Posted on 12/25/2008 7:55:05 PM PST by Soliton
After 10 years and many thousands of replies, I am leaving FR.
I don't really care, and I don't know why anyone else would.
I am leaving before I am banned (again). Truth doesn't seem to matter on FR. I don't know if it is donations or sympathetic opinions that do, but I have been suspended twice when I followed the rules and the people who complained to the moderators didn't, yet the moderators sided with them.
For the record, evolution is a fact and the Shroud of Turin is a fraud. I would prove it if the admin moderators would let me, but they won't. Your resident "expert", Swordmaker won't debate me because he can't.
I will work to build a forum where members have rights and truth matters.
Merry Christmas
And by "scientist" you mean "credentialed propagandist."
Awww, why didn't you tell him before...
You mean they flourished under Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao, Kim Jung Il?
Not sure where you're going with that. It's a mixed bag.
While they haven't attempted to 'eliminate' any specific discipline, they - let's go with an example everyone can recognize - want to force Creationism (oops, "Intelligent Design") into public schools and/or restrict the teaching of evolution.
So by your own admission, they haven't tried to impose that dominionist theocracy on everyone.
I admitted nothing. It's a gradual process.
Creation was taught in schools for centuries with no deleterious impact on education.
You mean the centuries before Origin of Species? LOL!
Christian schools which do teach both, outperform public schools.
You're attributing the success of private Christian schools to the teaching of evolution? You have got to be kidding me!
It couldn't be the higher level of parental involvement and the higher grade of teachers? (Which is present in nearly all private schools, not just Christian.)
Homeschoolers, who are often very conservative Christians, teach both as well and they do even better than the private schools in educating and graduating their students.
Yeah. One-on-one (or one-on-a very small number) teaching has amazing results.
There is no precedent set that indicates that teaching creation/ID is going to result in more poorly educated students in the sciences. The statistics do not bear it out.
Cite the studies. I'll love to see 'em.
Further: I was using the 700 Club's ratings as an example of how popular the anti-science segment of the US population is.
Why do you assume that the viewership of the 700 club is inherently *anti-science*?
"I'd like to say to the good citizens of Dover: If there is a disaster in your area, don't turn to God, you just rejected him from your city. And don't wonder why he hasn't helped you when problems begin, if they begin. I'm not saying they will, but if they do, just remember, you just voted God out of your city. And if that's the case, don't ask for his help because he might not be there."- Pat Robertson on Dover
The majority of dedicated viewers would, naturally, agree with his opinion.
(And evos are complaining about made up labels?)
"Evos"? Are those the nutty people that believe earth and life are older than 12,000 years? ;)
Sources?
Pat Robertson and The 700 Club.
Don't you believe that a human embryo is a human being?
As I said: not touching that one.
Biblical Communism? Speaking of *yawn*. That’s about as bad as the dominionism links we were provided upthread.
What a stretch, trying to blame communism on the Bible.
They did that of their own free will. It is not forced socialism and communism, and if you note, even in the Book of Acts, it didn’t work out so well.
Nor does that link demonstrate any attempts of *religious* communism. Can you, perhaps, provide us with ANY examples from history of such a system?
While being an atheist doesn’t mean that you’re a communist, it sure seems to be a tendency that they lean towards. Even in this country, in this day and age, those most hostile in their opposition to God show the most communistic tendencies.
Atheism and communism go hand in hand. The correlation between those regimes which are communist and are atheistic in nature is too hard to ignore.
If you ever have cancer, you'll thank the army of scientists that are working to vanquish that monster.
Is this what conservatism is nowadays? Knee-jerk anti-science?
You’re being deliberately obtuse about the connection between the teaching of creation and evolution in school and are misrepresenting my comments.
Of course, I did not say that the teaching of evolution was what made them better. I clearly stated that the teaching of creation did not bring down the quality of education as the evos and atheists claim it would.
There is NO evidence to support the contention that teaching creation and ID in schools will cause the science education of those students learning it to suffer.
The public schools, which teach ONLY evolution, are the ones in the toilet. If teaching evolution only is so superior, then why don’t the statistics bear it out?
Are you for real?
If conservativism = anti-science then we can rightly deduce that science = liberal?
Is that why you won't touch the issue of the humanity of the HUMAN embryo?
Teaching it in what way? As an example of man's earlier attempts to understand the origin of life and the universe? To show how science has progressed?
If you want to drag Creationism in and allow those science teachers to rip it apart, I'm all for it. I'll even buy my local public middle school the science books and the Bibles.
Can you, perhaps, provide us with ANY examples from history of religious communism?
Show us a communist society that isn’t atheistic?
Show us a atheistic society that isn’t communist or doesn’t have major human rights violations?
How have you disproved creation?
Every major religion has a strain of collectivism.
Show us a communist society that isn’t atheistic?
I'm not defending communism. Not sure where you're going with that.
Communism, as generally accepted, is materialistic. So, naturally, it is atheistic.
Show us a atheistic society that isn’t communist or doesn’t have major human rights violations?
Don't demand what you can't provide, either.
Or government.
The burden of proof falls on the Creationists. They are proposing a 'creation' that flies in the face of all available evidence.
If I claim that the Flying Spaghetti Monster is dancing naked in the street, I have to back it up.
"Is this what conservatism is nowadays? Knee-jerk anti-science?"
We gladly embrace real science, but evolution, and alopathy, are far from science.
Sick, arrogant, psuedo-pedantic condescension, clearly illustrating the fact that your comments and position are unworthy of debate.
LOL- Coyoteman- that skull and ALL the subsequent skulls you post have been refuted as transitionals- do a little research before posting such nonsense- huh? K? Alrighty then.
[[Sorry, that is absolutely false and if you did any research at all you would know better. But your research consists of quote mining from creationist websites. That is the deliberately ignorant leading the willfully blind.]]
What’s the3 difference between what you write and what I wrote? You post nonsense about ID and creationism, and sit around as though what you posted were fact- You get refuted time and tiome again, yet you sdtill post the same nonsense again and again- So in that light- I’ll simply post the same kind of stuff- What I posted is fact as far as I’m concerned, and I could care less what you post to ‘refute it’- I’ll simply do as you- ignore it and keep posting.
For hte lurkers who care anyhtign about hte actual science about suppsoed ‘transitions’, here are the facts:
KNM-ER 3733 IS NOT A TRANSITIONAL:
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c029.html
“Another interesting erectus specimen is skull KNM- ER 3733 dating from about 1.7 mya. It also possesses, along with other ‘ancient’ erectus forms, much the same type of cranial morphology as did Java, Peking and WT 15000, and has an ECV of approximately 850 - 900cc.21,22 (See Figure 4.)23 ER 3733’s cranium is dolichocephalic, a feature also found in many Neanderthals, and it is thick, as are most erectus and Neanderthal specimens. The four erectus specimens so far mentioned are the main subject of this paper. According to Lubenow, the entire ECV range of known erectus forms runs from 700cc for a Javan infant to 1200cc - the largest Peking skull.24 However, the capacity of the previously-mentioned Vertesszöllos fragment from Hungary and dated at about 350,000ya, is estimated at about 1400cc, which is high for an erectus specimen.25
Figure 4. Skull profile of erectus specimen KNM-ER 3733. This fossil human is of similar geological age to WT 15000.
The finding of ER 3733 and WT 15000 therefore appears to strongly reinforce the validity of Java and Peking Man. The clear similarities shared by all four (where skeletal and cranial material is available), render untenable any claims that the two Asian specimens are nothing more than exceptionally large apes. Further, their affinities with both archaic sapiens and Neanderthal sapiens are so strong that it can hardly be denied that all are closely related human beings.
The question of course is - are erectus forms proof of an evolutionary progression from the apes, or are they simply temporal, regional, climatic, dietary or pathological variants of human beings?”
Well you see or maybe not, you are making the creator equal to your conception of 'him'.
The creator is beyond all concepts of the physical universe, life/death, existence/void, eternity itself. We are but players in his dream.
Those ‘creationist sites’ are far better sourced than anything Yote puts out.
Yup- at least htye deal in the facts instead of the wild biologically impossible ASSUMPTIONS and over-reaching conclusions of other sites-
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.