Just so we’re clear; that’s been my point from the beginning . . . and that Dawkins, his many acolytes, and many of his colleagues, claim that the Judeo-Christian Tradition must give way to anything Science might wish to assert on any subject. Hence, my question; Why do you continue to tell me what you already know I know?
“Silly YHAOS -- have you yet learned nothing?”
Nothing from you. A great deal from boop and Alamo-Girl (and others), who explain things far better than you (and without the fog of disinformation you mix with your attempts at a/disa greements).
“No, (to the question if Man is a “vicious predatory animal”) far from it, except certain criminal mind-sets.”
Exception noted. Aside from your exception, how do “other similar words,” such as “effective hunter-gatherers” equate with “vicious predatory animal”?
(And that, boys & girls, is how it’s done. That is how one says “yes” by saying “no”)
I await with interest how Miz boop answers your response (should she choose to do so). And/or others.
One other issue:
In post #200, this thread, you allege no new quotes since February of 2009, How Much Longer Can They Sell Darwinism?, FR, and you set the standard for “new quotes” to be four year’s (or less). Prove what you allege.
Sorry, meant to likewise ping you to #238.
Yes, I "get it" that agreeing with me irks you beyond all human endurance, and to be reminded of such agreements is an insult no human should have to endure.
Nevertheless, it's still a free country -- at least on Free Republic -- where I can express my considered opinions, even when, G*d forbid, they agree with YHAOS.
;-)
YHAOS: "...the fog of disinformation you mix with your attempts at a/disa greements"
No "disinformation" from here -- just straight facts and reason, to the best of my ability.
And I deeply apologize for the insult of sometimes agreeing with you!
;-)
YHAOS: "Aside from your exception, how do “other similar words,” such as “effective hunter-gatherers” equate with “vicious predatory animal”?
(And that, boys & girls, is how it’s done.
That is how one says “yes” by saying “no”) "
In fact, the phrase "vicious predatory animal" is loaded with multiple ambiguous word-meanings, which you can easily discern yourself.
To begin with, the term "vicious predatory animal" is a modern pejorative used in reference to our worst criminals -- murderers, rapists, etc.
That's a simple fact.
But if you strip away the pejorative meaning, and simply ask: is man an animal?
Well, we're not potted plants -- at least most of us.
Is man a predator?
Well, certainly all our pre-civilized ancestors hunted animals for food -- which matches one definition of "predator" (today many hunt for sport, not the same).
Is man vicious?
The word vicious means: violent, cruel and dangerous.
That might describe our hunter-ancestors from their prey's point of view, or from their enemies' view during times of warfare.
In short: the answer depends on what, exactly, you mean by the phrase: "vicious predatory animal."
YHAOS: "In post #200, this thread, you allege no new quotes since February of 2009, How Much Longer Can They Sell Darwinism?, FR, and you set the standard for “new quotes” to be four year’s (or less).
Prove what you allege."
In fact, four years (February 2009) is the only reference you gave for those 27 alleged "insults" against Christians.
I merely noted that FOUR YEARS is a pretty long time to keep records, and harbor grudges, against people who may or may not have seriously intended to "insult" your POV.
Now, if you wish to assert that some of your alleged quotes are more recent that FOUR YEARS, I'll cheerfully accept that.
Of course, if you, yourself, YHAOS were to provide source data for your own grudge-list, including the full contexts of those exchanges, then (and only then) I might take them a bit more seriously.
But why bother, since your "point" is pointless regardless, FRiend?