Pat Robertson has a message for Dover, PA: Don't ask God to help.

WGAL.com ^ | 11.10.05 | WGAL

[conserv13]

DOVER, Pa. -- Pat Robertson had a special message for residents of Dover, Pa., today after voters there elected to boot the current school board, which instituted an intelligent design policy that led to a federal trial.

Robertson made the comment after Lee Webb of CBN News delivered a report on how residents in Dover voted in eight new Democratic board members, replacing all eight current members who had voted for a policy that required students in ninth-grade biology classes to hear a statement on intelligent design before hearing lessons on evolution. Webb then asked Robertson what he thought about the vote.

Here was Robertson's response.

"I'd like to say to the good citizens of Dover: If there is a disaster in your area, don't turn to God, you just rejected him from your city. And don't wonder why he hasn't helped you when problems begin, if they begin. I'm not saying they will, but if they do, just remember, you just voted God out of your city. And if that's the case, don't ask for his help because he might not be there."

[Dimensio]

How has anyone forsaken the Lord here? Be specific.

[Tempest]

The voters have chosen to deny God's work. I don't think it gets anymore obvious than that.

[Dimensio]

The voters have chosen to deny God's work.

Deny it how? What did they do that denies God's work? All I've heard is that they voted out a group of school board members who committed perjury. Could you be more specific as to what they did that denies God's work?

[Tempest]

The school board members commited perjury?! What the heck are you talking. They did their job and were demonized by the left same ole song and dance. The voters decided to yield to the leftist evolution sales schpeil and in result denied the creator.

It's that simple.

[Dimensio]

The voters decided to yield to the leftist evolution sales schpeil and in result denied the creator.

But you've not explained how they "denied" the creator. What did they vote on that implicitly "denied the creator"? What is it about the now voted-out school board members that "affirmed" the creator?

[Dimensio]

The school board members commited perjury?! What the heck are you talking.

That would be (soon to be former) school board member Alan Bonsell, whose testimony in the recent trial contradicted a sworn deposition that he gave back in January. In January he denied that he knew of anyone other than his father who was involved in donating $850 worth of textbooks on Intelligent Design to the Dover school district, and that he didn't know how his father obtained the money for the books. Except that he'd personally received the check -- with the name of the textbook written on the check itself as the intended purpose of the check -- for the books from former board member Bill Buckingham. Who is not his father. Which means that when he claimed that he didn't know anyone else involved in donating the books he was lying. And when he was lying, he was under oath.

Here in the USA, lying while under oath is called "perjury".

[Tempest]

and that would explain all 8 school board memebers??? Nope. The reaction, intentions and agneda of the voters were clear.

I don't know if they're hot or if their cold. But if their lukewarm I'm sure they're going to get spat out....

[Dimensio]

You ignored my previous question. What is it about the vote that "denied" the Lord? Why should the voters have retained the school board members? What, specifically has the Lord to do with the vote and how was He specifically rejected.

[Tempest]

I didn't ignore anything. You obviously didn't read it.

The people have rejected the Lord by denying creation and adopting wholly the dictates of evolutionist.

[Dimensio]

The people have rejected the Lord by denying creation

How did they deny creation? The vote wasn't on creationism. The school board members voted out never promoted teaching creationism in the school district.

[Tempest]

God searches the hearts of men. They don't need to sign a declaration. Their vote was clear.

[Dimensio]

God searches the hearts of men. They don't need to sign a declaration. Their vote was clear.

So you've determined that the voters have rejected creationism even though they didn't vote on anything remotely related to creationism.

[Dimensio]

Also, how is accepting valid science rejecting the Lord? Or are you one of those morons who thinks that anyone who accepts evolution as valid science is an atheist?

[Tempest]

Ahhh now the name calling begins... Guess what boyo... A theory that has remained a theory for some 100+ odd years and has failed to become a grounded fact IS NOT valid science.


I know, I know,,, more name calling and posturing. But that simple fact does hurt, doesn't it.

[Dimensio]

Ahhh now the name calling begins...

Name-calling? I stated a fact: people who claim that evolution is atheism are morons. I didn't say that you were one, I asked if you were one.

Guess what boyo... A theory that has remained a theory for some 100+ odd years and has failed to become a grounded fact IS NOT valid science.

If you understood anything about how science works you would know that a "theory" that remains a "theory" is actually very solid science. Theories never become anything "more" than theories. Theories do not graduate to "grounded fact" status. That is not how science works.

[RunningWolf]

You are against one of the most staunch defenders before the alter of atheistic evolutionism. Staunch yes, rational not.

Wolf

[Tempest]

I you understood science you'd understand that theory that remains theory and has to keep change it's position every few years is nothing more than a hogpauge of hypothosis.

And yes theories do graduate to grounded facts, that is exactly the way science is supposed to work.

For goodness sakes man where did you learn about the basic priciples of structuring facts and science. The whole point of science IS to establish facts!!!!

[Dimensio]

And yes theories do graduate to grounded facts, that is exactly the way science is supposed to work.

Uh, no. Theories are general explanations behind observed phenomena. They do not become anything "more" than theory. It takes years of research, testing and validated predictions for a hypothesis to rise to the leve of theory. Once there, it can only be disproven or remain "theory".

If you disagree, please given an example of a theory -- that is, a general explanation for observed phenomena -- that has ceased to be theory and is now "grounded fact".

For goodness sakes man where did you learn about the basic priciples of structuring facts and science.

Professional scientists.

Are you going to tell me how you determined that a vote that had nothing whatsoever to do with creationism is somehow an attack on the Lord?

[Tempest]

A hypothesis is a statement made based on observations. It must be tested and be able to withstand scrutiny under all observable circumstances for it to be elevated to theory. It must be further tested and be able to provide repeatable, definable and unwavering testimony within the established constraints of it's precepts in order for it to be established as scientific fact.

You're "professional scientist" have mislead you or you have misinterpreted.

I never said attack, I said rejection. Stop trying to put words in my mouth.

[Dimensio]

A hypothesis is a statement made based on observations. It must be tested and be able to withstand scrutiny under all observable circumstances for it to be elevated to theory. It must be further tested and be able to provide repeatable, definable and unwavering testimony within the established constraints of it's precepts in order for it to be established as scientific fact.

So an example of a general explanation for observed phenomena that went from "theory" to "grounded fact"?

I never said attack, I said rejection. Stop trying to put words in my mouth.

I'm so sorry. Now stop dodging the question: how was a vote that had nothing whatsoever to do with creationism a rejection of the Lord?