Posted on 09/04/2009 8:50:36 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Once again, a NASA space probe is supporting the 6,000-year biblical age of the solar system...
(Excerpt) Read more at creation.com ...
As you mentioned, I have been following your threads, and from what I can tell, about half the posters try to insult you on each and every thread.
Kinda goes with the territory.
What was the original argument? Anyone remember?
“Dontchaknow? If a Creationist or ID scientist is denied tenure, then everythign they have ever said, or ever wil lsay must therefore be a lie? Silly you- Someone who isn’t awarded tenure can NEVEr EVER under any circumstances present truth apparently- (although those makign that silly claim show hte weakness of hteir position- but are just too blind to see it apparently- Attack the messenger- attack their credentials, and insist that unless they are mainstream- that htey couldn’t possibly have anythign of scientific value ot present- Gee- what a powerful coutner-argument put forth by some on htis thread- but it’s typical anti-Christian/creation tactics- throwing spitwads because they’re out of ammo)”
—Here I thought I might be the victim of the most grievous misreadings and non sequiturs - but that may be the most bizarre tortuous twisting of a post I’ve seen – ever. I’m actually jealous.
“attack their credentials”
—Examining the credentials of someone going for tenure; imagine that. What’s next – examining the resume of someone applying for a job? That’s just not right!
So in a sense, it is not necessary for God to create each and every individual snowflake, but the design allows for a tremendous latitude for variety within that framework. The water molecules are working the way they were designed to, which in no way demonstrates that God is not needed nor that God didn't design it.
----------------
Thank you for the excellent analogy.
“Are you talking about the lies in Ben Stein’s movie? “
No, more like the guy who worked in the Smithsonian, here....
Museum Officials Oust Research Associate Open to Intelligent Design Theory (Smithsonian)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1802847/posts
Or the science minister in Canada who wouldn’t comment on his views relating to God and creation and was facing a frenzied mob of evo/atheists who were demanding his career on a silver platter.
(ping to someone who may have a link to that thread)
“Or the science minister in Canada who wouldn’t comment on his views relating to God and creation and was facing a frenzied mob of evo/atheists who were demanding his career on a silver platter.” [excerpt]That would be Mr. Goodyear. (can't find his first name right off)
“(ping to someone who may have a link to that thread)” [excerpt]For starters:
Thank you. Much obliged.
I wasn’t sure of the titles and without good keywords, the search is hopeless.
Googling it didn’t help either.
Perhaps this will be helpful:
www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/.../20090317/ -
[[Examining the credentials of someone going for tenure; imagine that. What’s next – examining the resume of someone applying for a job? That’s just not right]]
Imagine- examining the statements about ID INSTEAD of obsessing over someone’s position- Imagine, arguing hte ISSUES presented isntead of ignoring htem- Imagine, Discussing whether was was actually said was right or wrong based on the ISSUES instead of arguing about whether he was given tenure or not- Imagine, staying focussed instead of diverting attention away from the facts of hte case with silly accusations about hte person himself- Golly- Whoda thunk arguments are based o nthe ISSUES being discussed aboiut the evidnece of ID instead of someone’s character? What a concept!
[[Examining the credentials of someone going for tenure; imagine that. What’s next – examining the resume of someone applying for a job? That’s just not right]]
Imagine- examining the statements about ID INSTEAD of obsessing over someone’s position- Imagine, arguing hte ISSUES presented isntead of ignoring htem- Imagine, Discussing whether was was actually said was right or wrong based on the ISSUES instead of arguing about whether he was given tenure or not- Imagine, staying focussed instead of diverting attention away from the facts of hte case with silly accusations about hte person himself- Golly- Whoda thunk arguments are based o nthe ISSUES being discussed aboiut the evidnece of ID instead of someone’s character? What a concept!
What’s next?: Actually Facing problems with the hypothesis of Macroevolution instead of runnign scared from them and ignoring them by diverting asttention away from them by attackign hte messenger per usual?
Right. Believing in evolution does not in anyway require the exclusion of God's involvement or design.
Do you believe that God is the Intelligent Designer?
It is bearing false witness to call a conservative a liberal, socialist marxist as y'all repeatedly do.
Lost his office? Part of a larger move involving over a dozen associates. They were offered identical new offices, the others accepted, Sternberg refused. A second move was at his own request.
Took his keys? All associates lost their keys in a security revamp, and they were all issued access badges. He never lost access to anything he needed to do his work.
Demoted from Associate to Collaborator? His term was due to end anyway, and his sponsor (necessary for the associate status) was dead. They renewed him as a Collaborator and he didn't lose access to anything he needed to do his work.
The published paper? He didn't follow procedure and consult the staff subject expert editors for peer review before publication, and did it right before he left his post as editor. Basically, he sneaked it in, and this wasn't the first time. A quote from an NCSE exec:
“First, above all, we believe strongly that the discussion should not be a referendum on Dr. von Sternberg’s personal scientific beliefs, even though they clearly fall outside of the normal scientific mainstream. Obviously Dr. von Sternberg’s religious beliefs are also off the table. The focus should be on the fact that he allowed into the pages of PBSW a paper that was inappropriate for the journal in both content and quality”Sternberg was also repeatedly warned about his gross mishandling of museum artifacts and books, not a good thing at the Smithsonian.
They treated him with kid gloves, where I would have fired him purely for his conduct.
Sternberg is a very clear case of pulling the ID card. You screw up bad and claim persecution when things don't go your way. Sounds familiar. I knew a disabled minority woman who was a total screw-up at work and they had a hell of a time firing her with all of the EO complaints she'd lodge to claim persecution. They eventually gave up and she stayed, and they just put her someplace where she couldn't hurt anything.
[[It is bearing false witness to call a conservative a liberal, socialist marxist as y’all repeatedly do.]]
Annnnnd NOONE is doing that- We’re calling obvious liberals liberals- so rest easy big fella- noone is ‘bearing false witness’- those spounting liberal ideology can call themselves whatever they like, but their words betray their claims- their own confessions belie their claims- they do it to themselves- not us!
Yeah, your credentials shouldn't have anything to do with whether you are awarded tenure. Maybe we should award tenure by some criteria other than performance? That does sound very liberal, very affirmative-action.
The awarding of tenure is largely based on academic publication performance. That's for everybody, not just IDers. And after an impressive earlier performance, his original publications dropped through the floor as he was going for tenure.
Then you definition of a liberal must be anyone that believes that the earth is more than 6000 years old.
Yep- deny tenure to someone who doesn’t hold to the TOE cannard, then deny he was denied because of his belief- Win Win situation for macroevolution
But again- this all has NOTHING to do with what was presented in Expelled- and is nothign more than a childish attempt to ‘discredit’ the ISSUES presented in expelled by Childishly attacking someone’s character- per usual- Macroevolutionists are a tired out broken record that just never shut up nor present ANY credible coutnerarguments to ID- throwing spitwads because they don’t have ANY serious ammunition to fire- Yawn!
“Imagine- examining the statements about ID INSTEAD of obsessing over someone’s position- Imagine, arguing hte ISSUES presented isntead of ignoring htem- Imagine, Discussing whether was was actually said was right or wrong based on the ISSUES instead of arguing about whether he was given tenure or not- Imagine, staying focussed instead of diverting attention away from the facts of hte case with silly accusations about hte person himself- Golly- Whoda thunk arguments are based o nthe ISSUES being discussed aboiut the evidnece of ID instead of someone’s character? What a concept!”
—The post you responded to was a response to another post that was about people allegedly losing their positions. What your post is about, I have no idea.
[[Yeah, your credentials shouldn’t have anything to do with whether you are awarded tenure.]]
That wasn’t hte issue we were discussing- please try to stay on topic
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.