Kalamata:
"It my case it turned out to be the other way around.
I was an evolutionist for most of my life, until I was exposed to scientific data that demonstrated the accuracy of the biblical narrative on the flood.
It was quite a revelation." Considering Olive-boy's highly transactional relationship with the truth, I don't believe this version of events for a moment.
What's far more likely is a common human experience: like anyone growing older, Kalamata at some point naturally decided to make his peace with God and so prepare for the next life.
In Kalamata's case that meant a church whose definition of "salvation" included full adherence to their own interpretations of Biblical texts, interpretations we might summarize under the heading, "Biblical science".
Now Kalamata tells us he is both highly educated and some sort (unspecified) of scientist meaning we should well be able to presume he understands the basic ideas of what methodologically natural science is all about -- natural explanations for natural processes.
But late in life his mission became to seek out and find data and arguments which, far from being "natural explanations for natural processes" are instead: "science" which conforms to & confirms the Bible.
And, lo and behold, it turned out there is such data and argumentation, a lot of it, because a good number of others were engaged in the same enterprise.
It began with what was long called "creationism", and about 30 years ago picked up the name "intelligent design", focused on such concepts as "irreducible & specified complexity", added to "hydrological sorting", "ecological zonation" and "differential escape" it gets us through Genesis & Noah's flood and is well on its way to becoming what Kalamata calls "Biblical science" and what Ken Ham describes as "a natural understanding of the Bible".
Notice here Ham's word "natural": meaning no, not "natural" as in "natural explanations for natural processes", but rather as in "what we would naturally understand the Bible's words to mean".
Today Intelligent Design is a multi-multi million dollar industry employing many "scientists" like our own Kalamata to spread the word and even write "peer reviewed" articles for its own "scientific" publications.
It fights its war-on-science on many fronts, though curiously, does not seem to have assaulted our courts since being yet again defeated in the 2005 Kitzmiller vs. Dover Schools, now 15 years ago.
So how does (we are told) a highly educated scientist like Kalamata with lifelong work experience, lobotomize his brain into believing that "Biblical science" is the real deal while natural-science as we understand it is "just another secular religion"?
The answer is: using well known denial tactics which begin, first & foremost, by ignoring all data that conflicts with your own constructs, then exaggerating the importance of any which might be used to support your ideas.
Kalamata: "I have never said modern science is a religion, Joey.
The pseudoscience of evolution is a faith-based religion — no doubt!
But science is not a religion."
And this is Denier Rule #2: redefine every word to suit your own purposes.
In this case when he says "science is not a religion", he means (by his definition) that his own version of "Biblical science" is not a religion.
When he says, "the pseudoscience of evolution is a faith-based religion" he means by that not just Darwin's basic simple theory of evolution, but any and all facts or ideas from any branch of science -- be it geology, biology, physics or astronomy, etc. -- which might conflict with his own version of "Biblical science".
Now it's immediately obvious that such denier tactics are the same ones our Democrat fellow citizens use, for example, to concoct cockamamie "articles of impeachment" when no crime exists.
And even though Kalamata can see that such behavior in Democrats is deeply pathological, he refuses to see it in himself.
And why?
Because, he says, the alternatives are just too unacceptable.
That's because Kalamata blames the evil trinity of Darwin, Marx and Lincoln for all the world's ills, he attacks them all with equal ferocity, will not admit any of their ideas as potentially valid, and flat-out denies any data which might support them.
In Kalamata's mind, to grant any of it is not just to reject his own understandings of the Bible, but also to accept as "OK" all the world's modern ills.
His logic goes something like this: if you believe Darwin, then you are responsible for AIDS, for homelessness and mass shootings by lunatics.
If you also think Lincoln did right, then you are responsible for Hitler, Stalin, Mao and the 100 million people they killed.
Of course nobody here thinks much of Marx, but to Kalamata it's all the same -- Marx's atheistic socialism combined with Darwin's atheistic evolutionism and Lincoln's atheistic tyranny join to make Big Government the "trinitarian deity" of our atheistic fellow citizens.
And that, I think, is how Kalamata lobotomized himself.
Kalamata referring to yours-truly's mainline theological beliefs: "That is best characterized as, pseudohistory meets pseudoscience."
Right, nothing which conflicts with his own constructs can break through into Kalamata's newly lobotomized brain. ![]()
>>Kalamata wrote: "It my case it turned out to be the other way around. I was an evolutionist for most of my life, until I was exposed to scientific data that demonstrated the accuracy of the biblical narrative on the flood. It was quite a revelation." >>Joey wrote: "Considering Olive-boy's highly transactional relationship with the truth, I don't believe this version of events for a moment."
That is most diplomatic of you, Joey.
****************
>>Joey wrote: "What's far more likely is a common human experience: like anyone growing older, Kalamata at some point naturally decided to make his peace with God and so prepare for the next life. In Kalamata's case that meant a church whose definition of "salvation" included full adherence to their own interpretations of Biblical texts, interpretations we might summarize under the heading, "Biblical science"."
Joey couldn't tell the truth if his life depended on it. I have been a Christian for most of my life, but I was also an evolutionist until about 8, maybe 9 years ago (after I retired,) when a friend asked me to take a look at the geologic column. If you understand fluid mechanics, and sedimentology generally, you cannot miss the FACT that those sedimentary layers were deposited rapidly. I had no reason to doubt the text books and literature, until I saw contrary evidence for myself.
My "awakening" was really as simple as that. Now I know that Charles Darwin and Charles Lyell were either liars, or absolute lunatics; and that tends to upset those who hero-worship them, like Joey.
****************
>>Joey wrote: "Now Kalamata tells us he is both highly educated and some sort (unspecified) of scientist meaning we should well be able to presume he understands the basic ideas of what methodologically natural science is all about -- natural explanations for natural processes."
I was a consultant on many science and engineering projects during my rewarding career. Some of my employers and co-workers called me a trouble-shooter, some an analyst; but I typically went by the title of "consultant."
****************
>>Joey wrote: "But late in life his mission became to seek out and find data and arguments which, far from being "natural explanations for natural processes" are instead: "science" which conforms to & confirms the Bible."
As usual, Joey mischaracterizes my research. I seek the truth, no matter where it leads. Joey prefers being the big-shot: the truth be damned.
****************
>>Joey wrote: "And, lo and behold, it turned out there is such data and argumentation, a lot of it, because a good number of others were engaged in the same enterprise. It began with what was long called "creationism", and about 30 years ago picked up the name "intelligent design", focused on such concepts as "irreducible & specified complexity", added to "hydrological sorting", "ecological zonation" and "differential escape" it gets us through Genesis & Noah's flood and is well on its way to becoming what Kalamata calls "Biblical science" and what Ken Ham describes as "a natural understanding of the Bible"."
LOL! If the data fits, well, it fits! Scientists are not supposed to ignore or discard data just because they don't happen to like it. The same for historians.
****************
>>Joey wrote: "Notice here Ham's word "natural": meaning no, not "natural" as in "natural explanations for natural processes", but rather as in "what we would naturally understand the Bible's words to mean"."
Joey always comes back to Ken Ham (I guess the others scare the daylights out of him.)
May I recommend books from two highly-respected scientists, which shoot all sorts of holes in Charlie Darwin's nutty theory:
Link: Darwin's Doubt
Link: Darwin Devolves
****************
>>Joey wrote: "Today Intelligent Design is a multi-multi million dollar industry employing many "scientists" like our own Kalamata to spread the word and even write "peer reviewed" articles for its own "scientific" publications."
Joey lies again. I would be safe in saying that every research scientist that works for the Discovery Institute has peer reviewed articles in secular journals, despite the stumbling-blocks the rabid Darwinists set up to try to keep them out of the journals.
BTW, the Pseudoscience Industrial Complex (Evolution, Big-Bangism, and Climate-Alarmism) is a multi-multi-billion dollar industry, to be conservative, that YOU the taxpayers pay for. You actually pay for clowns (pretending to be scientists) to set up very expensive radio-telescopes so they can listen for aliens night and day, year round. -- I kid you not! LOL!
****************
>>Joey wrote: "It fights its war-on-science on many fronts, though curiously, does not seem to have assaulted our courts since being yet again defeated in the 2005 Kitzmiller vs. Dover Schools, now 15 years ago."
The war on science has been real, at least since the days of Galileo, when the orthodoxy used the power of the state (the Church in those days) to suppress Galileo's work. The same thing happens today when the orthodoxy recruits federal judges to help keep EBD ("Everything But Darwin") out of public schools.
I'll bet you didn't know that federal judges tell us what is and is not science. To be fair, that is over simplified. The ACLU briefs federal judges on what is and is not science, and then those judges copy the ACLU briefs directly into their opinions, as the "judge" did in the Dover case. So, it is really not judges that tell us what science is and is not, but a bunch of Far-Left Marxist lawyers.
****************
>>Joey wrote: "So how does (we are told) a highly educated scientist like Kalamata with lifelong work experience, lobotomize his brain into believing that "Biblical science" is the real deal while natural-science as we understand it is "just another secular religion"?"
I believe scientific data. Joey, on the other hand, believes what corrupt scientists and museum artists tell him to believe. He really doesn't understand what he is told to believe, but he believes it anyway so he can be in the consensus – so he can be part of the pseudoscience crowd.
****************
>>Joey wrote: "The answer is: using well known denial tactics which begin, first & foremost, by ignoring all data that conflicts with your own constructs, then exaggerating the importance of any which might be used to support your ideas."
Joey is a science denier, preferring instead to believe unprovable pseudoscience, such as evolutionism.
****************
>>Kalamata wrote: "I have never said modern science is a religion, Joey. The pseudoscience of evolution is a faith-based religion — no doubt! But science is not a religion."
>>Joey wrote: "And this is Denier Rule #2: redefine every word to suit your own purposes."
Joey made up a bunch of silly rules that fit him, which he then projects onto others who disagree with him. I believe that is what the Democrats do. For example, fascists label conservatives as fascists.
****************
>>Joey wrote: "In this case when he says "science is not a religion", he means (by his definition) that his own version of "Biblical science" is not a religion."
No, Joey. I'll say it again. Science is not religion. Evolutionism is religion, not science. Try to keep up.
****************
>>Joey wrote: "When he says, "the pseudoscience of evolution is a faith-based religion" he means by that not just Darwin's basic simple theory of evolution, but any and all facts or ideas from any branch of science -- be it geology, biology, physics or astronomy, etc. -- which might conflict with his own version of "Biblical science"."
Joey lies so much he is difficult to follow. I believe all science. Science can be recognized by being observable and testable. Evolutionism is neither observable, nor testable, so it is not science. It is that simple.
****************
>>Joey wrote: "Now it's immediately obvious that such denier tactics are the same ones our Democrat fellow citizens use, for example, to concoct cockamamie "articles of impeachment" when no crime exists. And even though Kalamata can see that such behavior in Democrats is deeply pathological, he refuses to see it in himself."
Evolutionism is devoutly embraced by Marxists, Joey. I am being consistent in that I am neither an evolutionist, nor a Marxist. I was inconsistent when I was an evolutionist, but not a Marxist.
****************
>>Joey wrote: "And why? Because, he says, the alternatives are just too unacceptable. That's because Kalamata blames the evil trinity of Darwin, Marx and Lincoln for all the world's ills, he attacks them all with equal ferocity, will not admit any of their ideas as potentially valid, and flat-out denies any data which might support them."
I didn't make the rules, Joey. When you are evil, you are evil; and Darwin, Marx and Lincoln were up there in the super-evil category. Don't forget to include Charlie Lyell, Darwin's partner-in-crime.
****************
>>Joey wrote: "In Kalamata's mind, to grant any of it is not just to reject his own understandings of the Bible, but also to accept as "OK" all the world's modern ills."
I need a code breaker for that one. (Talk about gibberish? LOL!)
****************
>>Joey wrote: "His logic goes something like this: if you believe Darwin, then you are responsible for AIDS, for homelessness and mass shootings by lunatics."
I don't believe I have made any of those claims, except perhaps in a general sense. I have made the claim that if you tell kids they are descendants of apes, don't be surprised if they act like them.
****************
>>Joey wrote: "If you also think Lincoln did right, then you are responsible for Hitler, Stalin, Mao and the 100 million people they killed."
Joey says some really weird stuff . . .
****************
>>Joey wrote: "Of course nobody here thinks much of Marx, but to Kalamata it's all the same -- Marx's atheistic socialism combined with Darwin's atheistic evolutionism and Lincoln's atheistic tyranny join to make Big Government the "trinitarian deity" of our atheistic fellow citizens."
That's about right.
****************
>>Joey wrote: "And that, I think, is how Kalamata lobotomized himself."
About all Joey has proven is he can spell lobotomized, or his spell-checker can.
****************
>>Kalamata referring to yours-truly's mainline theological beliefs: "That is best characterized as, pseudohistory meets pseudoscience."
>>Joey wrote: "Right, nothing which conflicts with his own constructs can break through into Kalamata's newly lobotomized brain."
LOL! Child.
Mr. Kalamata