Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Quark2005
I don't give a damn what Iran's homicidal maniac president (or general population) "think" (assuming that they think) about Dubya, the USA or conservatism or Catholicism or Chriostianity generally. Likewise Ugo Chavez. Likewise, Jacques "Light Fingers" Chirac. Likewise, the New York Times. Likewise, the National Education Association. Likewise, C-Span's Commies in the Morning aka Washington Journal. Likewise Noam Chomsky. Likewise Charles Darwin and his posthumous Monicas. Likewise other liberals/leftists/"progressives" whose "stereotypes" conservatives are proud to be and righfully so. OOOOOH, that Elk is just sooooooo, ummmm, ummmmm, anti-intellectual!!!!! Sooooooo politically incorrect!!!!! Liberals posing as conservatives are sooooooo embarassed!

I have no interest in worrying for my country or my conservatism about human respect (the Catholic term for what the world misthinks) and every interest in having the world become appropriately worried about what America and conservatives think. We have the weapons. They don't.

I practiced law for decades. You did not if you imagine that "science" can be libeled much less that it has been.

What is fictional about Darwinian "science?" Ummmm, everything! If you imagine yourself descended from apes or other simians to be linked later (how many centuries and government funds later???? Never mind!) or that darwinism is truth, then you are a Darwinian Church Lady.

Also "scientifically literate people" is another discredited tautology. First, you are forgetting your claim to be mere trousered apes. I am still waiting for the darwinian answer to whether there is an immortal human soul and, if so, whether it too "evolved" from whatever sould the apes had to immortal.

It only seems to you darwinians that I am jumping up and down because you are not used to being rightfully disrespected or subjected to dissent from darwinian "orthodoxy" protected as you are by federal courts which establish your false religion and force taxpayers who know better to pay for it. You are used to grandiosely setting the terms of the debate and I refuse to play along. You are used to playing establishmentarian and demanding that your critics bear the burden of proof and I refuse to play along. You are pissed. That is only natural but it does not buttress your fantasies as fact.

Go back to your laboratory and genuflect before your beakers and test tubes. I guess it's better than nuthin'.

288 posted on 09/22/2006 11:52:12 AM PDT by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 275 | View Replies ]


To: BlackElk; Quark2005
Quark2005 -- So, exactly what is "fictional" about 'Darwinian' science?

BlackElk -- I don't give a damn what Iran's homicidal maniac president (or general population) "think" about Dubya, the USA or conservatism or Catholicism or Chriostianity generally. . . . OOOOOH, that Elk is just sooooooo, ummmm, ummmmm, anti-intellectual!!!!! Sooooooo politically incorrect!!!!!

Good point.

I practiced law for decades.

And your fellow inmates were appreciative, I'm sure.

305 posted on 09/22/2006 12:29:05 PM PDT by atlaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 288 | View Replies ]

To: BlackElk
I practiced law for decades.

Perhaps you should practice science a little bit before making pronouncements about it. The proverbial 'audience' would be a good place to start.

What is fictional about Darwinian "science?" Ummmm, everything!

Once again, you fail to be specific (as do most people making vacuous claims). Do you even know what the basic lines of evidence are that support Darwin's theory (and still do, very strongly)?

Also "scientifically literate people" is another discredited tautology. First, you are forgetting your claim to be mere trousered apes. I am still waiting for the darwinian answer to whether there is an immortal human soul and, if so, whether it too "evolved" from whatever sould the apes had to immortal.

The fact that you think it is within the purvey of science to answer such theological questions shows how sadly unaware you are of how science is actually practiced.

You are used to grandiosely setting the terms of the debate and I refuse to play along.

By what, actually providing evidence, and demanding the same from critics? Shame, shame.

Go back to your laboratory and genuflect before your beakers and test tubes. I guess it's better than nuthin'.

I'll do my genuflecting in church, thank you. I do my work in a lab.

You are pissed.

How about taking a long, careful look at your own posts, and then decide who's been keeping a cooler head, here. I'm not sure you can do that, but I'm sure there's plenty of lurkers that are quite capable of that discernment.

311 posted on 09/22/2006 12:46:35 PM PDT by Quark2005 ("Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs." -Matthew 7:6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 288 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson