Posted on 01/04/2009 5:39:47 AM PST by PurpleMountains
All across the country, archeologists, paleontologists and biologists are taking part in what is perhaps the greatest example of political correctness in history – their adherence to Darwinism and their attempts to ostracize any scientist who does not agree with them. In doing so, they are not only ignoring the vast buildup of recent scientific discoveries that seriously undermines the basics of Darwinism, but they are also participating, due to politically correctness, in a belief system that indirectly resulted in the deaths of millions of people – those slaughtered by the Stalins, the Hitlers, the Maos, the Pol Pots and others who took their cue from Darwinism’s tenets.
(Excerpt) Read more at forthegrandchildren.blogspot.com ...
Based on an anecdote about your dog, you say that humans can be bred like dogs. That is a strange thing to conclude by a strange process of reasoning.
And where is Peking Man? Oh yes, it... vanished.
I didn’t even see that it was coyote. He posts his little chart like it is proof of anything, when all of the examples have been discounted. He is as close minded as they get. He is a perfect example of what is wrong w/science and why Global Warming isn’t challenged.
Pray for W, America and Our Troops
Read this: Darwinism-Eugenics.
Of course, the same cautions would extend to any published material.
My point was that it was injudicious to accept information from an unknown or unverified source simply because it appeared to buttress one's position. There is a procedure to verify research and the reports that are generated in its name. It's called science.
I do not understand why the evos are in such of angry state of mind. Their perfected model has come full circle flowing right out of their legally required places of worship, public school houses. They have by law preached for years the animal theory and now have gained a 'perfect' leader, who presents himself as savior who will unite the world as one. Yet they are still itching and crying in their overheated primordial soup bowls blaming the fundamentalists for everything that does not go their way.
I think there is something to that fairy tale 'mirror, mirror, on the wall, who is the smartest of them all. They have out smarted themselves and are looking for scapegoats to point their accusing fingers. Like they have to be concerned over funding cuts in their houses of worship.... their modeling system established the welfare system.
Christ did say these things need be .... NO parable, just a fact.
> Based on an anecdote about your dog, you say that humans can be bred like dogs. That is a strange thing to conclude by a strange process of reasoning.
Please elaborate.
> Based on an anecdote about your dog, you say that humans can be bred like dogs. That is a strange thing to conclude by a strange process of reasoning.
There is nothing on this planet more grating than a catty “Christian” who tries to make a cheap shot in a snide way.
So which idea is “strange for you to conclude” — that I am a practising Christian, or that humans can be bred like dogs?
(and for the record, I suggest you inform yourself of my views on eugenics properly by reading the entire thread, and not lifting and misusing one posting ot of context).
Would you like me to cite you?
> Would you like me to cite you?
Yes. Particularly interested to read the part where I say selectively breeding people is a good thing.
” I am trying to keep rationality a part of these discussions, which otherwise are increasingly dominated by fundamentalism, superstition and other forms of irrationality.
And I am used to teaching. Judging from the mail I receive there are many here who benefit from my posts.”
***********************************************************
Say, aren’t you the guy who goes around with his hair on fire about theocracies, the Dark Ages, and being burned at the stake? Like here?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2154313/posts?page=403#403
http://www.religioustolerance.org/reconstr.htm
Or the one who keeps telling us that science isn’t about truth or proof? And then you expect us to believe you that what you say is what.....true? That’s rational?
And it’s rational to think you’re helping someone with information you can’t be sure of yourself?
http://spider.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/jarrett/LiU/resource/misused_glossary.html
Just..... wow......
There are people who maintain that such a religion exists, but all known religions have self-professed believers. As far as I know, no one professes a belief science as a religion.
Creating a theoretical religion, and then professing belief in it on behalf of others seems rather outside the realm of conventional theology.
I do not understand why the evos are in such of angry state of mind. Their perfected model has come full circle flowing right out of their legally required places of worship, public school houses. They have by law preached for years the animal theory and now have gained a 'perfect' leader, who presents himself as savior who will unite the world as one. Yet they are still itching and crying in their overheated primordial soup bowls blaming the fundamentalists for everything that does not go their way.
I will tell you what they want. After reading a few Carl Sagan books and some pages from talk.origins, they come into threads spouting some tripe about how we're descended from dead monkeys in the ground or frog-spawn or whatever, and they expect us to fawn all over them like they are the oracles of science. They gave us steam engines and computers didn't they? How could we not fall down and glorify these science-blathering guys? Are they not our saviors?
And it shocks them to find that some of us do in fact glorify and worship a person, only it's not one of them, but Jesus Christ. Seeing as how Christ takes away the glory and worship they feel rightfully belongs to them, they, as you say, 'itch and cry in their overheated primordial soup bowls' blaming not only Christians, but God... for taking away what they esteem to be their rightful inheritance.
Read this carefully:
Based on an anecdote about your dog, you say that humans can be bred like dogs.Would you like me to cite you, backing that up?
Well then, you should have no trouble answering the following rational question:
Do you believe eliminating religion should be a main goal of working scientists?
That's a pretty simple yes or no question.
Judging from the mail I receive there are many here who benefit from my posts.
Yes, I'm sure their ears no longer itch when they're done reading your stuff. And I'm sure George Wallace, Nathan Bedford Forrest and Torquemada all had fans in their day who sent them nice mail about their efforts. The question is, are you in the same club as them? It seems you are, given your reluctance to answer my simple question.
BTW, all of you folks who are justifiably outraged when Creationists on this forum compare you to communists, you should have a nice talk with the ol' 'yote here, because he's using the same standard. Check out this post:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2154313/posts?page=441#441
Folllowing the trail of that conversation back might be fun for y'all, too.
So, it appears that in the 'yote's world, believing that "evolution = Communist genocide" is stupidity, but believing that "creationism = theocracy and a ban on paleontology" is dead on good stuff, baby.
And he says he's trying to keep things rational. Sure, and I'm Grover Cleveland.
I was on that thread. I recall that DieHard made a comment about it being technically possible that humans could be bread like dogs, but I don’t recall that he held the position that it would be morally acceptable.
I’ll look it up later when I get back and have the time.
Then you can set an example by answering this simple question:
is anything you say about evolution true?
“Do you believe eliminating religion should be a main goal of working scientists?”
Brooking No Debate: Scientism, Crowbars, and Bats
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1761605/posts
If those guys are affiliated with caltech as well, the answer is pretty obvious.
DieHard: More than claimed, my FRiend. I AM a Christian. A practising one.
Ethan: Based on an anecdote about your dog, you say that humans can be bred like dogs. That is a strange thing to conclude by a strange process of reasoning.
You quoted my claim to being a practising Christian and then called it into question, based upon an anecdote about my dog on a thread about eugenics.
Cite whatever you think you can from that thread to support your assertion that I am not a practising Christian.
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.