Brain Food (Amazingthing about Godless is the amount of intellectual meat Ann Coulter has packed...)

The American Prowler ^ | 6/30/2006 | Richard Kirk

[RobRoy]

You are being intentionally obtuse. Either that or you have rreally poor reading skills. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and go with the former.

[RobRoy]

>> Try again: what keeps a theist in line that is fundamentally unique to a theist.<<

Belief that he was created for a purpose.

>>Purpose, universal objective morality, etc are all beliefs that can exist without believing in a god.<<

True, but not being absolute, they really are only imagined. They are so flexible as to be, in truth, non-existant.

[RobRoy]

I disagree. In such a case, "moral" is only a word. It is a world of, literally, might makes right.

[churchillbuff]

Sir Fred Hoyle doubted the ability of Abiogenesis to create life on Earth and felt that Earth was seeded from space (Panspermia). ...His views lend nothing to the idea of ID or Creationism."""

Of course, that's not the point. His views support doubts about evolution on Earth. Ann didn't put forward any theory of creationism, she merely said there's good reason to doubt the theory of evolution as an explanation for life on earth. Fred Hoyle's views lend considerable support to the doubt that Ann expresses.

[RobRoy]

Buddhism is not a religion. It is a philosophy. Again, if we are accidental, Buddah is irrelivant.

[OmahaFields]

Belief that he was created for a purpose.

Somehow, Christianity missed that point.

[RobRoy]

>>Again, that's BS.<<

In all seriousness, Why? If a thing happened by pure chance than destroying it has no moral consequences.

[OmahaFields]

Of course, that's not the point. His views support doubts about evolution on Earth.

WRONG. His views support evolution on earth. Read his book.

[RobRoy]

>>Somehow, Christianity missed that point.<<

I think you meant that the other way around. Either that or you forgot your sarcasm tag. :)

[churchillbuff]

So, according to you, you and Ann support the idea that viruses came to earth from comet """

You've committed a logical fallacy by suggesting that Ann and I back Hoyle's alternative theory of human origins. Ann cited Hoyle merely to show that some weighty scientists believe there HAS to be an alternative cause, other than evolution - because they see the holes in the evolution theory. Ann didn't endorse the alternative that Hoyle suggested - - she just said that Hoyle's skepticism about evolution shows that evolution is not a proven scientific fact and has some big weaknesses. Wow, your dishonesty in saying that Ann buys Hoyle's alternative - or you weakness with logic -- makes it easier to understand your uncritical support for evolutionary theory; you're not a rigorous thinker.

[OmahaFields]

Buddhism is not a religion. It is a philosophy.

Perhaps that is why it is possibly superior to Christianity?

[jennyp]

"Lucy" and that ape look just alike, at least comapred to the blonde.

So, I'm waiting on you to tell me how we got from there to here.

"Paging Jenny, paging Ms JennyP. Please pickup the white courtesy phone..."

I believe we have a questionnaire candidate.

Sorry I'm a little late to the party! But just in case there's still a crowd milling about, it is a good time to bring back The Questionnaire:

Which of the following are "just an old ape" and which are "just an old human"? Try it, it's fun!

Fossil hominid skulls. Some of the figures have been modified for ease of comparison
(only left-right mirroring or removal of a jawbone). [CLICK HERE] for larger photo.
(Images © 2000 Smithsonian Institution.)

• (A) Pan troglodytes, chimpanzee, modern
  
• (B) Australopithecus africanus, STS 5, 2.6 My
  
• (C) Australopithecus africanus, STS 71, 2.5 My
  
• (D) Homo habilis, KNM-ER 1813, 1.9 My
  
• (E) Homo habilis, OH24, 1.8 My
  
• (F) Homo rudolfensis, KNM-ER 1470, 1.8 My
  
• (G) Homo erectus, Dmanisi cranium D2700, 1.75 My
  
• (H) Homo ergaster (early H. erectus), KNM-ER 3733, 1.75 My
  
• (I) Homo heidelbergensis, "Rhodesia man", 300,000 - 125,000 y
  
• (J) Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, La Ferrassie 1, 70,000 y
  
• (K) Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, La Chappelle-aux-Saints, 60,000 y
  
• (L) Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, Le Moustier, 45,000 y
  
• (M) Homo sapiens sapiens, Cro-Magnon I, 30,000 y
  
• (N) Homo sapiens sapiens, modern

We know that A) is a modern chimpanzee and N) is a modern human. Everyone agrees that M) was a modern human as well. Your challenge is to fill in these blanks:

Fossil	Just an ape	Ape-like transitional	Human-like transitional	Just a human	Not related at all to apes or humans
B	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]
C	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]
D	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]
E	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]
F	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]
G	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]
H	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]
I	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]
J	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]
K	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]
L	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]

The Responses So Far:

Person	A Pan troglodytes (modern chimp)	B, C Australopithecus africanus	D Homo habilis	E Homo habilis	F Homo rudolfensis	G Homo erectus	H Homo ergaster	I Homo heidelbergensis	J, K Homo sapiens neanderthalensis	L, M Homo sapiens sapiens (Cro-Magnon, modern human)
Mainstream scientists	ape	ape-like trans	ape-like, human-like trans	ape-like, human-like trans	ape-like, human-like trans	human-like trans	human-like trans	human-like trans	human-like trans, human	human
The responses...
Bowden, Malcolm	ape		human		human		human			human
Brown, Walt	ape	ape	ape	ape				human	human	human
editor-surveyor	ape	ape	ape	ape	ape	ape	ape	ape	human	human
Gish, Duane (1979)	ape		human		human		human			human
Gish, Duane (1985)	ape		ape		human		human			human
Luskin, Casey	ape	ape	ape	ape	ape	human	human	human	human	human
Mehlert, A. W.	ape		ape		human		human			human
Menton, David	ape		human		human		human			human
Michael_Michaelangelo	ape	ape	ape	ape	ape	ape	ape	ape	human	human
MississippiMan	ape							ape		human
Taylor, Paul	ape		human		human		human			human

[OmahaFields]

Ann cited Hoyle merely to show that some weighty scientists believe there HAS to be an alternative cause, other than evolution

But Hoyle wrote a book on how we 'evolved'. How can you cite someone that believes in evolution as a critic of evolution. That is not rational.

[RobRoy]

THAT's gonna leave a mark! ;)

As I have been on the crevo threads and read the posts by educated evolutionists, it suddenly hit me one day"

Of education, knowledge and wisdom, the least of these is education, and the greatest is wisdom.

I have found that many evos are big on education, have some knowledge, and have so little capacity for independent thought that they seemed to miss the wisdom boat alltogether.

[RobRoy]

I believe you have already been accused by someone else here of logical fallacy. You did it again.

You are attempting to connect the wrong dots.

[OmahaFields]

I think you meant that the other way around. Either that or you forgot your sarcasm tag. :)

I don't understand your post. Christianity is not about the purpose of life as previously stated, it is about sucking in sinners with a promise of salvation.

[RobRoy]

>>I don't understand your post. Christianity is not about the purpose of life as previously stated, it is about sucking in sinners with a promise of salvation.<<

No, that is not true. It is also not about giving money to televangelists. It is also not about the Crusades, or the KKK or any of the number of other things men have done in the name of Christ.

The Bible says what it is about.

[OmahaFields]

I believe you have already been accused by someone else here of logical fallacy.

I have also been accused by those types of being a homo-recruiting Nazi that will burn in hell! But the good one was where they said my Buddhist wife will be crispy toast for eternity. I hope you are not associating yourself with those types.

[OmahaFields]

You are being intentionally obtuse. Either that or you have rreally poor reading skills. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and go with the former.

[OmahaFields]

The Bible says what it is about.

Yes.

God (Old Testament): Man is evil and I will keep whacking you till you learn better.

Matthew: God, we are really having a hard time recruiting with all this whacking going on ...

God: You are right, we need a new message. What do you think about 'salvation'? That has a nice ring to it.