Mekongcola
I don't think 'progress' is really his goal.

//From Kansas. Glad voters came to their senses.

wh0mprat: I don't think 'progress' is really his goal.

Sounds an awful lot like feudalism to me.

skookum

Perhaps, finally, their acidic misanthropic style would finally be scorned for the un-Christian behavior that it is.

I'd be very careful with how you throw that "un-Christian" line about, some of the most "un-Christian" people in history have been Christians and part of the Christian church.

Jews most likely would continue in their own way, with their own faiths. But it would be recognized that their philosophies are out of date and anachronistic.

...and Christianity isn't out of date and anachronistic?

No, I'm just offering an alternative. This country is much too fragmented, and faith is already being dismissed as myth. America needs to return to these roots.

Why can't rational thought and intellectual growth be the alternative? Why superstition and mythology instead of freedom and exploration?

SkinnyHead

ALL men are created equal? Are you some sort of creationist? Do you think that some magical man in the sky gave you equality and inalienable rights?

I don't know about you, but I was created by my parents.

You evolved from a monkey-man by purely natural processes. You have no more rights that a monkey.

We share a common ancestor with apes not monkeys.

/your strawman needs more hay

FloydA

For Christendom!

Hey it's Kansas,,doing what Kansas does. Don't go there, don't spend money there. Ignore them.

muninsfire
Sounds an awful lot like feudalism to me.

I'm OK with that as long as we get New York and LA.

FloydA

Thanks for clearing that up, I was reading too fast.

SkinnyHead: But why are all men born equal? Thomas Jefferson said that it was because they are endowed by their Creator with equality and inalienable rights. If mankind evolved from monkey-man by natural processes, with no Creator, why would anyone expect all men to be born equal?

They are born equal because they are all humans. That's what it comes down to, all rhetoric aside.

Now STFU and GBTW.

skookum

America needs to return to [these] roots.

Secularism? I'm all for it.

I guess it's only useful purpose is for people to hone their own point of view while spewing it on others.

I don't know about the other people here, but I use it to get a good laugh.

SkinnyHead: muninsfire: Subsitute the word "born"--are you happy?

But why are all men born equal? Thomas Jefferson said that it was because they are endowed by their Creator with equality and inalienable rights. If mankind evolved from monkey-man by natural processes, with no Creator, why would anyone expect all men to be born equal?

Jefferson was a Diest and yes he believed in a Creator. Belief in a Creator and accepting the Theory of Evolution are not mutally exclusive and many religious people have no problem reconciling the two.

Even for non-thiests we can still believe that all humans have equal rights simply because we are all human and it is good to treat your fellow man with respect and dignity. Many people also think we should extend some of these rights to our closest relatives on the great Tree of Life as well.

Murkanen: We share a common ancestor with apes not monkeys.

But I have never heard evolutionists give this "common ancestor" a name. I think "monkey-man" is as good as any.

What like a missing link? No one is really seriously searhing for a "missing link" nor do we expect to find one. The liklihood of finding intact fossil evidence of the entire line and where exactly it diverged is slim. Claiming that there has to be shows a severe lack of understanding of how all of the available evidence fits into the puzzle and how that evidence comes from multiple, independent sources and fields.

Our common ancestor with monkeys would probably look a lot like a moneky just as our common ancestor with the great apes would look like *gasp* a great ape. Of course then again humans should be classified as Great Apes as well.

smeegle

Hey it's Kansas,,doing what Kansas does. Don't go there, don't spend money there. Ignore them.


The only problem is that they vote whether we ignore them or not.

Suck is xian fundies. suck it hard.

ha.

ha.

ha.

FloydA

You know what I meant, darn it.

SkinnyHead

Thomas Jefferson said that it was because they are endowed by their Creator with equality and inalienable rights. If mankind evolved from monkey-man by natural processes, with no Creator, why would anyone expect all men to be born equal?

This is such crazy semantics because even if you were born in a test tube you'd have a "Creater". I was created by my parents when they did had sex at an oppurtune (or inoppurtune depending on how you think about it) moment, same as you were created when your parents did the same.

But I have never heard evolutionists give this "common ancestor" a name. I think "monkey-man" is as good as any.

Actually I'm fairly certain they do have a name for it, as I recently saw a show on Discovery Science about it. I have a horrible head for normal names, let alone scientifc ones so I'll have to let FloydA or our other resident experts give you the specific name for it (granted it's entirely possible that "common ancestor" could be "common ancestors" if the relations were close enough for interbreeding to occur).

FloydA

Wanted: Men for the new Crusade!

SAVE America!
CONVERT the heathens!
BUILD favour with God!

You must bring your own assault rifle, helmet and socks.
T-shirts and special armbands will be provided.
No shorts or running shoes.

JOIN the Holy Elite!

Murkanen

But I have never heard evolutionists give this "common ancestor" a name. I think "monkey-man" is as good as any.

Actually I'm fairly certain they do have a name for it, as I recently saw a show on Discovery Science about it. I have a horrible head for normal names, let alone scientifc ones so I'll have to let FloydA or our other resident experts give you the specific name for it (granted it's entirely possible that "common ancestor" could be "common ancestors" if the relations were close enough for interbreeding to occur).


Australopithicus afrensis, perhaps?

There is also Mitochondrial Eve and Y-chromosome Adam

How can you creationists rationalize your belief?

Here is visual evidence of the minimal age, and vastness, of the Universe.

There are about 15,000 galaxies in this tiny slice of sky. Our galaxy contains over 300 billion stars. There are about 45,000 trillion stars in this little slice. The total number of stars in the visible sky is far too huge for the simple mind of a creationist to grasp. And to think that one planet around one of these seemingly infinite number of stars boasts the sole possession of the one true and benevelant god. That man is actually created in its image. Such arrogance! So misinformed and or delusional.

It is as if an electron orbiting an atom of sand (SiO2) on a beach reaching into the ocean claims possession of an omnipotent neutron, that just happens to closely resemble it. Only this neutron can exist and no other. The electron is granted dominion over all the quarks and leptons. It's nucleus is the only nucleus which is the center of the universe.

SkinnyHead: That sound's like an argument for Intelligent Design. That's ironic. Jefferson's own words are unconstitutional.

Actually when arguing against ID being taught in science class I could care less about it being constitutional. Since I am not an American and the US Constitution has no bearing on me it is irrelevant. I argue against it being taught in science class because it is not science.

SkinnyHead

Can we retire the term "evolutionist"? Making up words doesnt make you sound smarter, or lend strength to your cause. It only makes it seem like you can't engage in debate on middle ground. It weakens your position.

Let us we agree to just use a synonym like "rational person" or "an individual who is not retarded".


Confucious
That's no good. The biblical speed of light is only about eighteen miles per hour.

SkinnyHead: That sound's like an argument for Intelligent Design. That's ironic. Jefferson's own words are unconstitutional.


No they're not, because words cannot be Unconstitutional as per...The Constitution. Jefferson was espousing his own beliefs about the universe, that is not Unconstitutional. He was *not* advocating government endorsement of those beliefs, that would be Unconstitutional.

Whomprat
The biblical speed of light is only about eighteen miles per hour.

c = 299'792'458 m/s (metres per second)

-God



One cannot go against the word of GOD!

FloydA: Sahelanthropus tchadensis is awfully close to the date of the human/chimp split. The fossil is about 6-7 Millions of years old. It may have been on "our side" just after the split, on their side just after the split, or a shared ancestor just before the split. The jury is still out on that one. (More about S. tchadensis) Hope that helps.


You always come to the rescue :) Of course we'll probably never be able to pinpoint "the" ancestor with absolute certainty but S.tchadensis looks like he is definitely someone close to that split.

SkinnyHead

You know, like Flying Spaghetti Monster is a funny name for God.

Blasphemer! How dare you compare your deity to that of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. May the fury of his meatballs rain down upon thee.


wh0mprat

Can we retire the term "evolutionist"? Making up words doesnt make you sound smarter, or lend strength to your cause. It only makes it seem like you can't engage in debate on middle ground. It weakens your position.

I'm still waiting for him to answer me about whether he's a gravitist and/or an electro-magnetist, after all they too are only theories.

SkinnyHead
What does any of this have to do with Thomas Jefferson? He was dead long before the theory of evolution came into being. It's perfectly natural to have the feeling that there is some design or order to the universe, but it's impossible to measure something like "designedness" with scientific experimentation.

Confucious
God created Kansas to train the faithful?

Rev. Skarekroe
I'm going to buy it because it has a dinosaur on the picture!
ROOOAAARRR!!!! Dinosaurs!!

I'm late to the thread, but I just wanted to say that I heart Rev. Skarekroe for that...and yes, I'm easily amused.

skookum
This country is much too fragmented, and faith is already being dismissed as myth.

wow. for someone who posts so much about "this country" you sure don't understand it very well.

What are the two major factors that have made America so successful and now the world's only superpower?

1) Diversity. Strength through diversity - ever hear of that? It is our great diversity - or "fragmentation" as you lament, that produces huge, life-changing concepts/inventions/ideals/etc. From a Democratic republic where all are created equal, to a cure for polio to the personal computer -- none would likely exist if we were the hegemonic state you so yearn for.

2) Separation of church & state. A VERY novel idea at the time of our founding. Why were we (and are we) never bogged down in the violent, ceaseless wars and acts of violence that bog down so many other parts of the world and sap them of their ability to thrive? From Indonesia, to Africa, to the Middle East, to the Baltic states to Northern Ireland, etc, etc - look what happens when your great desire for a theocratic state, or state-sponsored religion develops! "When religion and politics mix both are sullied."

So hear you claim to be concerned for our great nation yet the two "solutions" you prescribe (much like your hardline Muslim brethren, incidentally) would ultimately role us back into a stone age of intolerance, violence, anti-intellectualism and strip us of our superpower status.

To this, skookum, we say no thanks. Don't like our "fragmentation"? Might I suggest a move to Saudi Arabia -- they have precisely the amount of sole religious domination you're looking for. Human rights? Science? Progress? Well they're lagging a bit on these, aren't they?

It sickens me the way you take your freedom for granted. Americans come in different colors, with different creeds and -- gasp -- different religions (or lack of). Don't like it? Get the hell out.

Wo0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o!!!!!!

*Does the cabbage patch*

Go Kansas, it's your birfday...

SkinnyHead
That sound's like an argument for Intelligent Design.

If you base your scientific opinions on the quotes of 18th-century politicians, then you're an idiot.

SkinnyHead
I wonder whether it would be unconstitutional to have public school students learn these words of Jefferson on the matter.

I wonder whether it would be unconstitutional to have public school students learn these words of Thomas Paine who soundly defeated the validity of the Bible.

"As to the Christian system of faith, it appears to me as a species of Atheism - a sort of religious denial of God. It professes to believe in a man rather than in God. It is a compound made up chiefly of Manism with but little Deism, and is as near to Atheism as twilight is to darkness."

"It is a fraud of the Christian system to call the sciences human invention; it is only the application of them that is human. Every science has for its basis a system of principles as fixed and unalterable as those by which the universe is regulated and governed. Man cannot make principles, he can only discover them. "

-Thomas Paine, from the Age of Reason

SkinnyHead

By Odin's codpiece! You mean your supporters have already changed the dictionary?

We'll all be dissappeared soon. By Zeus' nipples!

2006-08-02 03:40:43 PM SkinnyHead


Evolutionists routinely claim that ID proponents are all mentally retarded fundamentalists. I think we can all agree that Jefferson was neither mentally retarded nor a fundamentalist. He was a Deist who discerned the existence of an intelligent designer through powers of reason rather than revelation. He examined the physical world and drew a design inference. That is what ID does. Intelligent Design holds that design is empirically detectable in nature, and particularly in living systems.


If the Jefferson we've all read about were presented with the information about biology and paleontology that we have in the 21st century, and then decided that creationism in all its glory was a substitute for evolutionary theory, I would conclude that he'd had a severe head injury or was an imposter.

That's a strawman, in other words.

Murkanen

I'm still waiting for him to answer me about whether he's a gravitist and/or an electro-magnetist, after all they too are only theories.

You clearly don't understand the meaning of a theory. A theory is something that has been tested again and again and has been deamed viable. We know for a fact that both gravity and electro-magnetism exist, infact we have pretty accurate mathematical models of how they work. I'm really tired of people saying that nothing is really real, its all theory and conjecture. Scientists don't make absolute statements because they like to be coy. They do it because its impossible to be complete sure about every detail.

/whew
//sorry about that, had to let that out

SkinnyHead

Jefferson was a Diest...


You're confusing him with Chuck Norris.

SkinnyHead -

how about we employ the term "Scientist" instead of "Evolutionist"? hmmmm.

As for Jefferson - whom you're gravely insulting by trying to link with ID, I think you'd agree he wasn't privy to all the scientific wonders we have today - atomic microscopes, carbon dating, electron telescopes, reality television and on and on and on -- things that very well might have had him happily shouting "God is dead!"

Funny that, even way back then, Jefferson said "Fabricator," not "God." That's no coincidence.

And although I hold Jefferson in very high regard, I also believe in contraception, reproductive rights and sex for pleasure's sake. If YOU, however, want to put him up on your pious pedestal, perhaps you ought to refer to him as "slave fuc*er."

SSL

You better recalibrate your sarcasm detector.

SkinnyHead

Tell it to Webster

Webster puts a lot of slang and nonsense into its dictionarys (*cough*bling*cough*) so I wouldn't use that as the standard for your scientific terminology. If enough people use it, they stick it in there and even when they have the word they botch the definition (*cough*atheist*cough*). Come to think of it, that gives me a great idea for a conspiracy theory but I'll save it for later.

Actually, I was referring to the ruling of Activist Judge Jones in the Dover case, who ruled that any mention of ID in a public school was unconstitutional.

So you think teaching christian mythology as fact in schools is constitutional... why exactly? Also, if I may know, why do you refer to a conservative judge as "activist judge Jones".

I wonder whether it would be unconstitutional to have public school students learn these words of Jefferson on the matter.

Would that lesson also include all of the negative and scathing comments he had for organised religion, Christianity in particular?

Evolutionists routinely claim that ID proponents are all mentally retarded fundamentalists.

No we don't, we claim that most of them are willfully ignorant sheep or uneducated in the basic premise of science and the terminology used there in. The ones that don't fall into that are greedy and manipulative assholes out to take advantage of the gullible and expand their coffers in the process.

I think we can all agree that Jefferson was neither mentally retarded nor a fundamentalist.

No, but by today's standards he'd have about a second grade education when it comes to science which would make him a prime candidate for being suckered into the ID debate. However, Jefferson also wasn't so delusional that he'd ignore 150 years of evidence just because a book told him to, which leads me to believe that Jefferson would have seen the evidence that evolution has for it and accepted it.

He was a Deist who discerned the existence of an intelligent designer through powers of reason rather than revelation.

Just because someone reaches a conclusion through reason doesn't mean that the conclusion can't still be wrong. For instance, missing vital pieces of data can sway you to the wrong conclusion. Jefferson probably believed that the thought of a man being able to fly was absurd as well, yet I don't see you proclaiming airplanes to be based on false science.

He examined the physical world and drew a design inference.

You missed my post about humans having this amazing capacity for finding order where none exists didn't you?

That is what ID does. Intelligent Design holds that design is empirically detectable in nature, and particularly in living systems.

Then empirically demonstrate it already, we've been waiting for over twenty years when this crap was called "scientific creationism" for you to provide this evidence.

SkinnyHead: Activist Judge Jones in the Dover case, who ruled that any mention of ID in a public school was unconstitutional.

That's a lie, you've been shown the documentation to prove it's a lie, and you know it's a lie. Still, you keep repeating it. Why must you lie?

By the way, if a judge is a Republican, appointed by President George W Bush, but rules against your particular Dominionist hobby horse...does that make him an evil activist? Or are you just using "activist" as a weak code word for "liberal?" In which case, you're wrong once again.