Posted on 09/22/2006 2:09:33 PM PDT by PatrickHenry
Free Republic is currently running a poll on this subject:
Do you think creationism or intelligent design should be taught in science classes in secondary public schools as a competing scientific theory to evolution?You can find the poll at the bottom of your "self search" page, also titled "My Comments," where you go to look for posts you've received.
I don't know what effect -- if any -- the poll will have on the future of this website's science threads. But it's certainly worth while to know the general attitude of the people who frequent this website.
Science isn't a democracy, and the value of scientific theories isn't something that's voted upon. The outcome of this poll won't have any scientific importance. But the poll is important because this is a political website. How we decide to educate our children is a very important issue. It's also important whether the political parties decide to take a position on this. (I don't think they should, but it may be happening anyway.)
If you have an opinion on this subject, go ahead and vote.
What a bunch of rhetorical nonsense.
Thanks for sharing your delusions, it's too bad that a good number of others have the same delusion. Oh, and they don't understand science either.
You are on the record claiming that the face on Mars is "real", that a supernova caused Noah's flood, and that man was genetically engineered from the neanderthal.
I caught you deep-linking into bearfabrique.org the other day. Based on this, and your absurd opinions on astronomy and biology, I can come to no other conclusion than you must formerly banned poster medved aka Ted Holden.
You are a Class A Net.Kook and there is nothing you can do to the conservative movement or the Republican party except give it a bad name.
Wow, just wow.
This guy is far more delusional then I thought.
Thanks for the links, now I really am scared for the Republican party, and conservatives in general.
You're espending too much time worrying about crap you have no control over. The main threat to the republican party right now is their forgetting the things which supposedly distinguish them from demokkkrats. Nobody is going to vote against anybody for wanting to have open discussions of controversies in classrooms.
...
Modern man was either genetically re-engineered from the neanderthal or some other hominid, brought here from elsewhere, or created separately. Those are your three choices.
Interesting. Are you saying that the hominids (F - K) were (or could have been) evolutionary transitionals from one of the ape species, and it's just the transition from neanderthal to homo sapiens that had to be forced?
So, you are medved the retread?
"With you the ignorance never ends"
"So in essence, your ignorance, is healthy for me. LOL"
Did it ever occur to you that your post is validating editor-surveyor's claim of "relentless attacks on a particular individual"?
What? Stating fact is an attack?
Since when?
Of course by simply calling someone ignorant, that of course makes it a fact. Not only does simply calling someone ignorant make their ignorance a fact, it by definition invalidates everything else they say.
Well, is vitamin C, Absorbic acid? Yes, it is, yet he claims that it isn't, and then he gives links that prove that absorbic acid is Vitamin C, yet he states that they prove the opposite, which is obviously untrue.
It is called ignorance, so, it is a factual statement that he is ignorant.
Not an attack, just a statement of fact.
Even if true (and it doesn't really help, such a ship would need to be able to control itself to avoid broaching in heavy seas and to make internal conditions bearable) that contention offers no help to the Chinese Treasure Ship tales.
Similarly, Korean floating fortresses in wars against Japan back around 700 AD if memory serves were enormous compared to any western wooden ship.
The Korean Turtle Ships used in the Wars against Japan and pirates between 1400 and 1600 were considered enormous for that era, and are sometimes referred to as floating fortresses. They were about 120 ft long and would have been about 1200 tons. Curiously, if tales of giant Chinese ships are true, they never seem to have come across any of the 15,000 ton leviathans supposedly built by the Chinese.
As to Zheng He's ships, China was in the habit of doing a number of things on a much larger scale than other nations did in the middle ages, the wall being one such. China used more steel in the 1100s than England ever did until the middle of the 1800s as I've read it.
I never contended that China wasn't an advanced civilisation capable of great things. Clearly the treasure trading fleets led by Zheng He actually existed and conducted remarkable journeys of exploration, but even the reports of those journeys seem laden with hyperbole. The evidence for the really giant treasure ships is extremely thin, at best. Probably the fleet did include ships that were large for the period, but 600ft is simply ludicrous. Maybe designs above 300ft were attempted, but they wouldn't have worked, except maybe as lake-pleasure barges for the emperor.
...and the loving desire to do so. What more can He say? He Who spared not His Son, but delivered Him up FOR US ALL, how will He not, with Him, FREELY GIVE us all things for Life and Godliness?! Ask, and you shall receive, seek and find, knock...it will be opened!
Satan has always used the Word of God to tempt man away from Godliness - he cannot create; he does twist. All that tempter has is lies, and lies are nothing but a twisting of what is true. See Genesis 3 and Matthew 4.
How kind of you to say so, dear Pipe! Thank you! I cherish our shared acknowledgment of Truth.
That's letting the fox win the henhouse - not wise, IMHO.
You've got admire a man that willingly adopts so many little children! (;
Aether theory placemark
Response First posted by Thatcherite, 3/7/2006
On the subject of Nazism and crevolist threads let's have a little test! In keeping with the modern spirit of egalitarianism and "No student left behind" not only is this an open book test, but Darwin Central ("The Conspiracy that Cares" tm) has supplied the answers so that everyone can get full marks.
A: Nazism is introduced into many crevo threads, perhaps the majority, often before post 100.
2. Which side of the debate usually introduces Hitler or Nazism into crevo threads?
A: Nazism is almost invariably introduced into the threads by those who reject evolution. There are very few recorded instance of an evolution supporter introducing Hitler or Nazism into a crevo debate.
3. Isn't it right that if evolution were associated with Nazism then this would be a major argument against the theory of evolution?
A: No. The introduction of Nazism into crevo debates by creationists is a fallacy known as the "Argument from adverse consequences". The truth of evolution is not contingent on whether tyrants or odious ideologies use it to justify their evil actions.
4. How much evidence is there linking Hitler and Nazism with Darwin's theory of evolution?
A: Very little. A few oblique references that imply a very poor comprehension of evolutionary theory. The word "evolution" and "Darwin" appear nowhere in Hitler's speeches.
5. In crevo threads Christians get upset when evolution supporters retort to the assertion that Nazism was linked with evolutionary theory with the assertion that a stronger link can be shown between Nazism and Christianity. Can a stronger link with Christianity be demonstrated?
A: Yes. Hitler repeatedly referred to God and the Christian faith in his speeches and published writings. Whether he himself was a Christian is not relevant; he repeatedly used his twisted version of the Christian message to galvanise the German people.
6. How do other creationists on crevo threads react when Hitler is introduced into the debate?
A: Sometimes with overt approval, and sometimes with tacit approval. There are very few recorded instance on crevo threads of anyone on the creationist side of the debate chiding or criticising the creationists who introduce Hitler/Nazism into a crevo thread. There are numerous instances of such remarks being strongly supported.
7. How do the evolution-rejectors react when it is pointed out that there is more evidence linking Nazism and Christianity than there is linking Nazism and evolution.
A: They become very irate at a perceived attack on their religion. But curiously they still don't criticise the person who introduced Hitler into a subject where he is irrelevant, thereby opening the door for Hitler's links with their religion to be considered.
8. Is the anger of the creationists at the link between Nazism and Christianity being pointed out valid?
A: No it isn't. Once the subject of Nazism has been introduced into the debate it is only reasonable to examine all angles.
9. How should creationists react when one of their number introduces Hitler into crevo debates?
A: They should pre-emptively explain the fallacy and the consequences of introducing Hitler into the debate to the creationist who has made the error. A gentle slapdown is appropriate. Then there will be no need for crevo debates to be sidetracked into discussions about whether Hitler was a good Christian or not.
So, how did you do? I won't hold my breath for #9 to be acted on. Numerous creationists have to be aware that attacking evolutionary theory by associating it with Nazism is a logical fallacy, but hardly ever have I seen it criticised from the creationist side, and never with any outrage that their religion should be associated with such a nasty dishonest smear.
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.