Posted on 07/19/2006 3:27:29 PM PDT by Spiff
Which, despite what opponents state, was A reason for the Iraqi offensive to begin with. And it is working. Imagine if present coarse is stayed where they will be a generation from now. Then two. Then three. Despite what some think, bringing a culture from the middle ages into the 21st century and undoing thousands of years of passed down propaganda isn't wiped out by displacing a couple of dictators and allowing self rule in under five years. But, this is a start. A significant one.
(Go Israel, Go! Slap 'Em, Down Hezbullies.)
LOL! Oh, because she's NOT a scientist her argument is destroyed? That's pute T B.S.!!! There are many things about the "religion" of evo sighted as fact, which are completely destroyed right on their very face!
Ann did a very credible job with FACTS, unlike alot of the preachers of evolution who twist and call real theory, and hypothesis, fact.
I xsee you don't know what a "theory" is. Well, don't feel bad, neither does Ann.
Love that blonde.
Her statements are the equivalent to making an economic argument that socialism is the ONLY proper economic model. People BELEIVE her. In your capacity as an economic expert, would you not feel honor bound to correct her mis-statements?
I know Ann is the opposite to that, but I need an analogy that has heft so you understand why I am so disappointed in her. She is spreading psuedo-science and ignorance. Ignorance in furtherance of a political agenda is never a good thing.
Yeah, I should have known you'd come back with the "STANDARD" B.S. line that most duped evolutionist use. It doesn't matter when evolutionist see evolution as fact, and educators teach it as such.
Evolution is nothing more than arrant religion. In fact, it's a religion that requires mountains of faith!
IOW you don't know what a "theory" is and are using bluster to cover your ignorance.
Evolution is nothing more than arrant religion. In fact, it's a religion that requires mountains of faith!
If you have a valid alternative scientific theory that explains microevoluion as seen with our own eyes and macroevolution as seen in the fossil evidence, I am dying to hear it.
I read the link, you offerred and it seems, you are doing the same thing, that your suggesting Coulter be criticized for, namely using a secondary source. You don't argue yourself, you just say other people did, therefore Ann is wrong. Well, no offense, but how can you do that? The page you sent me to, did NOT devastate Ann's arguments, it simply called everyone a liar. The author of the screed you linked to, said one thing that was definately not true, namely that Ann thinks that Evolution is refuted by science. Not true, she says that Evolution or particularly the Origin of species is not proved by science, two different things. The author of your piece, revealed himself at that point to be guilty of the same thing he was generously accusing everyone else of doing, namely misrepresentation. I am not a scientist, but I come away from these evolution vs ID debates with a very visceral dislike of the way the pro evolution crowd trash talks their opponents. By the way, and again, no offense, I could care less about the outcome of a scientific discussion about the merits or lack of merits of Evolution or Intelligent Design, but I care very much when what will be taught in schools is decided and the pro evolution crowd can damn well come down off their big high horse and start talking to people instead of down to people!
I await an alternative scientific theory that explains mirco-evolution as seen before our very eyes and macro-evolution as seen in the fossil records.
There. It doesn't get more direct than that.
You missed the point of her book: that wisdom does not emerge in people who are refusing to submit to the right God, Jesus Christ, because they are godless, a religion unto themselves.
God says "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom," and you can't expect to have any right policies or correct understandings in life unless He so enables you to do so. Anyone should be terrified of rejecting the true God when He so mercifully keeps trying to present Himself to you.
He offers mercy and forgiveness, however, because Jesus died for your sins, and that death turned away the wrath of the Father on you, if you will believe.
That's why her book "Godless" is so good: it shows that all the "issues" are but distractions of the REAL issue: What do you believe about God's only Son?
He is our only hope, both as individuals, and as a nation, and as a world.
So what you're saying is if I point out to the "moon is made of cheese" crowd that my observations of the moon is inconsistent with their theory. My objections are invalid because I don't have the answer to their question "well, tell me what it *is* made of?"
TToE has nothing to do with whether or not people believe in God.
That's why her book "Godless" is so good: it shows that all the "issues" are but distractions of the REAL issue: What do you believe about God's only Son?
I am a Christian, if that is the question. Beyond that, my relationship with God is between me and Him. I don't wear my religion on my sleeve. I find most proselytizers are more interested in making themselves feel good by dint of their self-enabled superiority than any desire to actually do good in the world.
Provide me a scientific theory of what the moon is made of. We know that planetary bodies are made up of types of rock, minerals and varying types of sand as well as some degree of H2O. We know this both through spectrographic analysis and through direct observation. We can therefore conclude that, based on the evidence at hand, the moon is NOT made up of green cheese, but rather rocks and sand and minerals.
Now, given the evidence at hand, please provide an alternative to TToE.
The Clinton brokered accord between Israel and Arafat was about as strong and genuine as his numerous sexcapades with bimbos. Clinton's entire Presidential 'legacy' was a failure, he did nothing for America, and everything for himself.
The generation of the 90's was the perfect generation to elevate a gutless, lying, cheating fraud to the highest office in our nation, twice. Here's hoping the obsession with materialism, sex and self that permeated the 1990's will have taught us a national lesson in morals and values, and that we never again place a treasonous charlatan like William Jefferson Clinton in the White House.
You're still missing the point.
Just because one doesn't know the ultimate true answer doesn't mean one can't legitimately be skeptical of the provided answer.
Science does try to "explain" these things, but goes far beyond "explaining" into espousing these changes as FACT that evolution exists. Also as far as the "Fossil" evidence goes it is NOT complete as you know, and, therefore science can only hypothesize based on the current evidence, are you going to deny this fact?
Nice try. BTW, why don't you evo's get it? It does not matter what "Theory" means, most scientist embrace, and try to deceive "layman" into accepting evo is fact, which is totally wrong.
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.