too knew that man was made as a whole entity (i.e., not as the result of the evolutionary process).
For both the athiest and the Christian, it all comes down to having faith is something. For the Christian, faith is one step leading to eternal salvation, while the athiest's faith is a direct line to eternal damnation... not scare tactics- just reality.
Well I don't agree with how Richard Dawkins phrased it.
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:14 ET by shawn228I do see his control freak, vindictive part though. Hey don't get me wrong, I want to believe, but I wish he would lighten up a little.
For an atheist to tell a
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:16 ET by MidAmericaFor an atheist to tell a person of faith that their faith is an illusion is like a childess man telling a woman holding her child that the bond she feels for her child is an illusion because he cannot feel it himself.
Dawkins
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:24 ET by brain trustIt was on CNN so nobody saw it. The day will come when Dawkins will believe. Only it will be too late.
Before we have a government that can supply us with everything we will have a government that can provide us with nothing.
Hi there Jer
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:41 ET by shawn228Sigh, Don't take this as a backhanded compliment, but here it is the day before Thanksgiving and here you are getting piled up on again. Sometimes I almost think you are a glutton for punishment.
Hi Shawn
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 22:53 ET by RukusI sorta defended Jer above, I expect some blow-back, but Jer is a good guy. Me and him have had some e-mails and he is a really caring person. I won't pile on, but I can see where some would. Maybe I am to nice, but with Jer I like him. He was very supportive with Brie and I appreciated that. He's good people, left but good. That goes for you too, a little left, but good. Take care freind.
Gary
Old media species: Moonbat-a-saurus-rex. Getting more endangered by the day.
Hi Gary
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 23:12 ET by shawn228You right Jer is a good guy. I feel bad for him. He gets piled on most of the time as soon as he logs on by the same people. People that imply Jer is stalking them is lying, its others that follow him.
edit
Thank for the kind words Gary, you still remember my first post to you right? Not every troll is the same. there are Orks, Gremlins as well....:-)
I'll ok with you Shawn
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 08:43 ET by RukusYes, you and Jer are left of us on NB. Ok, we agree on that. Yes, you guys are gonna get piled on being left, gonna happen, deal with it. LOL! Doesn't mean you aren't good guys with different opinions .
OK, ya wanna be left, ok,deal with it, ok, i'm ok with it. I still like you guys ok. I am a target now... damn! : )
Edit: That sounded snarky, I meant you guys can deal with it. LOL! It was late, that's my story and I'm stickin' with it. : )
Gary
Old media species: Moonbat-a-saurus-rex. Getting more endangered by the day.
Proof that the notion of
Wed, 11/25/2009 - 23:53 ET by DarasenProof that the notion of Natural Selection has some flaws: the Chihuahua.
I guess Dawkins will know
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 03:05 ET by ConservativeRexI guess Dawkins will know about 5 seconds after he's dead.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum
Atheist Are Smart Because Atheist Tell Everyone They Are Smart
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 14:25 ET by lareeAnd if they have an English Accent, that means they are super brainy right? It's not what you say, but how you say it, and with what authority you say it with. All the names listed on the Dawkins bandwagon. "Conformist" peddling the lastest "ism" it's a fad Atheist Chic.
We are the highest developed speices on the planet so far if you believe this is it, and we are done evolving? ....no more kinds of homo sapiens in the future? Modern Man is it? Kind of flys in the face of Evolution.
In an infinate universe there is a species on the third planet from our sun, and they are so advanced, they can determine if there is a "Supreme Being" uh huh sure. Homo Sapiens are not all as Narcisstic as Dawkins and his atheist cult.
It is a free country people can chose to believe or not to believe. If there is no God, what do atheist care what other people believe? What's business is it of theirs?
GET BACK TO THE SUBJECT
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 23:40 ET by ChristianRebelThe subject of this post is is to expose how the media HIGHLIGHTS the athiest "scientist" and "philosopher" but ignores the CHRISTIAN'S THAT PRESENT SCIENTIFIC AND PHILOSOPHICAL DEFENSES FOR THEIR BELIEF.
For Example:
The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Bible, which provides the ignored historical evidences to support the Bible that the secular world claims doesn't exsit. (Example Joseph and his dream, last paragraph: http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD256109#_edn1)
Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis, Lewis makes hurculian philosophical statements that backs the Bible and the Christian faith from a former athiest.
The Cells Design: How Chemistry Reveals the Creators Artistry
Oh and for that evloution thing, bare with me, but there's a Christian website that explains the scientific gaps in the theory and some hints to support intelligent design.
Books found here: http://www.conservativebookclub.com/products/SearchResults.asp
Evolution here: http://www.overcomeproblems.com/believe_in_evolution.htm
These things are obsured by the liberal press to support Dawkins.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places." -Ephesians 6:12
How is one a "militant"
Thu, 11/26/2009 - 23:58 ET by balboaHow is one a "militant" atheist?
when one is a pushy a$$hat
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 00:22 ET by Rowanewhen one is a pushy a$$hat like this one.
"You know, when I was asked earlier about the issue of coal, uh, you
know — Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would
necessarily skyrocket" - Barack Hussain Obama
Hi bal, when one pushes for another's tenure to be denied becaus
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 05:09 ET by pahuberone does not believe in evolution, that is militant.
I know you have argued that those who do not subscribe to evolution should be censured.
Do not push me to find the exact quote but I remember reading that in a thread about a year ago or less concerning Ben Stein's movie... your comment struck me so much that I basically have thought you were the largest douche in the world ever since... God how lame and petty are you for that view?
Anyhow, I hope you have grown since then.
Take care,
Paul
pahuber
Tue, 12/01/2009 - 22:55 ET by balboaI sure don't remember that and that's not a view I agree with. It doesn't sound like me. I'd love to see that. I'll dig around.
Balbo, I remember the topic and your comments. Stalinistic IMHO
Thu, 12/03/2009 - 03:04 ET by pahuberThe way you chime in with your inane comments that make absolutely no sense are just fabulous. I still have not gathered what good you think you're doing... I just think you're here to crap on our carpet.
I am a Conservative,
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 13:20 ET by DoktorFrankenI am a Conservative, politically. I was once a Christian who lost their faith. I went through a period where I attacked religion and faith. Not any longer.
This assnut Dawkins is much more than a person without faith. He is filled with hate and anger against people who have faith in something he will never understand. His attacks on Jews and Christians are a view into his soulless, bile-filled life. His mission is to destroy something he cannot touch or feel. In my mind he, and folks like him, are a major part of what went wrong with America. There's is absolutely no reason to attack the Judeo/Christian way of life. It's merits (without dragging up long, lost history of ignorance that permeated all sections of humanity) have positives that have enriched people and helped to create our laws and morals.
I have respect for people of faith - except for the followers of the Death Cult, Islam. Many people in my family are devout Christians and whenever we are together for meals I bow when they pray. I do not mock them or speak out against what they believe in. That would be the height of rudeness - something Dawkins excels at.
Now, as far as the THEORY of Evolution, I'm not sure that we humans can sit within our mere sliver of Geological Time and point to portions of time and adequately explain everything about how living things ''evolve''. There is some indication that Homo Sapiens and other ''human like'' species lived at the same time. Obviously we won out through our superior intelligence (please, no smartass remarks!) and adaptation capabilities. As for leaps in evolution I have a feeling that mutations helped out in that regard. Just a feeling, you understand.
I guess what I am trying to say about myself is that I am wary of people who attack others for their beliefs (or in the case of radical Islam - kill others that don't agree with them). The newest religion of Global Warming / Climate Change are a group of closed-minded people equal in ignorance as the religious folks back ''in the day'' that Atheists point to for some defense of their viewpoint. A wake-up call to those people - The Spanish Inquisition has been over for some time. Their ''religion'' is going to compete with Islam to see who can be the most ignorant and close-minded. And it's supposed to be based on ''Peer Science''. It is to laugh.
Live, be well, and learn to co-exist with a variety of beliefs. It is the haters that will fail because they have NOTHING but hate.
Sarah Palin: The Most Dangerous Conservative In America
Just supporting what you believe?
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 17:35 ET by SideShowI'm not going to defend Islam or any other religion you've deemed to be a "death cult" or whatever you decide to call non-Judeo/Christian religions. There are a billion Muslims in the world. Not all of them belong to a "Death Cult". They live in this world peacefully, raise families, work, and are a lot like the rest of the religious types in the world and in this country. They believe in the same God, the God of Abraham.
As for the "religion" of Climate Change. Throughout the world, people study and try to explain unexplained phenomena. They ask the question and try to find the answers. Hocus-pocus, magic, and the belief in supernatural forces do not belong in explaining science. The next time you're sick and need to be cured of a curable disease...who will you rely upon, your clergy or your doctor? Think Polio for a moment.
Stop hating people who do not believe what you believe. Stop judging them- that's up to God anyway, isn't it?
By the way, I don't hate anyone that makes me laugh! I love the Jimmy Swaggarts, Jim & Tammy Faye Bakkers, and all the rest of those hypocrites.
SideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
Sideshow Bob is the perfect nom de plume for you, friend
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 17:47 ET by SickofLibsThis Allah character is not the same god Judeo-Christians worship.
Investigate it if you don't believe me.
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 18:15 ET by SideShowSideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
Nothing I need to investigate, DB
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 18:17 ET by SickofLibsNothing I need to investigate, DB
The God of Abraham.
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 18:27 ET by SideShowThe Abrahamic conceptions of God. Don't stick your fingers in your ears and close your eyes to the truth.
SideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
→ Side Show
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 18:40 ET by Cool ArrowYou're a wiki man?
Whodathunkit?
"It cannot be stated when exactly the Israelites moved from their orginal polythesim to a monothestic religion" - Side Show's offered treatise from wiki.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
You're joking, right?
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 18:50 ET by SideShowQuick and easy.
Problems with wiki?
Would you like some other reference?
Something you would believe in?
SideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
Wiki!!!
Thu, 12/03/2009 - 03:21 ET by UnsaneQuick and easy. And for the lazy.
Wikipedia is a source that cannot be evaluated, primarily because anyone can go in there and say anything they want about anything.
If I attempt wikipedia in the academic world in which I partially reside, I would be laughed right out, and I have seen people laughed right out for being dumb enough to use wikipedia in research.
Would you like some other reference? Try a reference that is at least halfway legitimate.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
SideShow is indeed a sideshow... he should pair up w/ hydro.
Thu, 12/03/2009 - 03:42 ET by pahuberBoth seem to be totally full of themselves.
pahuber, Tisk tisk - I saw
Thu, 12/03/2009 - 18:24 ET by hydrodynDMpahuber,
Tisk tisk - I saw that.
I don't know who SideShow
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 19:08 ET by Conservative VoiceI don't know who SideShow is, as I haven't followed whose who for awhile...however, he is right.
The difference between Islam and the Jews goes back to Abraham, they believe that Ishmael, his first born, recieved the Priesthood...and the Jews believe the line of authority went through Isaac.
SideShow
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 17:54 ET by MrShyNot all of them belong to a "Death Cult"...
Whoopie!!!! Let's throw a party, people. SS has certainly eased my frayed nerves. Not all of them belong to a death cult. You don't know what a relief that is to hear.
Whew.
Jim Jones anyone?
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 18:21 ET by SideShowDavid Koresh, plenty of Christian cult figures out there with the End of Times in them there preachins! Gosh, can you name anyone at this moment who believes we are living in the End of Times with the Rapture just around the corner? Well, can ya? I betcha can! (wink, wink)
SideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
SS
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 18:31 ET by MrShyJust be aware that from your fingers to my eyes (unfortunately) you wrote that, out of some billion (2 billion? more?) -- ** that's billion, for everyone out there reading this ** -- Muslims:
...not all of them belong to a "Death Cult"...
Let that sink in for a minute.
And welcome, you obvious liberal ("I'm not part of any ideology, I think for myself, man... LOL OMG!!") who is quick to cover for the sick, death-happy religion that is Islam, along with other stinky things in this world that progressive liberals love defending and/or promoting.
Similarities abound.
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 18:33 ET by SideShowYou can find "death cults" in Christianity just as you can in Islam. It's a fact, Jack.
As Hitchens said, "Religion poisons everything."
SideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
SS
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 18:40 ET by MrShyAnother leftist whistling along in life as people are actually killed daily by Jihadists the world over -- by the truckloads -- and countries are either in ruin or dealing with serious civil wars, all for the love of Allah.
And with all that's going on right in front of him/her, all around him/her, the whistling leftist brings us the retread and utterly failed equivalency argument between the two religions*
* Sorry, between a religion and a cult.
Oh, Christ!
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 18:46 ET by SideShowAre you kidding?
What was that about?
Ramblings and name-calling.
Just stop for moment.
Keep thinking your God is greater than their God and you're going to find out it's the same God. As Lincoln said-
“Sir, my concern is not whether God is on our side; my greatest concern is to be on God's side, for God is always right”
SideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
MrShy has a God?
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 18:51 ET by Candance MooreLast I checked Mr Shy was not a Christian in the first place. Of course, if SS had taken time to learn things about NB before coming on here and blabbing, he wouldn't end up making such silly assumptions.
Ignorant does not mean stupid.
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 18:58 ET by SideShowI'm not here to investigate people's backgrounds- I'll leave that to the Government.
"He" could be a "she" for all I know, and frankly, I don't care. It's an internet forum.
SideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
Okay, so who let SideShow Bob here out of the Kosylem?
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 20:09 ET by R D HelmMy guess? We have a sleeper KosBot that averages about one comment every four months.
That spells P.L.A.N.T.
Yeah, and I'm buying this load of BS, too:
About MeProfile
Married with Children
My Other Sites
Hannity
FoxNews
Redstate
FreeRepublic
HistoryMember for 29 weeks 5 days
-Dave
Our elected representatives have failed us.
Good call Dave.
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 20:10 ET by Free StinkerGood call Dave.
خال
Free,
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 20:13 ET by R D HelmLOL-Yeah, and I had been logged in all of about 30 seconds, too.
:-)
-Dave
Our elected representatives have failed us.
let's whisper here, Shy
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 18:47 ET by Candance MooreCan't have clownboy learning about stuff like this. It would hurt his little brain.
It's shame that people get so incensed over a book.
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 18:54 ET by SideShowI like the softer pages of the Bible over the Koran, anyday!
I love the Gideons! You never have to call room service when you run out.
That's a joke people and a poor one at that.
SideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
→ Just in case
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 19:04 ET by Cool ArrowWouldn't want you slithering back to this post to delete the evidence.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
That sideshow is one class
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 20:17 ET by Free StinkerThat sideshow is one class act, eh ?
/Sarcasm Off
خال
You got a reason for
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 12:56 ET by Willis_Leon_JohnsonYou got a reason for demeaning snakes CA?
Snakes 'slither'.
SLIME oozes.
Obama, the first "alleged" president
http://gjresult.com
Candance of NewBusters
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 19:01 ET by MrShyYes, but our new dingbat is on the case, working hard to eradicate "all death cults". SS wants to "go after the criminal elements." (see two posts down)
We really need to calm down about Islam. And yeah, their God is your God. Naturally.
Here, SS, go after the criminal elements. These "cases" are just the last two months, btw.
Get back to us, thanks. Keep us posted on how it goes, rounding up the "criminals". If you need extra back-up.... um...... good luck.
Is this about Obama?
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 19:03 ET by SideShowOhhhh, now I get it. Obama prays to Allah because you think he's a muslim. If Allah is the same God as the Judeo/Christian God, and everyone prays to the same God then you would be supporting Obama? That's as Glenn Beck as I get. Of course, the "O" in Obama can be found in the word "GOD" which means Obama is God? or just the messiah? Hmmm. I think we have a case to get rid of him now or embrace him as one of your flock.
SideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
since you're so accustomsed to Hannity's forums
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 19:10 ET by Candance MooreWhich is what you told rex the last time you appeared on NB (six months ago, all the way back in May), perhaps you can enlighten us as to how well that works out making fun of Christians and mocking Glenn Beck on such a conservative site.
Then you can explain where you've been for the past six months. Certainly it has nothing to do with you logging in under some other name.
We won't talk about what chose called you back in May. That'll stay between us.
You may go now.
→ SideShow
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 19:13 ET by Cool ArrowOther religions worshipped a giant phallus.
You'll bow to anything, won't you?
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
SS
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 19:18 ET by MrShyI've seen my share of posts at NB that made no sense, but this one takes the cake.
Again, I went out of my way and supplied you a direct link of just the last two month's of acts perpetrated by those "criminals" of Islam.
Do yourself a favor and sit and really absorb it. Then come back here, more humbled, and start from scratch. You'll make more sense AND we'll tease you less.
Sideshow
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 19:11 ET by shawn228I am not one to bash anyones religion, however can you name me even one Christian, Jew or Buddist that straps bombs to themselves to blow up as many people as possible? Including women and children?
Also since you like Wiki so much, they document an average of 180 suicide bomers per year since 2005, what percentage of those bombers were Christian? I look forward to you prompt response, because I'm sure you are not one of those post and runners right?
I'm not here defending the extreme elements.
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 19:24 ET by SideShowHow many good Christians went over to kick some Mooslem ass? How many innocent lives have been lost? Collateral damage? Blackwater's CEO comes to mind. Broaden the scope. See the Forest for the Trees. Bringing our "values" and spreading our "democracy" can be seen as one in the same in the eyes of our enemies. It depends on how you want to define it and from what perspective and position you want to take. Terrorists- they're criminals in my mind. They use a religious shield to cause fear & panic. They're criminals, plain & simple.
Explain to me when did the Iraqi people become the terrorists we seek to destroy? I thought most of them were Saudis.
SideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
→ Too late SS
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 19:29 ET by Cool ArrowThey're criminals, plain & simple.
And you don't find it the least bit confounding that these "plain and simple criminals" are overwhelmingly Muslim?
Your powers of deduction are at least equal to those of Eric Holder.
Next, you'll be telling us that women are just as likely to commit violent rape as men.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
SideShow
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 19:30 ET by shawn228You are not answering my question and answering my questions with questions of your own, this is a troll tactic. Please Sideshow, don't prove people right when they say liberals do nothing but deflect questions.
No one went over there with the purpose of kicking Mooslem ass, they went there because they were following orders from our CIC.
"Explain to me when did the Iraqi people become the terrorists we seek to destroy? I thought most of them were Saudis."
I'm not going to argue with you about why we went to war, but again can you tell me how many of the 180 suicide bombers a year, which also kill American troops fighting for freedom are Christian?
hmmm, where you lost me was
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 19:32 ET by Conservative Voicehmmm, where you lost me was the "Terrorists -- they're criminals in my mind."
Doesn't matter what is is your mind. It was an act of war. And we aren't at war with Islam.
We went to Iraq because Saddam was not cooperative. Its like this, a robber uses his finger in his coat pocket to threaten a cop. The cop says, drop it, thinking its a gun...and the robber says...make me....in your mind the cop is at fault for shooting the robber.
Say what you want...but Bush kept the war off our borders post 9-11, where as captain ZerO is playing the dangerous game that this is a police action...these are but misunderstood criminals.
SS
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 19:35 ET by MrShyEnough of your diversionary tactic and insidious leftist drivel of "we're partly to blame". (Partly to blame for them strapping on bombs, ramming cars/planes into humans, etc., dozens of times every day, worldwide, yelling "Allah" in their final moments...)
Try answering shawn's question. Of the average of 180 suicide bombers per year since 2005, what percentage of those bombers were Christian?
SSounds
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 19:45 ET by DoktorFrankenSSounds
Sarah Palin: The Most Dangerous Conservative In America
You mention David Koresh
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 19:43 ET by Jack BauerYou mention David Koresh and Jim Jones, neither of whom were Christians. That's D minus, for effort. Do try harder.
In case you didn't know, Christians acknoweledge Jesus Christ as the son of God.
Koresh and Jones believed THEY were at least prophets; and probably thought of themselves as the messiah. God knows really, because they sure didn't make much sense.
Though in Koresh's case, his followers didn't deserve to be incinerated; and in Jones's case his followers didn't deserve to be brainwashed into mass-suicide/murder.
Agreed, Jack.
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 19:59 ET by JerAgreed, Jack.
Do you also consider their followers to be non-Christians?
Jer
oops
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 20:07 ET by MrShyThe hair-splitter pokes his head in.
→ Actually Shy
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 20:13 ET by Cool ArrowIn the case of the dispute between Isaac and Ishmael, wouldn't he be an heir-splitter?
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
cool
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 20:16 ET by MrShy:D
Christianity 101
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 20:25 ET by Candance MooreBecause apparently our lefties here don't understand the criteria. Here are the rules to qualify as a Christian (issues like abortion aside, this is about theology):
-Jesus Christ is and was the Son of God, fully divine while fully human, and the only person with the power to overcome sin.
-Jesus died to absorb the consequence of sin on our behalf and then returned to life to save us from eternal death.
-there is no other name by which we can be saved.
If a cult teaches dependence on a messiah-like figure such as David Koresh, they've elevated another human to being comparable to Jesus and the Bible clearly speaks against that.
Arrogance 101
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 23:08 ET by JerYou appear to be addressing me, Candance. If so, I've understood the basic tenets of Christianity since I first began attending Sunday School and Church services nearly 60 years ago.
As such, I find your "instruction" not only unnecessary, but patronizing and offensive as well. I would expect this from someone like Dan the Man--but not you.
Jer
WAAAAAHHHH 101
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 23:17 ET by MrShy:p
What a surprise. Another
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 23:34 ET by JerWhat a surprise. Another profound insight posted by my resident stalker.
Jer
Jer
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 00:13 ET by MrShyYou just can't seem to catch a break around here. Everyone's doing something to you.
This member's insulting you, that member's crossed the line, you expect such-such from that member but not this one, this other member's stalking you, a member over there never lets up with personal attacks, that member there -- yeah, that one -- is disrespectful, that other member has done this, this, this, this and this, and you've kindly asked him to stop, and there's that one member who you admired greatly before that deplorable post.
Ahhh...The stalking defense.
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 00:33 ET by JerB..bu..but, your Honor...
Don't you see? He deserved to be stalked because he objected to it.
You're a smart one, MrShy.
Jer
Jer
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 01:02 ET by MrShySomeone like you hardly objects to any brand of attention. You're being (cough) dishonest again.
Now take your once-over from Candance. :)
Well there goes my Thanksgiving wish
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 02:52 ET by shawn228Looks like you guys have a problem going two hours, let alone two days without a flaming match.
Shy and Jer, why not ignore each other for a few days,? the threads and boards will feel much more peaceful.
shawn...avoid each other?
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 17:40 ET by JerAre you kidding? I've been pleading with Shy to do exactly that for the better part of eight months now. Blonde has asked him to stop. [After which he took a day off, and then roared back worse than ever.] Restless has asked him to stop. Unfortunately, Shy has made it painfully clear that he is pathologically incapable of controlling his stalking. Just check out this thread alone and notice who has been popping up with the ambush potshots. Not me, and 90% of the time it hasn't been me in the past. [I tried it a couple of times thinking maybe his being the victim would change his thinking--it didn't.]
The mods aren't going to take a stand against it, and as long as he can get away with it, he'll continue the practice. I can say without qualification, Shy is the most immature individual I've ever encountered in my life. So, I'll just have to deal with it the best I can.
Now, he'll post a comment about my being thin-skinned, or a "mess" or link another silly picture of a baby crying or some other such foolishness. And the beat goes on.
Jer
Jer
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 17:54 ET by MrShyNow, he'll post a (etc., etc..) ....
No, not this time. I'll spare you.
But I am thinking up a Christmas gift for you -- and for all of NB :) -- which you might even enjoy, although you'll pretend you're highly offended, that I'm stalking you, that you're hurt, that it's outrageous, that it's immature of me and.... and, yeah, that beat will go on.
forgive me, Jer
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 00:32 ET by Candance MooreInasmuch as you've spent the past 36 hours debating whether lying about murder should be cause to lose communion, and now whether members of anti-Christian cults were actual Christians, one can easily get the impression that you're fuzzy about that whole Jesus thing.
Also, I find it a tad annoying on my end that you whip out 60 years as some kind of trump card. I can introduce you to people I know who've gone to church their whole lives but couldn't point to Israel on a map, much less determine if a cult member counted as a Christian by theological points.
If you're not dense about Christianity, then please don't act like you are. That's not an attack or a snarky comeback. It's how I see this. You can't play obtuse one minute and then claim expertise later.
I've posed legitimate
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 00:58 ET by JerI've posed legitimate questions, Candance. I haven't questioned your faith, or cast any doubts on the depth or sincerity of your beliefs, or attempted to "tutor" you with Sunday School level definitions of Christianity. Your doing so to me was a disgraceful example of "holier than thou" condescension, and the subsequent attempt to rationalize your actions with phony characterizations of my previous posts as deliberate density regarding the religious implications associated with certain behavior is beyond absurd.
Jer
we'll have to agree to disagree
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 01:31 ET by Candance MooreI took both of those questions to be needlessly tedious and obtuse. You say you meant them in sincerity, and I believe you, but on my end they came off sounding really bad.
It's not to question your knowledge or your sincerity. It's me scratching my head going why on Earth would someone who grew up in church be asking that question. I don't believe you're ignorant, so there had to have been another reason. That's why I told you not to *act* unsure about things you clearly understand.
As to it being condescending, what else was I supposed to do? You knew the answer and asked for it anyway, for what, just to advance the ball in a debate. Ask obvious questions and you'll get obvious answers. In no way was I trying to be snarky, I was answering in a way that I felt was most accurate.
You say your questions had merit, I was not convinced. We'll leave it to posterity and let the readers decide. Have a good night. And I do hope we can still be friends.
Well, Candance, I'm sorry
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 01:51 ET by JerWell, Candance, I'm sorry you found the questions "needlessly tedious and obtuse". They weren't intended to be, and, as you know, the one on this thread was not even addressed to you.
Jack had commented about Koresh and his faux Christianity. I agreed with him. I think the issue is slightly more complex with respect to the other Davidians however, although I tend to endorse your view. That said, I believe there are many who consider them Christian, and I'm not entirely convinced their opinion should be so readily dismissed.
In any event, you have a good night, too. And I have far too high of an opinion of your intelligence, fairness, and good character to let this interfere with our continued friendship.
Jer
Candance, you are a disgrace! :p
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 01:15 ET by MrShyYour doing so to me was a disgraceful example...
Look what we have here. Drama queen-level adjectives and hyperbole from The Uncle? Couldn't be... and:
If you're not dense about Christianity, then please don't act like you are.
Ouch. That's gotta sting.
Wrong, stalker...
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 01:28 ET by JerI didn't call Candance a "disgrace", so please don't even imply that I did. But her patronizing Christianity 101 lecture was indeed disgraceful.
I've always had--and still have--enormous respect for Candance. That was very surprising behavior.
Jer
Jer
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 01:36 ET by MrShyYeah, really disgraceful.
What a disgrace.
'Night, Uncle.
Geeze MrShy. You can't go
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 13:20 ET by Willis_Leon_JohnsonGeeze MrShy. You can't go a whole thread without your stalker/troll attacking you on a personal level.
Obama, the first "alleged" president
http://gjresult.com
Willis
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 14:35 ET by MrShyActually, a majority of us reap his wrath.... his feigned outrage and indignation. You, me, DanMan, Unsane, now Candance, etc..
He's always a hurt puppy.
A "victim" of endless NB abuses. :p
Jer
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 01:47 ET by MrShyIn all seriousness, and the dust-ups aside (and slightly belated, sorry)... Happy Thanksgiving!
Gosh, for a second there, I
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 01:55 ET by JerGosh, for a second there, I thought you were serious. Should have known better.
Jer
Don't know about Jack
Fri, 11/27/2009 - 23:24 ET by RESTLESS 1But as for Restless 1, YES.
"If the man, with the power, can't keep it under control...some heads are gonna roll." -Judas Priest
Gee-whiz, golly. The Conflict of Protestants and Catholics.
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 14:08 ET by SideShowNorthern Ireland.
Bombings?
Innocent lives sacrificed, all for what?
SideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
Sideshow
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 14:13 ET by shawn228Are you going to answer my question? Out of 180 suicide bombings per year since 2005 how many were Christian?
Splitting hairs.
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 14:38 ET by SideShowZero? Why 2005? Are you saying after 2005 that all bombings will be from Jihadists? Showing a history of religious zealots using extreme measures to further their agenda is what I intended. The cycles are there. Whether you like it or not, history shows that humans will do extraordinary things for their religious causes. Correct? This does not end. It's just another chapter.
SideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
CircusShow
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 15:21 ET by MrShyHOLD --FREAKIN'-- ON ......
Asking you for statistics on terrorist attacks over the last 5 (five) years.... (my head is doing a double-take spin here).... is..... wait.... you didn't really write......
splitting hairs ?????
HAHAHAHAHA......
You're on the stupid/blind side of history. And you're not only content with that, but arrogant to-boot.
EDIT: So, our "splitting hairs" scorecard (for lack of a better word) is:
Terrorist attacks since 2005:
Christianity - 0
Other religions (besides Islam) - probably/most likely 0 (or maybe a few)
Islam - *** 8,000 plus *** (approximately)
* I get that number from here, dividing it almost in half.
ON TOP OF THESE DISGUSTING STATISTICS....
They ramped UP their attacks on the western world AFTER ...... THEY. UNLEASHED. THE. BIGGEST. BLIND-SIDING. ATTACK. ON. A. FREE. WORLD. EVER. Which also came after MANY MAJOR ATTACKS on the US/West and it's interests for some 10-15 years prior...
For God sakes man!!!
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 14:45 ET by shawn228Would you just answer the question. Yes I am talking about modern times, but since you refuse and just want to answer questions with more of your own, lets go back 50 years, did these Christian extremist as you say match even one one year of destruction from these Islamic extremist?
shawn
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 14:59 ET by MrShyAnd yeah, CircusFreak (sorry, but I just don't care cuz you're not thinking rationally, at all) .....
Dig up some stats for us covering the past half-century, on the two religions and their history of attacks perpetrated on behalf of their God.
Again, you dwell in some freakish alternate universe. Makes no sense at all.
→ Another chapter
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 14:45 ET by Cool ArrowAbsolutely silly of you to observe this as just another chapter. These are the times in which you live.
Your outlook that "it's their turn" isn't one you'd follow if the situation came to your home. On second thought, I don't know that.
When you hear hoofbeats, you're thinking "zebras"
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
Also
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 14:16 ET by shawn228Please tell me how many lives have been lost in Northern Ireland from bombings or terrorism since 2005 and we can do a comparsion.
shawn
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 14:29 ET by MrShyTo CircusShow, bombings and terrorist attacks that occured 15-20 (and more) years ago -- oh, and many of which essentially had nothing to do with Chrisianity, like the N. Ireland ones -- are perfectly relevant and fair game in the discussion of religion and what our present day enemy is.
Koo-koo... koo-koo.....
He'll/she'll continue to dodge and sidestep your question. Giving you an honest answer will rattle his ideological cage.
Mrshy
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 14:38 ET by shawn228We have not agreed with much lately, but in this case you are right on the money. Wow what dishonest debating from this person.
what do you expect, shawn?
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 14:53 ET by Candance MooreThat's what angry liberals do.
Playing Northern Ireland as a "Christian terrorism" card is far too simplistic and off the mark. Religion is intertwined, but the point of that struggle was a political campaign to remove the English government's control of the region.
I grow tired of idiots who spout talking points on subjects they haven't researched. I daresay SideShow couldn't even explain what Sinn Fein is without hitting wikipedia, but here he is lecturing you on the Irish troubles.
By SideShow's standard, is it okay to call Columbine a case of atheist terror?
Nothing to do with-
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 15:00 ET by SideShow-Religion. Depends doesn't?
Exactly. It's to push an agenda. Cloaking yourself under the guise of religion leads to hatred of that religion by the victims. Criminal actions or not?
Why do they hate us?
SideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
SideShow
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 15:02 ET by Candance MoorePlease explain the origins and mission of the IRA without leaning on wikipedia or any other reference page.
No.
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 15:23 ET by SideShowSideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
rofpmsl ha ha ha ha ha ha
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 15:32 ET by Candance MooreYou bring up a debate point and then refuse to prove its relevance? So we're supposed to take your word for it because you're just cool like that? YOU are the one who brought up the IRA to buttress your case, not me.
Let the record show that SideShow debates by bringing up odd things, providing zero context, and then refusing to expound.
You are dismissed.
Candance
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 15:44 ET by shawn228I believe the word troll is used a little too liberally around here "pun intended" however in this guys case, yes has got the markings of troll in his scalp.
Why not?
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 16:04 ET by SideShowWhen you need to shut someone down, call them a name. How about "vermin"? That was used pretty effectively in the past.
What's your problem? Do ya need to stay within a narrowly focused box you drew yourself? How about it? Do you think this is the last time religion will be used by a small group of people to push their agenda? Violently?
SideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob
SS
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 16:11 ET by MrShyActually, no, you're not a troll. First off, you're relatively new here (or the first time you're posting and sticking around), and this is our first real thread with you.
But you're side of the argument has more holes than swiss cheese. Sorry.
Welcome, btw.
SS #2
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 16:19 ET by MrShyDo you think this is the last time religion will be used by a small group of people to push their agenda? Violently?
And therein lies your foolhardy, relativist thinking, which doesn't do you or I any good. We're dealing with today/these times. Not the Catholics of the 19th Century and further back, and not a projection into the future.
There's one REAL problem right now. Do you know what that real problem is?
Some also argue that Islam is going through it's growing pains, as it emerged later than, say, Christianity, but I'm not so sure about that. But the responsibility of their reign of current terror lies squarely on them and their religion. No one else.
You want to argue that all religion is poison -- or is "potential" poison, with your past/future arguing. Perhaps, but I'm atheist (or agnostic) and clearly, to me, most religions today seem to be coexisting just fine in the modern world. I say "most".
Actually, you're asking me
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 15:58 ET by SideShowActually, you're asking me to expound upon a subject with no ability to reference any material. The answer was logical.
I used the IRA case as was intended. Religion was used to foment hatred and disguise the agenda. Just like Islam is being used by terrorists in their approach to rid themselves of the US.
So, Islam and its followers are taking the brunt of our rage. This shouldn't be. We should focus on the perps.
SideShow
"The Bart, the"-S.S.Bob