Evolution Disclaimer Supported

The Advocate (Baton Rouge) ^ | 12/11/02 | WILL SENTELL

[f.Christian]

Your one sick overblown god you should get rid of - - - POPE // EGO ! ! !

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for not painting me with that brush!

[viaveritasvita]

I nominate AG's post 3645 as winner of the "best post from our side on the thread" prize. Amen and very well-said.

[B. Rabbit]

The fact remains that 90% of homeschoolers are Christians and they are smarter than the atheists churned out by public schools. You have failed to answer many of my challenges to you, and until you do, there is no point in going forward.

This "fact" is making a terrible assumption. Homeschoolers are better educated on average than the public school products, this I will not disagree with. However, a parent who has the time and resources to teach their children will almost always surpass the quality of education provided by the state. Let me restate your theory in a few different ways: The fact remains that 90% of homeschoolers are smarter than the Christians churned out by public schools. The fact remains that 90% of homeschoolers are Christians and they are smarter than the Christians churned out by public schools. The fact remains that 90% of homeschoolers are Christians and they are smarter than the average student churned out by public schools. This whole thing is a function of homeschooling and available parents, not religion. You are making the absurd hypothesis that Christianity makes people inherently more intelligent.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you oh so very much (blushing here...)!!!

[B. Rabbit]

Gee. Maybe they were all designed that way from the start. Did evolutionists watch this "mutation" take place from one species to the next?

It is a durned good thing we finally caught up technologically with the design so we could finally safely pull out each others' wisdom teeth and prevent infection. Wouldn't the designer be upset that we are improving upon his design when we do such things? Oh well, I'm leaving 'em in my kids then.

[Aracelis]

My apologies again. The only defense was that I had a tough night at work, and I had f.Christian's typically pleasant salutations on my mind. :^)

[f.Christian]

Your one sick overblown god you should get rid of - - - POPE // EGO . . . phony bloated self ! ! !

[Alamo-Girl]

No problem, I have had a few tough days so I can relate!

Sometimes when I read f.Christian's posts, I ponder that his expressions carry a lot of feeling that I might understand better if it were music instead of words.

[B. Rabbit]

So, the fellows who blew up the Twin Towers are as valuable as Mother Theresa? If you had a choice between saving the life of Mother Theresa or those fellows who would you choose? How about the choice between your child and a perfect stranger? We obviously value some people more than we value others (kin over friends, friends over strangers, etc.). Because your subset of kin and friends does not intersect my subset of the same, we will value different people more highly than others. Hence, my argument that values are purely subjective.

I've been following this debate for a while between you and exmarine. To be honest, when you first started I wasn't sure where you were going. I tend to pay high respect to what you write, normally, but I couldn't get it. I think I do now. Subjectivity in regards to human life is only normal, but it does not imply moral behavior or relativism, as exmarine puts it. There is a value to all life, but people value terrorists far less than family and friends. People value family and friends far more than strangers, but that does not make killing the stranger a moral thing to do. Simply because you place no value on my life for instance (subjective), you cannot simply kill me and justify it as moral. Subjective value does not necessitate moral relativism. Or something like that.

[f.Christian]

Some people // neigborhoods have had success with bad neigbors by amplifying their noise back to them!

I like paece // music too ! ! !

[B. Rabbit]

You are half-educated in logic. When I say "gee, doesn't this here thing look pretty similar to that there thing, I am drawing on the powers of analogy to suggest a possible relationship. This is called analogical reasoning, and is not subject to the law of the excluded middle. Look it up.

Although you speak far more eloquently than I, this is the exact point I was trying to make to exmarine for an eternity. It is so logical, and yet he refuses to see it. Even when everyday examples are put in, he won't listen.

[f.Christian]

Your one sick overblown god you should get rid of - - - POPE // EGO . . . way over rated phony bloated self ! ! !

[edsheppa]

...then rigorous pedagogy must apply.

Pedagogy? Why bring that up? :-)

But seriously Don, pedagogy is not primary, it serves a goal; here that goal is teaching about science. Science is much more than a set of published results, it is a process, a history, a community etc. Learning about the governing paradigms is central, it isn't all that should be taught.

if you are going to give special consideration to ID

I don't know what gave you that idea. I don't see how teaching about ID serves the goal. OTOH if I were convinced it would, the I would support doing so.

[B. Rabbit]

I hate what liberalism // evolution is doing to this country ! ! !

We have a common enemy, much more formidable than either side of this debate and yet laughably inferior: the liberal. But I don't see evolution as a direct brother to liberalism. What does evolution have to do with high taxes, weak foreign policies, and welfare?

[f.Christian]

You don't know that liberalism is state socialist control of everything . . . money - - - minds // evolution ? ? ?

[B. Rabbit]

You don't know that liberalism is state socialist control of everything . . . money - - - minds // evolution ? ? ?

No I don't. And I believe you are creating a relationship between two things by simply stating those two things in the same sentence. Back up the relationship.

To be honest, I don't care if they teach evolution in public schools or not yet. But what do we say about natural history? Can we say in our schools that dinosaurs lived 200 million years ago? Just curious, not an attack at all. I just want to see what you think.

[f.Christian]

Never heard of social engineering . . . brain washing - - - control // dependence ? ? ?

Ever read of Plato's cave allegory . . . captive // chained audience - - - projections // shadows(fakes // props) on the wall ? ? ?

Media bias . . . spin - - - vetting // PCism ? ? ?

Escapees are murdered . . . ostracized! ! !

Main Entry: os·tra·cize
Pronunciation: -"sIz
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): -cized; -ciz·ing
Etymology: Greek ostrakizein to banish by voting with potsherds, from ostrakon shell, potsherd -- more at OYSTER
Date: 1649
1 : to exile by ostracism
2 : to exclude from a group by common consent

ps...God purposely staged the auditoriom // theatre // script ! ! !

[SwordofTruth]

They will shut us up, one way or the other.

NO we won't. You're side will actually win here on Earth for a short time.

God is the one who will shut you up in the end.

[Junior]

You got it.