micro 0 #51 December 21, 2005 Quotewhich puts one ID myth to bed. don't be so hasty john. it's unbecoming of a real scientist. I miss Lee. And JP. And Chris. And... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
micro 0 #52 December 21, 2005 QuoteJust curious, can you point to a single post where I express admiration for Bill Clinton? you're the biggest bed-wetting liberal on this board john. you have almost 13000 posts here... i don't need to read them all to know what you stand for or what you believe. you're far too transparent for that. I miss Lee. And JP. And Chris. And... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,146 #53 December 21, 2005 QuoteQuoteJust curious, can you point to a single post where I express admiration for Bill Clinton? you're the biggest bed-wetting liberal on this board john. you have almost 13000 posts here... i don't need to read them all to know what you stand for or what you believe. you're far too transparent for that. So you can't find any, and resort once again to the personal attack. It does seem to be your style.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
micro 0 #54 December 21, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuoteJust curious, can you point to a single post where I express admiration for Bill Clinton? you're the biggest bed-wetting liberal on this board john. you have almost 13000 posts here... i don't need to read them all to know what you stand for or what you believe. you're far too transparent for that. So you can't find any, and resort once again to the personal attack. It does seem to be your style. well, i can certainly admit that "bed-wetting" is derogatory, like "knee-jerk" conservative and the like, but face it john, you're about as liberal as they come. It's really not much of a PA, but it does seem to be your style to get your panties in a wad over such little slights.... and can't you fuckin read? I'm not going to bother w/ your 13000 threads to confirm you like clinton. you may have disagreed w/ him getting a hummer under the desk, but... jesus, you're sensitive. I miss Lee. And JP. And Chris. And... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
n23x 0 #55 December 21, 2005 Man, who got their nipples in a twist here? .jim"Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
micro 0 #56 December 21, 2005 QuoteMan, who got their nipples in a twist here? .jim oh, it's how john and I flirt... it's shameless really. I miss Lee. And JP. And Chris. And... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #57 December 21, 2005 Ok you two.. get a room... I got video..... Mark will want to watch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
micro 0 #58 December 21, 2005 QuoteOk you two.. get a room... I got video..... Mark will want to watch as long as i'm pitching... my dick may be small, but I think john's too old to get it up. I miss Lee. And JP. And Chris. And... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,146 #59 December 21, 2005 QuoteQuoteOk you two.. get a room... I got video..... Mark will want to watch as long as i'm pitching... my dick may be small, but I think john's too old to get it up. Fully functional in all respects, but thanks for your concern.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #60 December 21, 2005 QuoteLike others in the scientific community, I don't just throw my hands up when there aren't answers to hard questions and say, "well fuck, it must be God." I fully admit that some degree, some form of evolution exists. That much is inescapable. Religion has always been the easy answer to difficult questions. We now know about lightning, so it isn't a god displaying anger. As the questions have answers, the need for the old answers will fade. QuoteHowever, far too many scientists take the "facts" of evolution and leap to invalid conclusions not warranted by the existing data. Isn't that the definition of faith? Religion is the acceptance of answers with no facts to support it. Religious people try to find flaws in any facts provided by scientists, but when questioned, they answer "faith". QuoteIt has become a religion in itself, whose followers adhere to it sometimes even more vehemently and "irrationally" than "back-woods fundamentalists" whose only intention is to force-feed creationism down everyone's throat. Belief is an irrationality at any level. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nathaniel 0 #61 December 21, 2005 Quote"Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged." Well that seems a bit misplaced. The whole idea behind science is that you scrutinize as much of it as you can. Which is apposite in contrast to the ID credo, "God did it, let's move on".It's why we teach the scientific method to begin with. Otherwise we'd just teach the outcomes of science. Tho it's not accurate to characterize it as a controversy or to suggest that it's invalid...unless you can come up with an alternate theory of course...which ID is not. Any more than it's controversy that the Earth rotates duh revolves around the Sun, or that the Sun has been "burning" for millenia without consuming all of its hydrogen via combustion.My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,146 #62 December 21, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteJust curious, can you point to a single post where I express admiration for Bill Clinton? you're the biggest bed-wetting liberal on this board john. you have almost 13000 posts here... i don't need to read them all to know what you stand for or what you believe. you're far too transparent for that. So you can't find any, and resort once again to the personal attack. It does seem to be your style. well, i can certainly admit that "bed-wetting" is derogatory, like "knee-jerk" conservative and the like, but face it john, you're about as liberal as they come. It's really not much of a PA, but it does seem to be your style to get your panties in a wad over such little slights.... and can't you fuckin read? I'm not going to bother w/ your 13000 threads to confirm you like clinton. you may have disagreed w/ him getting a hummer under the desk, but... jesus, you're sensitive. I only seem liberal during Republican administrations. I'm really anti lyingscheming sonofabitch politicians in general. The only President I can remember who was not found to have lied to the Congress or the people (or both) was Ford. I can remember back to Eisenhower. In order of trustworthiness I would rank them Worst Nixon Johnson Bush II (Challenging strongly though) Clinton Reagan Kennedy Bush I Carter Eisenhower Best... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,593 #63 December 21, 2005 QuoteNope. ID is a tool of religious groups to bring God back to schools. Indeed, the intellectual leaders of this movement - Behe, Dembiski, Wells - make no bones about their associations with creationist organizations like the Discovery Institute. (Which, BTW, claimed to be a scientific organization until some internal documents were leaked to the press.) A couple of months ago New Scientist ran an interview with one of the leaders of the ID in schools movement. He had no problem with stating that they intended ID to be the thin end of the wedge that would lead to more and more theological pseudoscience being introduced in all areas of schooling. Scary.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rasmack 0 #64 December 21, 2005 QuoteAS a scientist I want evolution taught in biology and science classes. As a religious person I want religious doctrine and dogma taught in religion class just as I got it in Catholic and Lutheran Parochial school when I was growing up. To force ANY religion on others contravenes GOD's decision to give man free will. Intelligent design/ creationism needs to be taught in the proper place and it is NOT in science classes I think I'm in love. HF #682, Team Dirty Sanchez #227 “I simply hate, detest, loathe, despise, and abhor redundancy.” - Not quite Oscar Wilde... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IanHarrop 42 #65 December 21, 2005 QuoteI have some very deeply held beliefs.. but when I look at sedimentary strata that are hundreds of millions of years old and some layers have really kewl looking critters that look like little aliens insofar as just how different they are from life today I know the dogma just does not work to explain what I am seeing. IT just took way too much time for all of that to be laid down...in organized layers which can be dated in relation to other layers. Then I read the Bible... and get the whole six day thing and think.. interesting way for a group of barely literate sheperds in the middle east to try and explain something they could not even come close to comprehend. The whole begatting and chronology of Genesis just does not jibe with the evidence all around us of how creative god truly has been. Somehow I do not think the shepherds who produced the prophets of the Bible... comprehended true time as god knows it. I just cant believe LITERALY what is put forth in the Bible. Its a complete lack of understanding of time and is a sad attempt to understand time as GOD knows it. I do believe GOD created everything but as God has given us free will so did GOD give and life the time to transform into what it is today. AS a scientist I want evolution taught in biology and science classes. As a religious person I want religious doctrine and dogma taught in religion class just as I got it in Catholic and Lutheran Parochial school when I was growing up. To force ANY religion on others contravenes GOD's decision to give man free will. Intelligent design/ creationism needs to be taught in the proper place and it is NOT in science classes I like your thinking. Thanks for being so clear in your thoughts and expressing them well."Where troubles melt like lemon drops, away above the chimney tops, that's where you'll find me" Dorothy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Newbie 0 #66 December 21, 2005 Quotehttp://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2005/12/20/intelligentdesign-051220.html I have renewed faith in the judicial system..... TK Seconded "Skydiving is a door" Happythoughts Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,107 #67 December 21, 2005 >In that series, spokespersons asserted that "all scientific evidence >supports [Darwinian] evolution" as does "virtually every reputable >scientist in the world." Well, you added that "darwininan" which makes it not quite the same. All scientific evidence supports evolution, a theory initially laid down by Darwin. It is being refined all the time. Details change but the basics stay the same. >However, far too many scientists take the "facts" of evolution >and leap to invalid conclusions not warranted by the existing data. Like what? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Reginald 0 #68 December 21, 2005 QuoteQuoteMany members of the scientific community hold ID as more plausible than strict darwinism. This baffles me. How could you be considered a "member of the scientific community" if the best you can come up with is: Fuck, I don't know. This is too complicated for me to understand, so I give up. God must have done it. LOL! Good one!"We've been looking for the enemy for some time now. We've finally found him. We're surrounded. That simplifies things." CP Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GTAVercetti 0 #69 December 21, 2005 Ya know the best part? Jones was appointed by Bush.Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lummy 4 #70 December 21, 2005 my favorite quote is from Jones commenting on being labeled an "activist judge " QuoteThose who disagree with our holding will likely mark it as the product of an activist judge ... this is manifestly not an activist Court," he wrote. "Rather this case came to us as the result of the activism of an ill-informed faction on a school board, aided by a national public interest law firm eager to find a constitutional test case on ID." sourceI promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. eat sushi, get smoochieTTK#1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #71 December 21, 2005 QuoteIn order of trustworthiness I would rank them Worst CAT 1 Nixon CAT 2 Johnson Clinton Bush II Kennedy CAT 3 Reagan Carter Bush I CAT 4 Eisenhower Ford Best Nice list, I'd switch 3 pairs of people of around, but it's close, it's a coin flip. I grouped them up too, pretty close to what John said. Although people still put JFK up on a pedestal. I don't know why. If he was alive today, he'd be best buddies with both Cheney and Kerry. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Channman 2 #72 December 21, 2005 >Well, you added that "darwininan" which makes it not quite the same. All scientific evidence supports evolution, a theory initially laid down by Darwin. It is being refined all the time. Details change but the basics stay the same. And this coming from someone who rejects the supernatural and stresses an individual's dignity and worth and capacity for self-realization through reason. What religion would this be? for you preach it so well. Is this your Belief our do you know it to be true? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,107 #73 December 21, 2005 >And this coming from someone who rejects the supernatural and > stresses an individual's dignity and worth and capacity for self- >realization through reason. What religion would this be? for you > preach it so well. What are you talking about? I consider myself catholic although I disagree with some of what the church has done and some of what the church teaches today. Is that what you're asking? I don't reject religion; I just think that it's not the same as science. The term "supernatural" as applied to religion was coined by people who don't understand that separation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
micro 0 #74 December 21, 2005 you consider yourself catholic? edit... not meant to sound inflammatory, just surprised to hear that. I miss Lee. And JP. And Chris. And... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Channman 2 #75 December 21, 2005 Evolution is preached from the mountain top as being a fact. I still remember it to be only a theory not proven and up for discussion. Many people believe it to be true, but to Know it to be true moves one from their belief to...ah enlightenment. Your a Catholic, but some Humanist I work with worship evolution as a fact. Believing in a theory takes alot of faith. Now some would say it takes an idiot to believe in a creator. (Who is Right? and Who is Wrong?), the problem as I see it is one side only is allowed to tell their side of the story. Where is the education in that? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
