Posted on 03/20/2009 6:41:02 AM PDT by Ethan Clive Osgoode
This week, the Globe and Mail asked Science Minister Gary Goodyear, a chiropractor, if he believed in evolution.
None of your beeswax, he replied.
"I am a Christian, and I don't think anybody asking a question about my religion is appropriate."
Well, the primordial ooze hit the fan.
Scientists roasted Goodyear. Is this why the feds have cut research funding? Does Ottawa figure it's cheaper to read the Bible?
Fumed one: "It's the same as asking the gentleman, 'Do you believe the world is flat?' and he doesn't answer on religious grounds."
No, it's not the same. We can bloody well see the world is round. But I can't look at an ape and see myself.
You could say that God made Conservatives and only Liberals come from apes.
(Excerpt) Read more at torontosun.com ...
I’ve always considered Jefferson a flake, but Hamilton was hot. (Sorry, I’ve got a case of the Fridays.)
I’m looking forward to the day when creationists learn how to flex their political muscle.
Only her mirror knows for sure.
You just aren't accepting HIS definition.
Yes, I'm not accepting his definition, but that doesn't mean I have my own definition. Logical fallacy.
You can prove a mathematics problem is incorrect without being able to provide the correct answer.
Yeah, but those lips....
Too much botox?
But the founder of Christianity said God created man and referred his listeners to Genesis.
Mathematics and definitions of words are not the same thing by any stretch of the imagination.
One is way more objective than another and in math, there are established facts. 2 + 2 = 4 no matter where you are in the world. With something as objective as math, yes, you can tell if an answer is wrong even if you can’t determine the right one.
With something subjective like determining whether someone is really a Christian, although Jesus has given us guidelines for making that determination, it is not as easy since no one can know another’s heart.
For something that is subjective, to determine that something is wrong, must mean that you have some idea of what right is, some standard by which to compare your definition to; just like you do for something that is objective. It just isn’t as easy.
So if you’re not accepting his definition, why aren’t you? What criteria are you using for a basis of rejecting his?
Evolution does not address the origin of life, and never has. It addresses how species adapt and change over time.
Hahaha, post #9 makes that statement look awfully foolish (were you intending to insult your fellow Darwinist Freeper?). I think it was Ernst Mayr, the emininent evolutionary biologist, who basically said "Look, if we went back in time and saw one of our ancestors, we'd point and say 'look, a monkey.'" His point was that your attempt to distinguish between modern apes and putative ancestors is an exercise in nit-picking trivia.
You couldn’t recognize an analogy if it smacked you in the face like a wet mackeral.
In case you are utterly dense, I was saying that I could disagree with a definition without providing the authoritative definition. The two concepts are not the same.
I AM saying that there are millions of people who believe they are Christians who also believe in evolution. I think if you believe and profess to be a Christian, then you probably are. It might not be your flavor of Christianity, but the notion that only your flavor is the correct one is arrogant at a minimum.
Well, we have biblical creationists who invented the MRI (Dr. Raymond Damadian), invented 'gene gun' genetic engineering (Dr. John Sanford), and co-invented the floppy disk (William Overn) to give just a few examples from contemporary history. Yet Darwinists continue to make the manifestly false claim that creationists are somehow outside the bounds of science. Why should we trust them about the past when their emotional prejudice makes them so incompetent about the present?
Thanks for the ping!
Thanks for the ping!
You're right, I was going by the definition that the inventor left in his user manual.
DARPA disagrees with you. As does the US Military, NSA and CIA.
Or do you want to leave us at a disadvantage compared to our enemies?
His definition excludes anyone who thinks cancer happened before the industrial age.
Evolution doesn’t speak to origins - you know this so why are you trying to spread falsehoods?
You overlook the fact that they used the scientific method to do those things. You know the same scientific method that current gen creations ignore / hate with a passion.
What? No preschool today?
Does your mom know you’re on the computer?
Why be so childish? I guess it is easier then trying to explain where those cancer cells in those Egyptian mummies came from.
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.