Teaching Darwin

Weekly Standars ^ | March 21, 2005 | Paul McHugh

[Doctor Stochastic]

Solipsists use their own definitions and do not accept the commonly accepted version of things.

[donh]

No thanks. It looked like gibberish before, so I ignored it,

You are now verifiably a liar. Case closed.

Oh, indeed. let's call the witnesses: Here is, as far as I can tell, the statement in question:

was a spiritual statement and not a recommendation for a form of government nor of a financial transaction.

Here is your statement about your statement:

I put "recommendation" and a conjunction(nor) together for a purpose.

Here is your statement about your statement about your statements.

And you better study English, because I did not say it was not a financial transaction, I said it was not a recommendation of a financial transaction. The "nor" is used for a reason. It joins things. If you want it more wordy then I will repeat it this way.

...as if you could be any more wordy.

Tell me again what a pellucid and clear argument this is, then tell me how my not getting it or caring about it makes me a "liar". Or do you just issue whatever insult happens to land first on your tongue? And then tell me what the sam hill your use of the word "nor" does to improve your argument. Why do I give a fart in a hurricane whether Jesus's "recommendation", or any other part of this discussion, is a transaction or not--or whatever the heck it is you are trying to communicate with this twisty mess? What effect does that have on whether the rich man was receiving moral, spiritual, and FINANCIAL advice, which, of course, he was, all at the same time. Was the financial side of the advice of the sort a communist would offer? It's a simple declarative question in one phrase--how hard can it be to parse?

[donh]

No thanks. It looked like gibberish before, so I ignored it,

You are now verifiably a liar. Case closed.

Oh, indeed. let's call the witnesses: Here is, as far as I can tell, the statement in question:

was a spiritual statement and not a recommendation for a form of government nor of a financial transaction.

Here is your statement about your statement:

I put "recommendation" and a conjunction(nor) together for a purpose.

Here is your statement about your statement about your statements.

And you better study English, because I did not say it was not a financial transaction, I said it was not a recommendation of a financial transaction. The "nor" is used for a reason. It joins things. If you want it more wordy then I will repeat it this way.

...as if you could be any more wordy.

Tell me again what a pellucid and clear argument this is, then tell me how my not getting it or caring about it makes me a "liar". Or do you just issue whatever insult happens to land first on your tongue? And then tell me what the sam hill your use of the word "nor" does to improve your argument. Why do I give a fart in a hurricane whether Jesus's "recommendation", or any other part of this discussion, is a transaction or not--or whatever the heck it is you are trying to communicate with this twisty mess? What effect does that have on whether the rich man was receiving moral, spiritual, and FINANCIAL advice, which, of course, he was, all at the same time. Was the financial side of the advice of the sort a communist would offer? It's a simple declarative question in one phrase--how hard can it be to parse?

[PatrickHenry]

P L A C E M A R K E R

[Elsie]

Oh NO!!!


111 MORE replies in this thread while I was away??


Do ANY of us have REAL lives?????

[Elsie]

Oh boy!!

I'm part of a group!

[Elsie]

Yup...

this is sure true!

[Elsie]

I agree with you, Pat!


I is a good person!


Most of the time; but my Savior has been recorded as saying...


Mark 10

17. As Jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him. "Good teacher," he asked, "what must I do to inherit eternal life?"
18. "Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good--except God alone.

[Elsie]

The Spartans practiced selective breeding.

I used to be an inselective breeder; but that was long ago; I was young; I'm married now.....

[Elsie]

I've read that in ancient Sparta, newborns were left out in the elements on the night of their birth, and if they survived the cold they were considered hardy enough to be a Spartan. I've also read that the Spartan city government would judge a baby to be healthy. If not, it was left out in the elements or drowned or dropped off a cliff. I certainly don't believe these are the only examples of infanticide or eugenic-like ideas in ancient societies.

(Sounds like TODAYS society!)

[Elsie]

...and distribute unto the poor, ...

(A side question: was he to 'distribute' ALL to the poor?)

---

Many of us fail to realize that GOD can bless us in zillions of different ways.

Folks lose ALL, every day, in finacial disasters that come upon them, yet, later on in life, they are prospering again, sometimes MUCH better than before, BECAUSE WHAT THEY had WAS TYING THEM DOWN!

[Elsie]

It says about the same thing in any other encyclopedia--because it's extremely common knowledge.

Sometimes 'common knowledge' is extremely wrong!

[Elsie]

And outsider, reading all this stuff, by now has concluded that BOTH sides must take part in a Looking-Glassian response of:

"A word means just what I WANT it to mean."

[Elsie]

Yea!!

I'm done reading!!!!


Bye 'til MUCH later....

[js1138]

As opposed to the obvious problems with Negative Eugenics.

What is the problem with voluntary negative eugenics? There are some pretty horrible genens out there, and people who carry them should avoid having children with other carriers. The late term abortion option could be avoided by looking outside one's narrow gene pool.

[Junior]

Darwin's work was an advance away from the "science" of the racist creationist anthropologists of his day. That's what all the evidence, including your evidence, shows. Be a man and clean up your mess.

Indeed, racism against blacks was actually Biblically-based:

And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without. And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid [it] upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces [were] backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness. And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him. And he said, Cursed [be] Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren. And he said, Blessed [be] the LORD God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant. God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant. [Gen 9:22-27]

These verses were used to justify enslaving blacks (making servants of the children of Ham).

[js1138]

Aside from the bogus assumption that one of Noah's children was an African-Israelite, the moral lesson here is a bit weird.

[Doctor Stochastic]

Little is wrong with most voluntary eugenics. I don't think most rational people with Huntington's would want to pass it on.

Voluntary positive eugenics may be problematical unless you are an NBA star.

[js1138]

Have you seen the movie GATTACA? Genetic engineering is presented in a negative light (available only to the rich). I think, however, that a couple hundred years from now, conceiving a seriously handicapped child will be considered a preventable tragedy.

I don't know whether we can easily raise the maximum IQ, but I suspect we can raise the bottom and mimimize stupidity.

[VadeRetro]

Exactly. You have a society which was pretty much top-to-bottom racist. Darwin actually caused a lurch away from the automatic assumption that anyone browner than you was somehow inferior. But creationists call for a rejection of Darwin's valid scientific theory because Darwin wasn't "2005" in every detail of his thought. (As if creationists are.)