Ayn Rand And Her Legacy Of Idiotic Objectivists

Toogood Reports ^ | December 30, 2001 | Charles A. Morse

[WrenchChucker]

I would gather that there's a strong minority of Representatives and Senators who've actually read, and re-read, and have studied, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Remember, and I'm sure you'll agree, you cannot read one without the other.

[rightwingbob]

I think that the Bible and Evolution are compatible. It never specifies in the Bible whether a day is 24 of our hours, or 20 billion of our years. It's well possible both are true.

Just my two quid.

[Physicist]

I think that the Bible and Evolution are compatible. It never specifies in the Bible whether a day is 24 of our hours, or 20 billion of our years.

But if seven of God's days equal 15 billion of our years, then surely most of the stuff mentioned in the Genesis account would have been created on Day 7.

[jeremiah]

How can the statement In the beginning, God created the heavens and the Earth be disproved?

[ValerieUSA]

Wow, I just saw this thread for the first time. Interesting reading. Carry on .....

[jeremiah]

I wish someone could explain how a protein becomes something else, then that something else becomes another thing, then a self replicating thing goes from self-replicating to 2 seperate entities(male and female) at the same time in evolutionary history.

These things continue to evolve through different forms, of course 2 at a time, until they bring forth a predecessor of man, of course at every evolutionary turn 2 at a time, but then a line dies out (like Cro-Magnon), or(Piltdown Man) but wait, there are other primates, these are the ones that will evolve towards man, of course at least 2 of a kind, at the same moment in life. The odds of this happening are nil, not long, not unlikely, but 0.

Nothing anyone can say will ever convince me different, and of course evolution itself is unprovable as well.

Just because man can use his mind to calculate odds, does not mean the the thing he calculates could happen, ever will.

It is statistically possible that with all of the ingredients in my fridge (eggs, chocolate chips) and in my cupboard (flour, brown sugar and shortening), that if lightning strikes my house, at the precise moment an earthquake spills these ingredients together, I may go home to freshly baked Toll-House cookies,( huhuhuhuhu chocolate chip cookies) but I wouldn't suddenly believe in an evolution when I saw the results. I would be looking for THE COOK to thank, how about you?

[jeremiah]

The bible says that grasses and trees existed before the sun did Grass and trees did not have to come after the sun, SOL our sun did they? Could there not have been the seeds of these things planted before the sun warmed the soil to make them grow?

[Physicist]

How can the statement In the beginning, God created the heavens and the Earth be disproved?

By the strong evidence we have that the Earth is about 10 billion years younger than the universe at large. The Earth simply didn't exist "in the beginning", nor indeed for a great while afterwards.

[Physicist]

Grass and trees did not have to come after the sun, SOL our sun did they? Could there not have been the seeds of these things planted before the sun warmed the soil to make them grow?

But even the soil didn't exist before the sun formed. The Earth was a molten ball of lava when the sun became hot enough to warm any soil within reach.

The sun is 4 or 5 billion years old. Grasses only appear extremely late in the fossil record, less than 37 million years ago. The dinosaurs were long dead before they appeared. There was plenty of time for their seeds to grow in a hospitable environment, had they been lying around...not that they would have germinated after so many billions of years, and not that they would have survived the inhospitable environment that existed on the planet Earth for an extended period after its formation.

[The KG9 Kid]

Has anyone seen ever a pic of Charles 'Chuck' A. Morse? If not, here you go:

(Notice how he at least put on his best wife-beater T-shirt)

SDI SSgt. Hartman: "...A jelly donut?! Are you allowed to eat jelly donuts Private Morse?!"

Private Morse: "Sir, no sir!"

SDI SSgt. Hartman: "And why NOT, Private Morse?!"

Private Morse: "Sir, because I'm too heavy si--"

SDI SSgt. Hartman: "BECAUSE YOU ARE A DISGUSTING FATBODY, PRIVATE MORSE!!!"

[jeremiah]

In the beginning is an old Hebrew idiom meaning a long long time ago, it is not meant to be literal, as quite a bit of the Bible is written that way. it is only 4 or 5 sentences later that the sun is mentioned as in he called the light Day, and the dark Night. Later on it is brought up as a fill in, so the sequence is intact.

1st the heavens and the Earth, 2nd was light, and motion to cause the day and night to alternate. 3rd The Earth itself is brought up from under an ocean. 4th the grass and herbs, and trees with fruit.5th The waters bring forth the moving creature that has life, and fowl 6th The living creatures like cattle, and snakes and beasts of the Earth 7th man comes. Now how is that sequence different than the theories of evolution, except for an originator, or creator? Go to Genesis in the Bible, and look for yourself, it is a logical progression, written millenia ago.

[Pres Raygun]

But if seven of God's days equal 15 billion of our years, then surely most of the stuff mentioned in the Genesis account would have been created on Day 7.

By the strong evidence we have that the Earth is about 10 billion years younger than the universe at large. The Earth simply didn't exist "in the beginning", nor indeed for a great while afterwards.

Genesis 1:1 is an opening sentence, simply stating that God created heaven and earth. Verse 2 then leads into a somewhat sketchy description of the development of the earth and life on it. In verse 2, the author states,"Now the earth was without shape and empty, and darkness was over the surface of the watery deep, but the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the water. This statement clearly indicates that the account to follow is from after the earth was formed and actually accurately describes the early earth, in that the earth was initially covered in water and the atmoshpere was opague.

Reagrding you earlier point that the Genesis account states that plant life existed before the sun, I think you are once again confusing the author's frame of reference for the account. The author in verse two clearly states that his frame of reference is the surface of the earth, so that when he reports in verse 3, that God say,"Let there be light", he simply means light became visible on the surface of the earth, meaning the atmoshpere became translucent. The Hebrew verb in verse 3, means 'to make appear what already exists' and is not the verb used in verse 1 which means 'to create something new'. Likewise in verses 14-19 when God apparently makes the sun and moon after he has created plant life in verse 11, what is really intended is that after plant life is created in verse 11, the sun and moon and stars become visible from the surface of the earth, which simply means that the atmosphere transformed from being translucent to transparent after the first appearance of plant life on earth. The Genesis 1 account is indeed very sketchy compared to modern science, but is amazingly consistent with modern science nonetheless.

[Archaeus]

I don't get it. Why are so many people spelling God as G-d?

It's not like a dirty word you have to censor.

What am I missing?

[MissyMack66]

People dont have “mistakes in their thinking”, as this article states. People think exactly as they think. What a ludicrous notion, the mistaken thought. Bah! I stopped reading this article after that gross blunder.