Posted on 04/04/2011 4:15:33 PM PDT by COBOL2Java
Didn’t the prophet Mohammad get the Koran as hearsay from the Angel Gabriel?
I feel a song coming on.
It was Galileo who sought to allow material investigations to follow there own course, and it is he who is your enemy, not Darwin.
Darwin is not my enemy. “Origin of Species” is a perfectly sound piece of scientific investigation, although it proves nothing about the origin of species. It is a careful study of population variations. “The Descent of Man,” however, is not. It is speculation based on his desire to fill a hole created by his loss of faith in God. Pascal was at once a man of faith and a man of science, and one who acted on your advise and was a careful researcher. Descartes was sure the atmosphere extended to the moon, and Cyrano wrote a “science-fiction” about a balloon-trip to the moon, based on his speculations. Pascal, however, took a barometer to the top of a mountain and showed us that the higher we go, the thinner the air.( Cyrano’s balloon is, therefore, as fanciful as the Starship, “Enterprise and probably the thousands of “M”-type planets populated by humanoids. If man ever travels to the stars, it will be by means unknown.).
You can deprecate any theory as speculation. I don't see how you can give the "Origin" a pass, then come down on the "Descent". I chided a poster recently for using the phrase "human species", in a context where he would not admit the natural origin of such. Are humans a species of animal? Surely they are! How can it be denied?
I am saying that “Origin”is the work of a good naturalist who uses his data to come up with a working hypothesis in proof of evolutionary theory. “The Descent of Man,” is not science, or it is popular science aimed at liberating science from “enlightened” clerics like Wilberforce. My favorite book, however,is “Voyage of the Beagle.” Man, what a good adventure story!
As to what man is. well, Aristotle defines him as a rational animal, but of course that does not capture his full ,complexities.
But the Descent of Man is entirely subsidiary to the Origin of Species. It only provides specific detail regarding the evidence for the origin of the human species in particular, and does not advance any thesis beyond what was implicit in the former work.
But it assumes data not given in evidence. Always evolution underestimates the fixity of species. All of his direct observations is of variation within a given specifies. One can accept the of what he is saying, without saying that he has proved it. Galileo was correct, but not as plausible as Newton provided a general theory, and there had to be much,much more work because we arrive at the universe we “know”today. My problem with the Darwinists is that they misrepresent natural selection as a “cause,” when, as Dawins has pointed it, it does not, such thing. It simply shows that first you have this popular and then you have THIS one, and they seem to be related. BUT the real question is: what does this tell you about mankind and the other animals? Before anyone had done any real research, before anyone knew much about genetics—beyond what the animal husbandry people knew—people,were making wild generalizations about humanity.
As much as I dislike women in combat in general and women in combat with no head protection even less, these ladies do look like ass-kickers.
That gear of theirs sure looks new and purty... $;-)
Insanity.... More an more will die due such PC insanity unless we wade in full force an kill the enemy an leave their supporters to clean up the squalor of their own making they find themselves in.
Use of DOD assets should NEVER be used for nation building.
Side note....anyone sticks that noggin with such adornment on it out during a firefight packing a weapon I will shoot it.
Grrrrrrrrr.....
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2011/04/manifesto-of-evil-totalitarian.html#more
PLEASE watch this Colorado woman’s two youtube videos. She has more guts than just about anybody I’ve ever seen. She even gives her name and address. First she b!tch slaps Lindsey Graham, and in the second youtube she reads passages from the koran, before burning those pages. She even uses bacon as her bookmarks.
Mark
And the fool says in his heart there is no God.
Two rhetorical questions: How can this possibly be in regs? and who convinced our soldiers that wearing that scarf is going to protect their heads better than a helmet? It screams ‘target me’.
I did. And your assessment was correct.
LiberalChristians
An oxymoron without equal.
Another point on the rest of your post -
There is no reason to examine the Koran with a “higher criticism”. Simply revealing what it says in unvarnished plain English (wwhttp://www.thestraightway.org/Quran.asp) offends every human’s God given sense of right and wrong.
It’s like anything of the left/Satan - tell the truth about it and people are naturally repulsed.
Thanks for this ping.
And, most importantly, “Why do they all have black hair?”
No, they don't have jobs, which is a large part of the problem. Other contributing factors are lack of cheeseburgers, football, beer, and available women.
As for the black hair, it's inbreeding.....
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.