Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- writerdog on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
- Politico on Health care reform would save state money
- Phantom on Open thread 11/22
- Phantom on Health care reform would save state money
- Phantom on Health care reform would save state money
- Phantom on Health care reform would save state money
- writerdog on Health care reform would save state money
- Phantom on Health care reform would save state money
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/22
- Phantom on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
133 Comments
By popular demand more evidence for the irrefutable fact of evolution. Real science, by real scientists coming up with findings that really benefit society. Creationists are busy looking for funding to create a puppet show to talk about how humans and dinosaurs lived together like in the cartoons.
Scientists Shed Light On Evolution Of Gene Regulation
ScienceDaily (Nov. 26, 2008) — Scientists at Penn State have shed light on some of the processes that regulate genes — such as the processes that ensure that proteins are produced at the correct time, place, and amount in an organism — and they also have shed light on the evolution of the DNA regions that regulate genes.
The team focused on regulatory regions that, when bound to the protein GATA1, are thought to turn on genes that play an important role in the development of red blood cells. “Our findings could help others to develop drugs to treat people who suffer from sickle-cell anemia and other blood disorders,” said Ross Hardison, the T. Ming Chu Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, and the team’s leader.
More real science, not creationist whining at:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/11/081125113108.htm
First post?!
Let’s make it about EVOLUTION.
Any takers?
I guess my fingers were too slow.
Somehow I knew I could depend on you MP!
Blaidd, I gotta do what the creationists want. They still insist there’s no evidence for evolution and I have to prove them wrong. Then again, creationists are continually proven wrong but they just don’t seem to be able to grasp reality.
But MP, what evidence would it take for you to NOT believe in evolution?
That was a piece of their distorted logic the other day.
When there is actual scientific evidence presented that challenges evolution I’ll take a look at it. All creationists do is whine, and that’s not scientific evidence. How about presenting something that supports the creationist myth that the Earth is 6,000 years old and how that science uproots the numerous studies that show an old Earth?
Spreading more holiday joy:
2 dead after shots fired in Palm Desert toy store
http://www.sacbee.com/114/story/1434304.html
First there was the mad rush where shoppers trampled a Wal-Mart worker for death in their dash to acquire a cheap child-labor product from China. Now some people get shot while buying toys for their kids. Someone must have thought a Barbie doll was worth killing for. Ah, the faux love and joy of the holidays when crime rates go up so people can show their love for capitalist Christ.
MP, would this be what is known as “irony”?
“MP, would this be what is known as “irony”?”
They were in a Toys R Us, they could have pulled out nerf guns and shot each other. If someone died from getting shot by a Nerf gun then it might be a funny story.
I wonder if one of the shooters was a CC permit holder?? Just asking….
You know, I hate to say this, but God has had nothing to do with keeping good ol’ Kentucky safe. To my way of thinking, asking God to support the war in Iraq, or using God’s name in saying your state has been free from terrorists, is just a bit blasphemous.
===================================================
Lawmaker to Homeland Security: Don’t forget to credit God for keeping Kentuckians safe.
A lawmaker is upset with his state’s Department of Homeland Security for its lack of credit to a “higher power” for its work in protecting the state’s citizens.
Kentucky State Rep. Tom Riner, a Southern Baptist minister who helped establish a requirement that the federally funded agency credit God with keeping the state safe, is upset that under Gov. Steve Beshear, the department’s 2008 annual report did not do so.
“We certainly expect it to be there, of course,” Riner, of Louisville, told the Lexington Herald-Leader.
Among the requirements of the 2006 anti-terror law is that a plaque be placed in the department’s Emergency Operations Center. Part of the statement on the plaque reads: “The safety and security of the Commonwealth cannot be achieved apart from reliance upon Almighty God.”
“This is recognition that government alone cannot guarantee the perfect safety of the people of Kentucky,” Riner added. “Government itself, apart from God, cannot close the security gap. The job is too big for government.”
“I will not try to supplant almighty God,” said Homeland Security chief Thomas Preston. “All I do is try to obey the dictates of the Kentucky General Assembly. I really don’t know what their motivation was for this. They obviously felt strongly about it.”
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Lawmaker_to_Homeland_Security_Dont_forget_1128.html
Efforts to support global climate-change falls: Poll
PARIS – There is both growing public reluctance to make personal sacrifices and a distinct lack of enthusiasm for the major international efforts now underway to battle climate change, according to findings of a poll of 12,000 citizens in 11 countries, including Canada.
http://www.canada.com/windsorstar/news/story.html?id=f0a1687c-decd-4c72-9d0e-7e6dd92d4ebe
Nothing like a bit of arrogance to help with that welfare check.
================================================
GM asks FAA to block public from viewing movements of corporate jet.
General Motors, under fire for flying its chief executive to Washington for hearings on an auto bailout on its corporate jet, has asked the FAA to block the public from being able to track its plane.
“We availed ourselves of the option as others do to have the aircraft removed,” a GM spokesman told Bloomberg News.
Flightaware.com, a website that tracks plane movements, has previously revealed information about the movement of GM’s leased Gulfstream Aerospace G-IV jet. Its last flight shown was for its trip Nov. 18 from Detroit to Washington, where GM CEO Rick Wagoner spoke to a Senate and House panel on a $25 billion emergency loan plan for the US auto industry.
At the House hearing, New York Democrat Gary Ackerman berated Wagoner for taking the jet.
“Couldn’t you all have downgraded to first class?” Ackerman asked.
GM’s Gulfstream jet is leased from General Electric Capital, a report said.
FAA spokeswoman Laura Brown told Bloomberg she couldn’t say whether the agency had complied with GM’s request, but said “We do this routinely” for jet owners and that the company didn’t “have to have a reason” for requesting a tracking blackout.
GM also said it had seven planes of its own, and that two are for sale, and an additional two are being listed for sale. The leased jet which carried Wagoner to Washington has made ten trips to D.C. this year, three of them since October.
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/GM_seeks_to_keep_public_from_1128.html
Here is a remarkable new math finding:
For any two real numbers a and b
a^2 – b^2 = (a + b)(a – b)
For example if a = 3 and b = 1
9 – 1 = (3 + 1)(3 – 1)
If we set a = b,
a^2 – b^2 = a^2 – a^2 = (a + a)(a – a) = (a + b)(a – b)
But in this case, it is also true that
a^2 = ab, so
a^2 – b^2 = a (a – b)
Therefore
(a + b)(a – b) = a(a – b)
Thus, by dividing both sides by (a – b) we find
(a + b) = a
or, since a = b
2a = a
2 = 1 !
With the economy’s turbulence, I’m thinking of getting a teaching certificate to teach math. I just have this sense I could do this job.
Having worked in retail setting for eight years I know that emotions are heightened on “Black Friday”.
Many camp out in front of the store and it is as much a Holliday tradition as Turkey and family coming.
The first year I was shocked at people’s actions, the member of management that open the door had to demand the people back away from it. As they were pushing so hard she could not turn the lock. Then she was almost knocked to the floor by the doors flying open and the crowd rushing in. She started passing out shopping carts but stopped after being hit several times by the carts. She ended up with bruises on her legs the size of a watermelon. There were those who rather then go to where the item was they wanted. Would simply wait and seeing it in someone else’s cart and grab it putting it in their own.
I believe sharks learn the system of “feeding frenzy” from human beings during Black Friday.
boxlock” The Windsor Star is part of Canwest a Canadian right wing group similar to Fox and I’ve love to see how the Hong Kong Shanghai Bank of China worded the survey for no other media picked it up. HSBC have aided with the financing of the pollution gusher factories in China to no small sum and they could not assisgn any degree of accuracy to their numbers. Did you note article closed by saying folks want government to do more about global warming? It also missed that the Green Party has risen stongly in the polls worldwide. NIMBY is a constant in all new processes so I think your post is a bit misleading rising from the source. It’s like them saying you are against technology because you dont’ want the nucear reactor in your back yard, but you do want govenment to facilitate more energy nonetheless.
FYIII
Posted November 29, 2008 at 7:45 am | Permalink
Therefore
(a + b)(a – b) = a(a – b)
Thus, by dividing both sides by (a – b) we find
(a + b) = a
or, since a = b
2a = a
2 = 1 !
—
Cute, but don’t forget that division by zero isn’t allowed in algebra because the calculus breaks down; i.e., “funny” things happen in algebra when you divide by zero (a – b = 0, under your assumption that a = b) where, say, 2 can equal 1.
Given that people with degrees in behavioural/motivational sciences, mass physcology and physciatry have prostituted their eduction by working for Maidson Avenue to produce almost any response desired, we should not be surprised at WalMart or Toys R US. No doubt some business/marketing/management school will study this and blend it into the thesis that advertising and marketing works! PS This applies to politics….. even more so.
OK. Equal time to provide a counter balance to Maggie, who is obviously so insecure in his own beliefs that he must throw it in everyone’s face and ridicule those who don’t share his view, first thing every morning.
——————
The Lone Ranger and Tonto are camping in the desert, set up their tent, and are asleep. Some hours later, The Lone Ranger wakes his faithful friend.
“Tonto, look up and tell me what you see.”
Tonto replies, “Me see millions of stars.”
“What does that tell you?” asks The Lone Ranger.
Tonto ponders for a minute.
“Astronomically speaking, it tells me that there are millions of galaxies and potentially billions of planets.
Astrologically, it tells me that Saturn is in Leo.
Time wise, it appears to be approximately a quarter past three.
Theologically, it’s evident the Lord is all powerful and we are small and insignificant.
Meteorologically, it seems we will have a beautiful day tomorrow.
What it tell you, Kemo Sabi?”
The Lone Ranger is silent for a moment, then speaks.
“Tonto, you Dumb Hoss, someone has stolen our tent.”
The above joke is a good lesson in missing the obvious. Chances are that you were surprised by the Lone Ranger’s response. However, the first sentence of the joke tells you that the Lone Ranger and Tonto were camping in a tent. It should have been clear at Tonto’s first response that he was missing the obvious.
Likewise, those who have already decided that God does not exist and that all processes must have a naturalistic explanation, do not see the obvious evidence that the universe was designed, rather than happened by chance.
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/obvious.html
“Likewise, those who have already decided that God does not exist and that all processes must have a naturalistic explanation, do not see the obvious evidence that the universe was designed, rather than happened by chance.”
Well, let’s put that to a test.
Again.
I don’t want anything for me.
God? Feed all the hungry people of the world. Get that done by, say Sunday afternoon. Otherwise, my conclusion is that you do not exist.
Well by God outlander you convinced me with that Tonto story! Why didn’t someone just explain to me before that I was missing the obvious God.
After millions of years of evolving all Maggotpunk can do is copy and paste and insult people like a third grader.
Geneticist Francis S. Collins explains through personal testimony why faith and reason can and do coexist peacefully, and how one actually complements the other.
Maggotpunk, you do know who Francis S. Collins is do you not?
“God? Feed all the hungry people of the world. Get that done by, say Sunday afternoon. Otherwise, my conclusion is that you do not exist.”—BlueJay
Much the the same silly arrogance as he exhibited in his thinking others have to respond to his childish challenges.
“Do not put the Lord your God to the test.” Matthew 4:7 (NIV)
“Maggotpunk, you do know who Francis S. Collins is do you not?”
Ask Francis Collins whether he is a creationist or an Intelligent Design adherent ala’ Michael Behe much less Phillip Johnson and see what he says.
In this discussion, it seems that people mix up two different issues. There is evolution, which is supported by mathodological naturalism (e.g., the practice of natural science) and metaphysical naturalism (the philosophical assumption that the natural world is all there is-often but not inevitably paired with atheism). Collins, as well as Ken Miller, employ methodological naturalism with no difficulties, but are not believers in metaphysical naturalism (from what I can tell, and she can correct me if I am wrong, neither is Tara). Collins is in more of an evangelical tradition, but he is not alone. Some of the leaders of the fight against ID in Kansas are devout Christians, and in fact are afraid that people will be turned off by Christianity because of the no nothingism of creationists.
Yeah I figured someone would be along with “Do not tempt the Lord thy God”.
I shoulda figured it would be bawks.
What you are telling us bawks, is that your “God” is a no show. Hey, I was gonna give him to midnight Sunday. But it probably is a good idea to get started early with the excuses.
“Do not put the Lord your God to the test.” Matthew 4:7 (NIV)
“Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.” The Wizard of Oz
Should be “know nothingism”, but actually in this case “no nothingism” works almost as well.
The dishonest heroes of the AGW deniers are still busy. . .
‘Not the IPCC (“NIPCC”) Report’
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/11/not-the-ipcc-nipcc-report/
“Much in the spirit of the Fraser Institute’s damp squib we reported on last year, S. Fred Singer and his merry band of contrarian luminaries (financed by the notorious “Heartland Institute” we’ve commented on previously) served up a similarly dishonest ‘assessment’ of the science of climate change earlier this year in the form of what they call the NIPCC” report (the “N” presumably standing for ‘not the’ or ‘nonsense’).”
More at link.
Ya’ll can believe in the bible if you want to. I really do not care. However, don’t use your religion to try to justify interfering with the lives of others and research that can be done to advance us.
Personally all you bible thumpers should resort back to your fundamentals and dress like they did in bible days. Stop partaking in technology and live like you mean it.
God? Feed all the hungry people of the world. Get that done by, say Sunday afternoon. Otherwise, my conclusion is that you do not exist.
=================================
Sorry, God already did that and was rejected.
Man did not want to obey God and just had to eat the “apple” didn’t he.
But god got all you non-believers to vote for the only Christian running for president, didn’t he?
Personally all you bible thumpers should resort back to your fundamentals and dress like they did in bible days. Stop partaking in technology and live like you mean it.
Sorry, Political_mama I can not find that in my Bible. Where is it found that Christian shoul live like that?
BlueJay
Posted November 29, 2008 at 9:19 am | Permalink
God? Feed all the hungry people of the world. Get that done by, say Sunday afternoon. Otherwise, my conclusion is that you do not exist.
—————————————————-
There’s enough food on the planet to feed every man woman and child. Man’s choices and sin.
I remember a comedian talking once about Oral Robert’s claim that the 900 foot Jesus appeared to him, telling Oral that if his followers didn’t contribute large sums of “What better way to bring people to God? As Oral delivers this message to the world, have a lightening bolt come out of of the sky, just leaving Oral’s empty smoking shoes behind the podium…millions would have converted on the spot!”
Are you atheists as bitter and unhappy as your posts generally seem to indicate? There is a better way.
Just sayin’.
I’m sure we can find lots of things prohibited in the bible that you regularly partake in, Right. All Christians cherry pick what they believe and don’t believe in.
In fact all religions do the same…I think most religious dogma is open to interpetation by the individual.
Then, it seems, after choosing what to believe, spend the balance of their time criticizing others who don’t believe exactly as they do.
In my experience…it’s the Christians who seem the most angry..you can find evidence of it all over this blog everyday.
I couldn’t be a Christian…I’m not into judging people and thinking anyone who doesn’t agree with my beliefs is going to hell. What a way to live! No wonder you are all so negative all the time.
Almost all the technology we enjoy today came from something that Christians fought against.
Like immunizations, you know, most of them started by using fetal tissues from abortions.
That’s just one of many.
Yes, Mary_Caruso
There are con artists on both sides of the fence.
Please do not judge Christians by the works of Oral Roberts.
I screwed up my earlier post..it should have read “…telling Oral that if his followers didn’t contribute large sums of money to his church that He would “take Oral home”. “What better way to bring people to God? As Oral delivers this message to the world, have a lightening bolt come out of of the sky, just leaving Oral’s empty smoking shoes behind the podium…millions would have converted on the spot!”
I don’t…Oral Roberts, Jimmy Swaggart, Bennie Hinn, Jim Baker…all of them have done a terrible disservice to the Chritian community…just more evidence of the power and distruction of greed.
There are con artists on both sides of the fence. — RightAngle
———-
I think that is what Agnatha was referencing in his 9:49 post when he said:
“Some of the leaders of the fight against ID in Kansas are devout Christians, and in fact are afraid that people will be turned off by Christianity because of the no [know] nothingism of creationists.”
“Like immunizations, you know, most of them started by using fetal tissues from abortions”
I don’t think so PM…I’d have to see some evidence of that. Most immunizations were developed by injecting a small amount of virus to develop immunity in the individual.
In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own. (Thomas Jefferson)
By the way, has anybody heard of the Moral Majority lately?
I believe that you will find many “Preachers” in Hell.
But that does not mean that there is no God.
If God would have struck Roberts with lightning, where would he draw the line. Kill everyone that lied on the spot?
Then what a loving god that would be?
“Then what a loving god that would be?”
It was a joke, Right!
Speaking of a “loving God”..just look at the world and that makes it pretty hard to believe in a loving God that is all powerful and in control. I think religion a fairly tale made up by every culture in order to try and civilize the world and understand our purpose for existing…only it sort of backfired.
Cool!
‘Venus, Jupiter will ’shine’ on Monday night’
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27958792/
“Every once in a while, something will appear in the night sky that will attract the attention of even those who normally don’t bother looking up. It’s likely to be that way on Monday evening, Dec. 1.
A slender crescent moon, just 15 percent illuminated, will appear in very close proximity to the two brightest planets in our sky, Venus and Jupiter.”
“By the way, has anybody heard of the Moral Majority lately?”
I think they’ve been repackaged and are marketing themselves as the present “fundamental right wing”.
“By the way, has anybody heard of the Moral Majority lately?”
I’m pretty sure the majority of Americans don’t think morals should be legislated. “Render unto Caesar…”
We’ve seen what a theocracy looks like and prefer not to change The Constitution of the United States of America to more closely resemble The Bible.
Ah, I see duh Libs have saddled the cruel horse of anti-religious commentary.
Perhaps there will be gas chamber tours later in the day?
“There’s enough food on the planet to feed every man woman and child. Man’s choices and sin.”
SURELY the king of kings and lord of lords can solve a minor distribution problem? WHY does he keep getting people “begat” in places where there is no food?
“Sorry, God already did that and was rejected.
Man did not want to obey God and just had to eat the “apple” didn’t he.”
Yeah I’ve always been struck by THAT bit of holy brilliance.
“Kids? This is the tree of life. Over there is the tree of knowledge. Those are hands off for you. No touchy, no snacky!”
Who WOULDN’T have disobeyed that one?
And the upshot is man is to be punished for wanting knowledge and life? That’s some God ya got there. Glad I don’t have to be his emmissary.
Ummmm Jay — I believe thats the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil — Not just Tree of Knowledge…. just saying…
Morning Chas,
Strokes suck…
I’ve found that living life the “right” way does not need to be steered by a book/preacher/priest/house of worship. Common sense goes a long way in figuring out right and wrong.
The ability of others to try and impose their beliefs and views on others, well, it’s just sad. Those with weak minds tend to be influenced by religion and need to spread this influence as if it is somehow their “get out of jail” free card to get in the pearly gates. I would think, “if” there is a supreme something, living your life right would be sufficient to get you in those gates (if there is any). Religion will be the ruin of society because of it’s views against those that don’t believe in it. Somehow, a person who does everything right in his/her life is somehow judged wrongly because of no affliation to a particular religion. Oh well, Take care of yourself and the rest will follow!
Regular
Posted November 29, 2008 at 11:39 am | Permalink
Morning Chas,
Strokes suck…
===========================================
For sure….
#
Mary_Caruso
Posted November 29, 2008 at 10:27 am | Permalink
I couldn’t be a Christian…I’m not into judging people and thinking anyone who doesn’t agree with my beliefs is going to hell. What a way to live! No wonder you are all so negative all the time.
————–
Ummm… No one is judging you Mary as far as I know. I certainly don’t go around judging people. That is a straw person that you made up yourself to beat around. And negativity? I invite you to review the posts in this thread and then say it again with a straight face.
I would guess that you have been turned off because of Christians who may have been heavy-handed. Christians are people, imperfect, and don’t always do it right. We simply believe the words of the Master when He told us that “I am the way , the truth and the life, no one comes the Father but through me”. Not our words, not our choice. How could we believe otherwise?
Tell me Mary, did you ever think that it might be through love and concern for you that someone mentions Jesus and His gift of eternal life to you?
“Are you atheists as bitter and unhappy as your posts generally seem to indicate? There is a better way.
“Just sayin’.”
You mean a better way that leads you to post a flame baiting “Have you stopped beating your wife” question like that?
Your comment was not designed to elicit anything but an angry response, and smug projection is not a “better way”.
“I certainly don’t go around judging people.”
Uh huh. Complete irony impairment.
You call out “atheists” for their “bitter” and “angry” comments while totally glossing over the comments of people like, say Boxlock, Jim Johnson, etc. That’s judgemental behavior that assigns a viewpoint to certain people. It is textbook prejudice. You have a predisposition to see “atheists” as “bitter” and “judgemental”, then you respond to those posts that confirm your prejudice.
http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/abortedtissue.htm
The answers are at your disposal Mary.
This is what happens when workers don’t have union representation–they’re expendable.
Demands Federal Safety Agency and Nassau County Prosecutor Investigate
QUEENS VILLAGE, NY (readMedia)– United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 1500, New York State’s largest grocery workers Union, has called for an immediate investigation by Federal, State and Local authorities into the “avoidable” death of a Wal-mart worker at the Valley Stream, Long Island Wal-mart. Specifically, the Union has called on the Federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the New York State Department of Labor and the Nassau County Prosecutor to investigate Wal-mart’s failure to provide a safe workplace.
“This incident was avoidable,” said Bruce Both, President of United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 1500. “Where were the safety barriers? Where was security? How did store management not see dangerous numbers of customers barreling down on the store in such an unsafe manner?” asked President Both. “This is not just tragic; it rises to a level of blatant irresponsibility by Wal-mart. UFCW Local 1500 will demand a full investigation by all levels of Government to ensure both justice for the surviving family members and to ensure the safety of current employees and the general public. This can never be allowed to happen again and those responsible must be held accountable,” Both concluded.
Director of Special Projects for Local 1500 Patrick Purcell called Wal-mart’s comments in response to the incident both “cold and heartless.” “If the safety of their customers and workers was a top priority, then this never would have happened,” Purcell stated. “Wal-mart must step up to the plate and ensure that all those injured, as well as the family of the deceased, be financially compensated for their injuries and their losses. Their words are weak. The community demands action,” Purcell concluded.
Outlander you’re one of the worst! It astounds me that your reality is so far off the truth.
BTW, how many of you fundies will refuse to vaccinate your kids? Surely you wouldn’t want to benefit your life and your kids lives from that horrible science?
OK Aggie. I take it you aren’t denying then that those posts aren’t bitter and unhappy? Is it just that you think I shouldn’t have mentioned it in order to respond to the attacks on Christianity, yet not hurt atheists’ feelings?
I’ll take your words under advisement and give them the consideration they deserve.
outlander posted November 29, 2008 at 9:02 am
However, the first sentence of the joke tells you that the Lone Ranger and Tonto were camping in a tent.
—————
No, it only said that they “set up their tent”, not that they slept in it.
“The above joke is a good lesson in missing the obvious.” — outlander
———
You really can’t make this stuff up, can you!?
Umm… It’s joke Cosmos. I bet you are a gas at parties.
How many cats did you say you live with?
outlander posted November 29, 2008 at 9:02 am
OK. Equal time to provide a counter balance to Maggie, who is obviously so insecure in his own beliefs that he must throw it in everyone’s face and ridicule those who don’t share his view, first thing every morning.
——————
…
The above joke is a good lesson in missing the obvious.
———————————
outlander’s “joke” is a good lesson in making assumptions not based on facts.
Oh Cosmos, you knucklehead. The fact is that you apparently have nothing better to do than to try to pick fly sh*t out of the pepper. So, if you want to play, rather than discuss ideas, then I suggest you go back to playing with your cats.
What’s the matter Outie??? You dont like nit-picking much when its your nits gettin picked??? LOL
Hi Chas. How’s the the fake minister biz going?
outlander,
Why are you posting insults at me, instead of discussing “ideas”?
What was “obvious” in the 1st sentence of your “joke”(sic) was it was not stated that they slept in the tent.
Perhaps outlander’s unwise habit of making assumptions is why he is unable to understand science?
“Ah, I see duh Libs have saddled the cruel horse of anti-religious commentary” — Regular
No, Regular. It’s called breaking free. It turns out there’s a hell of a lot more non-believers than anyone suspected; and of the believers, most of them are just cultural ass-snifers. They’ve never really thought about much at all. If Christians ever really thought about the bullshit they spew, they couldn’t believe it, so they just quit thinking. The question’s mute, it’s over, no more discussion. And that ability to “just quit” thinking spills over into their regular lives. Where it cause havoc all around. Like Iraq, and Vietnam and Economic Meltdown.
See, this here is the tattered remnant of a free country, and when you guys lie, pose impossibilities, slobber, gobble bread and genuflect, while striking your genitals with thongs, I’m free to make fun of you, ridicule you, and destroy your position in any way I can. If your faith is true, you have nothing to worry about, do you?
http://www.suntimes.com/news/falsani/726619,obamafalsani040504.article
outlander,
Your use of that pathetic ‘Tonto’ “joke” to argue that God does exist is much funnier than that “joke”.
Woot!
What a game!
Go JayHawks! :)
#
beber
Posted November 29, 2008 at 1:46 pm | Permalink
“Ah, I see duh Libs have saddled the cruel horse of anti-religious commentary” — Regular
No, Regular. It’s called breaking free. It turns out there’s a hell of a lot more non-believers than anyone suspected; and of the believers, most of them are just cultural ass-snifers. They’ve never really thought about much at all. If Christians ever really thought about the bullshit they spew, they couldn’t believe it, so they just quit thinking. The question’s mute, it’s over, no more discussion. And that ability to “just quit” thinking spills over into their regular lives. Where it cause havoc all around. Like Iraq, and Vietnam and Economic Meltdown.
———————
sorry trash bag,
I know what I wrote and meant, you’re way off and wrong as usual.
KU Rocks@!!!!
One of the best football games I’ve ever seen! Ended well too. :-)
Rock Chalk Jayhawk!!!
I thought Vietnam was the work of Camelot I.
JFK.
I also read where over 60 percent of liberals believe in God. Does that make over half of you religious?
I’d venture the number of liberal belivers will rise, now that the One, the Chosen of God, and risen.
KU WINS!!!
WooHoo!
Knocks off number 12 Missouri.
Gonna be a lot of sad rednecks today . . .
I believe in God. Just not your God.
“OK Aggie. I take it you aren’t denying then that those posts aren’t bitter and unhappy? Is it just that you think I shouldn’t have mentioned it in order to respond to the attacks on Christianity, yet not hurt atheists’ feelings?”
1) You only pick “those posts” that attack your particular ox, while ignoring those that post from “your side”. It seems your radar for “bitter” and “unhappy” seems to be on one side.
2) What is particularly “bitter” and “unhappy” about, say, Maggotpunk’s posts as opposed to this one:
“Oh Cosmos, you knucklehead. The fact is that you apparently have nothing better to do than to try to pick fly sh*t out of the pepper. So, if you want to play, rather than discuss ideas, then I suggest you go back to playing with your cats.”
Cosmos, as usual, was making a worthwhile point. Your “joke” came with exactly the sort of implicit assumption that you have a bad habit of making in discussions.
BTW, Capn, what on Earth are you talking about with regards to KU, MU, and rednecks?
Referring to them as “rednecks” is more polite than “skidmarks.”
Re: beber
DNFTT
Outlander posts:
“Likewise, those who have already decided that God does not exist and that all processes must have a naturalistic explanation, do not see the obvious evidence that the universe was designed, rather than happened by chance.”
If the evidence is obvious then why can’t the creationists present any? I went to the link and there was no evidence mentioned there. Is a made up story about Tonto supposed to qualify as evidence?
Right Angle whines:
“Maggotpunk, you do know who Francis S. Collins is do you not?”
Yes, Professor Dawkins mentions him in his book, “The God Delusion”. Collins was a talented, well-educated scientist who threw it all away because he felt he had to choose between the scientific evidence which refutes creationism, or believe in a god. He chose to reject knowledge and wisdom and go with believing in a fairy tale. So what’s your point?
“Yes, Professor Dawkins mentions him in his book, “The God Delusion”. Collins was a talented, well-educated scientist who threw it all away because he felt he had to choose between the scientific evidence which refutes creationism, or believe in a god. He chose to reject knowledge and wisdom and go with believing in a fairy tale. So what’s your point?”
Just to be clear, Collins is no creationist. And while I tend to be much closer to Dawkins’ (and indeed Maggotpunk’s) metaphysical views over Collins’, I do not agree with Maggotpunk’s over the top characterization of him. Rationaility and irrationality is found in a variety of domains, and I learned from experience far too many times that a person’s beliefs in one domain does not necessarily predict their approaches across all domains.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Collins_(geneticist)
For Right Angle:
“Yes, evolution by descent from a common ancestor is clearly true. If there was any lingering doubt about the evidence from the fossil record, the study of DNA provides the strongest possible proof of our relatedness to all other living things.”
Francis Collins
“Yes, evolution by descent from a common ancestor is clearly true. If there was any lingering doubt about the evidence from the fossil record, the study of DNA provides the strongest possible proof of our relatedness to all other living things.”
–Francis Collins
Yes.
Genetics study is extremely powerful evidence, but for me the die was cast for common descent when I took an undergrad course in vertebrate embryology.
THAT course – spending night after night poring over slides of frog, chicken, and pig embryos at various stages of development, very grinding work — that study made the truth of common descent plain as day to me.
“Dr. Collins remains firm in his rejection of Intelligent Design, and for this reason was not asked to participate in the 2008 documentary Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, which tries, among other things, to draw a direct link between evolution and atheism. Walt Ruloff, a producer for the film, claimed that Dr. Collins was “toeing the party line” by rejecting Intelligent Design, which Collins called “just ludicrous.” [12]”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Collins_(geneticist)#Religious_views
#
cosmos_originally
Posted November 29, 2008 at 1:50 pm | Permalink
outlander,
Your use of that pathetic ‘Tonto’ “joke” to argue that God does exist is much funnier than that “joke”.
————-
I wanted to start at a level I thought you could understand Cosmos. But you even failed humor 101.
Don’t worry, more to come.
Let me ask the atheists nad agnositics here a question. Assume that God exists and that he designed life and all its processes. Would evolutionary science be able to recognize His work? Or would they look right at it, not recognize it, and then go continue to go through tortured logic to try to find a naturalistic explanation?
We all know the answer to that question. You can’t disprove what you wouldn’t recognize if you saw it. Yet we hear the propaganda that evolution has disproven the handiwork of God. That religion has no role to play in “reality”.
Folks, I’m here to tell ya. It ain’t so.
“outlander” tries –
“Assume that God exists and that he designed life and all its processes….”
Try this: assume there is no god and we’re here anyway. How might that have happened?
We’re here.
And the assumption is part of the problem.
So…?
As we’ve tried to tell you CONs over and over and over again, science is a limited field. It looks for natural — no supernatural — answers. Science can’t play the miracle card because (to strain the card metaphor) science is not allowed to play with a metaphysical full deck.
The god card simply doesn’t exist in scientific investigation.
Now maybe some scientist will some day come up with a God Test that can prove supernatural phenomena. Even though there are a gillion questions we don’t have answers for, science isn’t allowed to play the God Card.
Just like the New York Yankees can’t kick a field goal in the bottom of the 9th inning, it’s not permitted in the rules of the game.
So, yeah. Let’s us “assume God exists and…” go off into some kind of sophist imaginings without acknowledging the premise of your assumption has nothing to do with the matter at hand.
Let’s assume wolverines give the best head jobs. Go out, “outlander,” and stick your manhood into a wolverine’s mouth and report back to us the results of your experiment.
outlander
Posted November 29, 2008 at 5:29 pm | Permalink
Assume that God exists and that he designed life and all its processes. Would evolutionary science be able to recognize His work? Or would they look right at it, not recognize it, and then go continue to go through tortured logic to try to find a naturalistic explanation?
—
Assuming God exists, then of course they’d recognize his work. After all, God exists by assumption. Because the existence of God is known by assumption, I think that scientists would recognize his work instantly (or very soon) and credit it accordingly. To do otherwise would be silly.
Also, you wrote a “naturalistic explanation,” but you didn’t say what these unenlightened scientists would be explaining.
What are they explaining? A naturalistic explanation of what?
“If Christians ever really thought about the bullshit they spew, they couldn’t believe it, so they just quit thinking. The question’s mute, it’s over, no more discussion. And that ability to “just quit” thinking spills over into their regular lives. Where it cause havoc all around. Like Iraq, and Vietnam and Economic Meltdown.”
I resent the implication that anyone who is a Christian is a non-thinker. My undergraduate degree was in Philosophy, and it’s a great way to destroy one’s faith. It nearly did mine. However, it was only through MORE study and questions and seeking knowledge was I able to come back.
And my life revolves around asking questions.
Agnatha is correct, I am not a metaphysical naturalist. Ken Miller and I are on largely on the same page when it comes to God. “Finding Darwin’s God” is an excellent read and I recommend it to everyone.
As for how could evolution be falsifiable: At this point, it’s very nearly impossible. Evolution is not some conjecture supported by more conjecture, it is a (scientific) theory that is supported by mountains and mountains of evidence from across many different fields. The only way I could think of a way to START falsifying is to find out that we were wrong about everything we know about DNA. And all our molecular techniques are wrong. And, you know, marsupials exist all over the world. And about ten million other things.
However, I am been thinking about it and we have not yet found a really solid explanation for how the first cell came into existance. There are many good ideas (I particularly like the RNA world hypothesis) but there is still a lot of work to be done in abiogenesis. However, I think finding life on another planet that is made up of the same four nucleotides as all life here would be a MAJOR puzzle for us. Because there’s nothing particularly special about A T G and C, those just what we started with and what we’ve continued on with.
However, as a scientist I would never say that we’ll NEVER figure out how the first life began on earth. We’ll figure out the how eventually I’m sure…the why is another story.
outlander posted November 29, 2008 at 5:29 pm
I wanted to start at a level I thought you could understand Cosmos. But you even failed humor 101.
——————
outlander, how does your dumb joke at 9:02 am prove that God does exist, and “that the universe was designed, rather than happened by chance”?
“Kemo Sabi, you drank too much booze last night.
Our tent is there. We decided to sleep outside last night, when the distant storm left.”
Then you follow the teaching of Jesus and Darwin. I have no argument with you. We should listen to all our great thinkers. Newton and Jesus.
I follow the teachings of Christ in so far as I am able, but I am not a Christian. I also follow the teachings of my Father, who taught me to change the oil. Neglect one of his teachings, and disaster ensues.
As for evolution, there’s still something missing. Something big, something wonderful, and we don’t know what it is. The animals of the earth are designed. How? I don’t know; neither does Maggot, nor the Pope, or the society of American athiests nor any American congresses of biology.
As for life coming into being, how much stranger is that than anything being as it is? We just don’t know. Trying to find out makes us great. Oh, and human beings are planet lice.
Assume that God exists and that he designed life and all its processes. Would evolutionary science be able to recognize His work?
Sure. Why not? So long as there is scientific evidence for such a proposition. I can’t imagine a single research scientist on this planet–especially the atheists!–who would not be absolutely amazed–and driven!–by hard evidence of a super-powerful “creator.” Dozens of peer-reviewed journals would spring into existence, just to deal with the onslaught of research into this exciting new area.
Or would they look right at it, not recognize it, and then go continue to go through tortured logic to try to find a naturalistic explanation?
Make up your mind! Do you want science to aggressively pursue any discovery of an amazing natural creature called “God,” or do you want science to be replaced with religion?
As I said, it should go without saying that even the most ardent atheists among scientists would be thrilled to discover observable, explainable, replicable evidence of a super-powerful creature creating the Earth and life on the planet. But that would mean–of course–that God was simply another natural phenemenon to be explored and understood. Perhaps one with a personality that would deserve respect, but a natural phenom nonetheless.
Scientists explore the natural world. It’s what they do. It’s not philosophy or spirituality. How often do we have to explain the friggin’ obvious??
But you’ve made clear what you want is not for scientists to follow any empirical evidence of a some super-powerful being producing the physical processes of our existence. And that’s probably just as well, because do you really want your God to be reduced to just another scientific problem to be solved?
Obviously not. You want to scientists to truncate their science at some point and kowtow to your religious beliefs. But it ain’t gonna happen. Not if I–or anyone who values scientific integrity, regardless of religious beliefs–have anything to say about it.
I personally happen to think that (mono+)theisms are irrational belief systems, but lots of people have irrational metaphysical beliefs, and still do good science, particularly since one’s metaphysical beliefs have no relevance whatsoever to the day-to-day work. Being human means having quirks. And it’s okay.
And by the way, I spend a whole half-hour dumbing down endosymbiotic theory to provide proof of evolution as requested, and just like all of my other evidence it goes ignored. Tomorrow the creationsts will holler indignantly that no one has ever presented PROOF of evolution, just speculation. And I will bang my head against the wall. And my fiance will laugh at me for arguing on the internet.
And yet I just can’t stop it’s like crack!
And yet I just can’t stop it’s like crack!
Tara, you might get in touch with Niall Shanks (assuming you’re not already bestest buddies). He’s made some inroads in getting through to creationist students of his own.
But, as for this forum, well, I suspect someone will continue to be wrong on the Internet. Good luck! ;-)
It was that monolithic stone in 2001 space odyssey that transformed apes to men, Hollywood said so…
Well, I for one am shocked, but Regular is wrong (this is so unusual for him).
“2001″ wasn’t a Hollywood production per se.
Kubrick was British, and although MGM gets some production credit the film was mostly produced by the English division, MGM-British Studios. I don’t think a single scene was filmed in North America.
Yall’ll have to find another strawman if yall want to build a bogus link from Hollywood to the eeevils of evolution.
If anything, blame NASA and Boeing:
“On the recommendation of Clarke, Kubrick hired spacecraft consultants Frederick Ordway and Harry Lange, who had assisted some of the major contractors in the aerospace industry and NASA with developing advanced space vehicle concepts, as technical advisors on the film. Ordway was able to convince dozens of aerospace giants such as IBM, Honeywell, Boeing, General Dynamics, Grumman, Bell Telephone, and General Electric that participating in the production of “2001″ would generate good publicity for them. Many companies provided copious amounts of documentation and hardware prototypes free of charge in return for “product placements” in the completed film. They believed that the film would serve as a big-screen advertisement for space technology and were more than willing to help out Kubrick’s crew in any way possible. Lange was responsible for designing much of the hardware seen in the film.
Every detail of the production design, down to the most insignificant element, was designed with technological and scientific accuracy in mind. Senior NASA Apollo administrator George Mueller and astronaut Deke Slayton are said to have dubbed “2001’s” Borehamwood, England production facilities “NASA East” after seeing all of the hardware and documentation lying around the studio. Even today, most audiences and critics still find “2001’s” props and spaceships more convincing than those in many more recent science fiction movies. While earlier science fiction films had aimed for a streamlined “futuristic” look, “2001’s” production design was intended to be as technically credible as possible.”
http://www.palantir.net/2001/meanings/dfx.html
Well, I for one am shocked, but Regular is wrong (this is so unusual for him).
I could point out that the late, great Arthur C. Clarke was British as well, but I think it obscures a more salient point, mainly that 2001 was a work of, ya know, fiction.
Well, the link between the origin of life “and all its processes” is what’s up for debate here.
Regular has decided to equate the fiction of “2001″ with the debatable truth of Genesis (note that I did not call Genesis fiction) (yet).
His choice, unfortunate as I’m sure some here find it (the young earthers and evangelists, anyway). I suppose it’s even lost on them that he screwed that up, but hey.
At least I didn’t conclude “it’s all fiction.” I’ll settle for a less hot hell, as long as the conversation isn’t weakened. If the divil gives me a choice between heat and conversation because of my omission, though, I’m up for crankin’ up the theromostat.
Pedant
Posted November 29, 2008 at 6:52 pm | Permalink
Well, I for one am shocked, but Regular is wrong (this is so unusual for him).
“2001? wasn’t a Hollywood production per se.
Kubrick was British, and although MGM gets some production credit the film was mostly produced by the English division, MGM-British Studios. I don’t think a single scene was filmed in North America.
———————
MGM gets a lot of credit. :)
My Uncle Theodore was working at MGM Film Editors at the time. :)
Yeah I’m pretty sure you were in the opening scene of the picture there too.
Regular seems to prefer fiction, regarding evolution, AGW science, the New Orleans levee failures, and other issues.
You know, I was shopping yesterday and saw a bumper sticker saying “You can’t be both pro-choice and Catholic”. Is that more play on Catholic guilt? Who the heck is anyone to say what religion you can be?
I know plenty of pro-choice Catholics.
A lot of evolution is great fiction. There are dinosaurs like dragons no one has ever seen. There are entire species decimated by mysterious forces (evil) and only artistic imprints in rocks that show great dark oceans teaming with life that no longer exists.
Then, the dawn of civilization suddenly appears out of chaos. Grunting upright man-like creatures go from throwing stones to solving complex mathematics. Art replaces religious worship of celestial bodies.
The concept of one true God appears and then a lowly, lack luster scientist in the 19th century says, “no it didn’t happen that way.”
Re-inventing the rise of man in his own mind and method Darwin is the “johnny-come-lately” in planetary revisionists.
We don’t really exist physically, it’s a project of what we call our minds. God is amused.
Here’s your problem: it’s not a matter of fiction at all.
The power of science to convert what were supernatural forces and explain them in natural terms has grown always. The power of science to take the supernatural and convert it to natural has never enjoyed negative growth – never.
The realm of the natural has been wholly taken from the bible and now belongs firmly to science.
The bible has been relegated to little more than a maintenance manual for the soul — which is not insignificant, I admit.
However, the bible as the source of all truth: those days are past us, never to return, no matter how hard many of you wish for it do do so.
One thing that God can claim that science cannot:
God says “I am.”
That pretty much says it all. :)
Regular
Posted November 29, 2008 at 8:29 pm | Permalink
One thing that God can claim that science cannot:
God says “I am.”
—
I say “I am,” too. :)
It’s hardly a unique statement.
It’s meaning, “I am” said God, lies wholly in those who believe in God.
For those who do not believe, its significance is widely overestimated. :)
I am is indisputable, without a measure of time, without equal and without measure.
It is unique to God.
You can claim “I am (your name)”, but you cannot claim the the status of “I am” meaning now and forever and with out equal in status of being.
non-belief is at your own peril. :)
Regular
Posted November 29, 2008 at 8:45 pm | Permalink
I am is indisputable, without a measure of time, without equal and without measure.
It is unique to God.
You can claim “I am (your name)”, but you cannot claim the the status of “I am” meaning now and forever and with out equal in status of being.
—
Again, its uniqueness depends solely on whether I believe in God or not.
For example, if I don’t believe in God, then I see no reason I can’t reliably and validly calim that nothing has “the status of “I am” meaning now and forever and with out equal in status of being.”
In other words, the uniqueness you assign to God’s existence is conditional. It is not universal, not as you have defined it.
One of many problems in your argument is that to argue that God’s existence as immortal forces you and me apart: it actually works against the values you attribute to God.
In other words, you argument (so far) actually works against the values you say your God stands for.
Do you have a counter offer?
No matter how high you stack your science books, God can see over the top. :)
How can the existence of God work against the actuality of his existence?
Snipping the rope in half doesn’t give you a longer rope.
That is your counter offer?
A book stacking contest?!?
What else do you have to convince me that your God’s existence is unique, that when s/he says “I am” that it means something extra, something more, to when I say “I am?”
Is this all you have?
ANS: your faith. That’s it, that’s all.
For you, it’s sufficient.
For me, it’s not.
We part.
We’ve all heard that a million monkeys banging on a million typewriters will eventually reproduce the entire works of Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the internet, we know this is not true.
Robert Wilensky
non-belief is at your own peril. :)
Ah yes, Pascal’s wager (which, I must emphasize, has nothing to do with what scientists should or shouldn’t believe or do, or even science in general).
My personal take: Pascal ignored the other peril, mainly the degree to which mandatory beliefs unsupported by evidence can seriously screw up one’s life (and, unless one believes the rest of the package, the only short life one has to live).
I see it as extremely unlikely that I will face any celestial judgment, and far more likely, in the other case, that I would waste far too much of my precious life appeasing some pointless religious institution. But that’s just me.
Unlike some self-righteous religionists, I have no desire whatsoever to make other people live by my own philosophical tenets.
But, should I be proven in the end to be wrong, by the terms of disturbingly large number of preachers worldwide, I would have plenty of company (in fact, the vast majority of humanity).
And, quite frankly, considering some of the people pushing this rather hateful and dystopic vision of infinite existence, well, I think I’d rather organize the rebellion in Hell than spend eternity with the likes of them. :)
A big second to that Rage.
What WILL “Heaven” be? Cons bemoaning the lack of guns and people to persecute? Thanks no.
good night; good luck; god bless —-
whatever you conceive god to be!!
blessings ALL!!
Advent blessings to ALL!!
so mote it be!!
Chas
Posted November 29, 2008 at 11:24 pm | Permalink
good night; good luck; god bless —-
whatever you conceive god to be!!
blessings ALL!!
Advent blessings to ALL!!
so mote it be!!
He’ll be back….just wait and see….he’ll be back, like in the movie Poltergeist.
Hillary Clinton will be announced as SOS Monday. Suck it Cons!
Chas has met MANY bloggers here “bawkslots”.
Um, who can speak for you?
My understanding is that Pascal in his 30’s had a near life-ending experience and afterward had a religious conversion, thus ending a perfectly magnificent scientific career.
I wonder if that sequence could be run in reverse, and if so, maybe Nathan can graduate from college with a computer science degree. Not holding my breath.