cheap trick behind the most devastating lie in the history of mankind

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_Poll ^ | 10/15/2003 | self

[Truth666]

Here are the some of the results of a 1999 Gallup poll on creationism, evolution, and public education :
49% believe that human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life.
Evolution theory is the most important weapon to twist people's minds.
For 99% of the people the most important REAL reason for believing in it : a trick that costed a few bucks, 100 years ago.
Even more incredible : the trick has remained the same until now.
Only lately, with very fast computers that allow virtual reality software to perform convincing enough, have we seen some effects added to the base trick.
I wonder who is the first Freeper to find out the trick behind the most devastating lie in the history of mankind.

[VadeRetro]

My complaint is not with the research, but the sensationalist hype with which they bypass peer review and go straight to the press, baiting the press with laughably misleading assertions.

Occasionally I see a sloppily written science article which looks to be the product of a reporter who does not understand what he has read or been told. Rarely does a researcher seriously misrepresent his work, especially in the direction of hucksterism. The kind of controversies that erupt when this happens (see "Cold Fusion") tend to destroy careers in science.

[RightWingNilla]

You and your educated stupid scientists and 1-day gods!!!

[dangus]

>> Fine -- then point out to me where some "atheist's guidebook" or "council for atheism" ever advocated genocide.

Communist Manifesto?
The Turner Diaries?
(Ever read that? By the end he's advocating the extinction of all Christians.)
Even Ayn Rand seems positively remonatic about the destruction of civilization which she describes in "Atlas Shrugged," but she's merely an anti-"mysticism" agnostic.

It's not that atheism itself advocates genocide, but it fails to contradict genocide. So a given atheist might be horrified by the Communist Manifesto or the Turner Diaries, but you have to recognize that atheism is a prerequisite for either belief system.

[dangus]

>> This is where atheism becomes unique as a religion. All other religions (and now we include Taoism and Buddhism) do indeed attempt to answer WHY we exist, but atheism doesn't. Atheism doesn't even try. Atheism is purely concerned with the How.

Gotta disagree with this... Agnosticism doesn't answer "why;" Atheism believes there is no reason. If you deny that there is intent, as "hard atheists" do, then the only "why" is "how."

[conservonator]

Hitler was a Christian. He took the swastika right from his Church.

Wrong on both accounts. A true Christian wouldn't do what he did and by most accounts, he was an occultist if anything. Also, the swastika pre dates the Christian religion by many, many years.

[dangus]

>>>>You're kidding, right? Did you miss the 20th century? China? The Soviet Union?

>>That's not atheism's fault.

Yes it is. Atheism cannot offer an objection to genocide. Some atheists have belief systems independent of the definition of atheism which object to genocide.

If you cut the breaklines, it's hard to argue you're not responsible when the car crashes.

[dangus]

No, Idi Amin at least claims to have converted *to* Islam after being driven from power. PErhaps it was just to give the Saudis an excuse to forgive his atrocities, so they could welcome him The point is he later claimed not to have been Muslim.

[P-Marlowe]

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Wrong on both accounts. A true Christian wouldn't do what he did and by most accounts, he was an occultist if anything. Also, the swastika pre dates the Christian religion by many, many years.

Hitler claimed to be a Christian just like the current members of the over 1000 Christian Churches that exist today. Are Episcopalians no longer Christians because their Church allows homosexuals?

Hitler's introduction to the swastika was at his Church in Austria. It has been a Christian symbol for centuries. The Curch that Hitler attended as a child in Austria still exists and the swastika is still there.

[dangus]

>> Religion also gives one a ready-made justification for the slaughter of "non-believers" -- "God said it's alright because they're doomed anyway."

Well, first off, except for some Calvinists, Christians explicitly reject the "they're all doomed anyway" belief. Secondly, even a Calvinist would say that they cannot, since that is God's role.

[dangus]

Not a Jesuit... went to a Jesuit school, got some Jesuit spirituality through Campus Ministries, but most Jesuit universities are just State University wannabes.

Mine had streaks of conservativism, but Leahy gave a huge endowment, and they suddenly mirrored KLeahy's beliefs in all things. :^( :^P :^O&* :^(

[dangus]

Whoops... it came out garbled...

Amin later claimed that he had not been Muslim when he committed his atrocities.

[conservonator]

Claiming to be and actually being is not the same thing. If he had wanted to adopt Christina symbols than the there are a myriad of more clearly identifiable symbols than the swastika, which is far more associated with pagan than Christian cultures.

Why is it so important for some to cast Hitler as a Christian when he clearly was not?

[Junior]

Except the history of Christianity paints a different picture. Heretics had to be destroyed lest their ideas infect the body of the Church; infidels had to be destroyed as they profaned God; witches had to be destroyed because the Bible specifically said, "suffer not a witch to live;" Jews had to be killed because they killed Christ. All those people were doomed in God's eyes, and it was the duty of God's chosen on Earth to fulfill God's will.

[Ogmios]

Yep, but it's fun to write!! LOL ;)

[<1/1,000,000th%]

...but most Jesuit universities are just State University wannabes.

Loyola University, the Jesuit University in Chicago, is not a State University wannabe, they just want your money.

OK, you're right. ;)

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Why is it so important for some to cast Hitler as a Christian when he clearly was not?

Because creationists cast him as an atheist motivated by evolution, which he is not.

I agree with you that I would not consider him a Christian, but he considered himself a Christian in all his writings, and he believed he was doing God's work.

[dangus]

>>Hitler claimed to be a Christian

I haven't read every word he ever said, but the fact that he denounced Jesus as a Jewish plot to destroy the Arian race shows he was not.

You can call yourself whatever you want, but to believe Jesus was a huckster, a malicious liar, and an evil perverter of truth sorta suggests he was not what any reasonable person would call a Christian. More likely, if he ever said such a thing, it was a political lie, made obvious by his other statements.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Not sure what your reference is but from Mein Kampf it's clear that Hitler believed that Jesus Christ was an Aryan, not a Jew. In fact, he claimed that Jesus "made no secret of his attitude toward the Jewish people, and when necessary he even took the whip to drive from the temple of the Lord this adversary of all humanity".

[conservonator]

I agree with you that I would not consider him a Christian, but he considered himself a Christian in all his writings, and he believed he was doing God's work.

The only Hitler ever espoused any Christian ideals was simply because he knew his audience, not because he believed him self a Christian. This seems to be an evenhanded look at the subject of Hitler and his attitude towards Christianity.