Say Anything Blog

LOL. Stein’s been reading too much late-era Normal Mailer.

“Behind Communism, Fascism, behind all occupations and invasions lurks a more basic, pervasive evil… a parade of people marching by with raised fists and shouting identical syllables in unision.” - Milan Kundera

Norman Mailer rather.

“Behind Communism, Fascism, behind all occupations and invasions lurks a more basic, pervasive evil… a parade of people marching by with raised fists and shouting identical syllables in unision.” - Milan Kundera

April 21 is the show, and methinks that the NR guy is overwrought about this.  Stein notes that his main beef is not directly with science itself, but rather with “scientists telling them what to do.” In other words, the quibble is not with the technological advances made possible by science, but rather the moral desert that happens from purely materialistic philosophy.

Which, yes, involved Hitler.  Here an interview that points out that Darwin’s philosophy is prominent in Mein Kampf.

http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles5/OlaskyHitler.php

He said “science leads you to killing people.”

I think creationism is about the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard of (though I respect people’s right to believe it if they want), but if you’re going to be an advocate for it you may want to avoid saying things as abysmally stupid as “science leads you to killing people.”

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Which, yes, involved Hitler.  Here an interview that points out that Darwin’s philosophy is prominent in Mein Kampf.

Making this comparison is like judging Christianity based on the history of the inquisitions.  Not all pursuit of science has been on sound moral footing, but the same can be said of religion.

I don’t think it’s fair to tar science with with Hitler’s ghoulish experimenters any more than it’s fair to tar Christians with the legacy of dark-age Catholics.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Ben Stein is pretty smart, but when he argues religious views he makes elementary mistakes.

Why is it unfair to point out that Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and legions of other Communists taught Darwin before introducing Marx, Rob?

Sorry, friend, but this is an ugly historical fact; science unmoored from the moral claims of tradition and religion has repeatedly led to genocide and war--in a way that makes most every previous atrocity pale in comparison--by orders of magnitude.

And again, you’ve got to read this in its context, which includes what Stein notes about Auschwitz, and it includes also the fact that the film itself is a plea for open minded science, not the end of it. 

Derbyshire, again, bobbles this one something fierce by ignoring the context.

Sorry, friend, but this is an ugly historical fact; science unmoored from the moral claims of tradition and religion has repeatedly led to genocide and war...

Survival of the fittest is practiced in nature. This is devoid of “moral claims of tradition” as well as religion. It’s just a cold hard fact.

Don’t blame the fact. Blame the tyrants.

Sorry, friend, but this is an ugly historical fact; science unmoored from the moral claims of tradition and religion has repeatedly led to genocide and war

I could say that religion more often than science has led to genocide and war (the body count is still mounting in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict).

I tire of people impugning atheists (and I take this personally because I am one) by invoking secular regimes like Mao, Stalin, etc. (Hitler, I’d add, was quite spiritual if not exactly Christian though I think sometimes those of you with religion need the difference between “atheism” and things like “paganism” pounded into your skulls).  It’s tiresome.  I mean, how many people have the Muslims murdered in the name of their religion?  How about the Catholics?  The Crusades?  How many protestants and Catholics have killed each other in England throughout the ages?  And Ireland?

For being grounded in tradition and morality, killing in the name of religion has a much higher body count than killing in the name of atheism.

But setting all that aside, do you really think that this line of argument excuses creationism which ignores a gigantic body of science about the age of this planet and its changes throughout eons of history?  Science which, frankly, has little to do with morality and a whole lot to do with just the age of rocks and things?

You expect me to believe creationists when they tell me the earth is only 2,000 years old based on nothing more than some notion that they have a monopoly on morality?

This is why creationists aren’t taken seriously.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Well said, Lik, except for one thing; most animals don’t kill their own kind except in dire circumstances.  So no, Hobbes’ “Nature red in tooth and claw” is something of a myth.

And you want to compare the Inquisition--a few tens of thousands over a space of centuries--to the Darwin-inspired Holocaust, or Stalin’s purges, or Lenin’s purges, or the Cultural Revolution, which killed tens of millions over the space of decades or less?

Be my guest, Rob.  Let’s compare, knowing that the kill rate for the latter exceeds that of the former by about four or five orders of magnitude. 

And no, the argument for a young earth and special creation does not begin and end with the moral argument for God’s existence, let alone from any claim that religious believers of any persuasion are intrinsically the only moral people.  You’ve got issues like the cooling of the earth, the orbits of planetary moons, rapid deposition of rock layers, petroglyphs clearly showing dinosaurs and legends of dragons, and abundant anthropological evidence across hundreds of cultures referring to a worldwide flood.

And lots more.

All of you should see the movie Expelled before you jump to conclusions about Stein. Intelligent Design is not creationism nor is it religious in the traditional sense of religion. It does not advocate any religion deity over another. It does not lend itself to any formal practiced religion. Creationism belongs to biblical reference and is related to Jewish / Christian doctrine.

Intelligent design simply says that there is more to development of life than evolution can explain. He points out that there are many holes in the evolution theory starting with the beginning of life which Darwinian Theory can not explain. But he also points out that there is a place for evolution in the Intelligent Design hypothesis.

Considering that it takes roughly 180 complex amino acids to create even the most simple, living single cell organism, the odds of this happening randomly are like 1 in a billion, billion, billion, billion, billion, billion, billion, billion, billion, billion, billion, billion, billion.

Don’t be too quick to judge Ben Stein. He is in good company with this one.

...the odds of this happening randomly are like 1 in a billion, billion, billion, billion, billion, billion, billion, billion, billion, billion, billion, billion, billion.

Given the size and scope of the universe, these are good odds.

Rob,

Also, Hitler DID use Darwin’s writings to justify the killing of Jews. In his mind he was cleaning the gene pool. So Stein was making a statement based on historical fact. The Nazi’s also used Darwin’s theory to advance their “Pure Race” experiments when they attempted to breed the perfect Arian.

Ben Stein is not anti science, he is against the movement in the world to stifle contrary science.
Just like the Global Warming crowd is doing.

Intelligent design is not science—it offers no testable hypotheses.  It’s premise must simply be taken as faith—again, that’s not science.  So there is no move to “stifle contrary science.”

Also, Mickey—

He points out that there are many holes in the evolution theory starting with the beginning of life which Darwinian Theory can not explain.

likwidshoe,

And what created the big bang? Or was it ....magic?

Today, we know more about what goes on inside a cell, and DNA and related science than Darwin could ever imagine. Evolution and Darwinian Theory is a good primer but it is not the total answer. Evolution still can not explain the missing link between man and ape.

Be my guest, Rob.  Let’s compare, knowing that the kill rate for the latter exceeds that of the former by about four or five orders of magnitude.

Uh...if you say so.  Stalin, Mao and Hitler, etc. killed tens of millions but I’d be willing to bet that the inquisitions, crusades, etc. killed just as many.

Though I suspect that’s probably pretty inconvenient for your theory here so you’ll discount it and move on.  Just as you discount the mountains of evidence which suggests that “young earth” theories are the intellectual equivalent of “flat earth” theories.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

God invented science to allow man to do good things with it.

The Debate is over!  Global Whining has been confirmed.

Just as you discount the mountains of evidence which suggests that “young earth” theories are the intellectual equivalent of “flat earth” theories.

Young Earth, Flat Earth, Global Warming, Eugenics.  They’ll all wind up on the ash heap of history.

The Debate is over!  Global Whining has been confirmed.

mdmdc,

—evolution does not claim or pretend to have an answer for where life came from, how it started,

Actually, evolutionist science does claim that life crawled out of the ooze. Only problem is they can not recreate that claim in a lab. No one can.

Rob, you COULD actually look it up, and realize that the great religious wars of history in general didn’t kill that many people.  Again, the Crusades killed tens of thousands, as did the Inquisition, over centuries.  It’s nothing compared to the kill rate of militant Darwinism. 

And mdmdc, nice evolutionist talking points, but there certainly is a central testable hypothesis to intelligent design; that certain portions of our design are too complex to have occurred randomly.  Demonstrate the latter, and you’ve defeated the premise.

And what created the big bang? Or was it ....magic?

Hey, I’m willing to admit that evolution and an intelligent creator aren’t mutually exclusive things.

What pisses me off is people trying to tell us that man walked around with dinosaurs and the earth is only a few thousand years old.

Ben Stein is not anti science, he is against the movement in the world to stifle contrary science.

So what are the religious nuts who want to ban teaching evolution doing?  Is that not stifling as well?

Conveniently, Stein leaves that part out of his movie.

Evolution still can not explain the missing link between man and ape.

That doesn’t mean there isn’t one.  Why long did it take us to find out that animals like the giant squid existed?

The basic fallacy most creationists adhere to is the idea that because science is imperfect it is inherently wrong.

I freely admit that science hasn’t filled all the holes on evolution, or creation, but it has provided the best answers we have so far.  That those answers fail to fit in conveniently with the dogma of religions hailing from the dark and ignorant ages of humanity is hardly a pertinent point.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Nope, Mickey—evolutionary science focuses on the changes.  Now, there are scientific efforts to describe how life began, but that is not the thrust of evolutionary science.

Go ahead, google away—the only sites that will tell you that evolution tries to explain the origins of life are those written by creationist/ID supporters.

The only dividing factor in evolution and intelligent design is that later suggests that some guiding power is behind it all. How does that hurt anything? The science of evolution has the premise that everything is the result of random pot luck.

Flip a coin if you like.

Rob, you COULD actually look it up, and realize that the great religious wars of history in general didn’t kill that many people.  Again, the Crusades killed tens of thousands, as did the Inquisition, over centuries.  It’s nothing compared to the kill rate of militant Darwinism.

Bubba, if you’re going to use the term “militant Darwinism” as though it were interchangeable with terms like “Communism” and “Fascism” I’m going to laugh at you.  That dictatorial regimes tend to be secular is hardly proof that former caused the latter.  Correlation does not suggest causation, and your theory goes out the window when we consider that you can be atheist and fiercely oppose communism and fascism (I’m proof of that) and that you can be Christian and do horrible things (The Popes, etc).

And I can’t actually look it up.  Due to poor record keeping, we have absolutely no idea how many people have been killed in the name of religion.  I mean, we can’t even put a specific number on the people Saddam killed and that was in modern times.

The Bible itself catalogs about 1.283 million deaths (things like Moses killing Israelites for worshiping the golden calf) and that’s, what, a thousand years or so before the Popes really got going in their killing?

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Not too worry.
He’s only shilling for his own movie.
He needs more ticket sales.
Someone has to pay.

“If a conservative is still a republican after the last 13 years, he is blind to the fact that his party of choice has failed him utterly.” – Realitybasedbob

The only dividing factor in evolution and intelligent design is that later suggests that some guiding power is behind it all. How does that hurt anything?

It doesn’t, and I don’t have a problem with the people who feel that way.

I do have a problem with people who think that atheism is equivalent to communism/nazism.  I also have a problem with the “young earth” people.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

mdmdc,

Those evolutionists, who are purest, and agnostic, insist that life is not the act of a greater power. They then fit it into their theory. And after all, it is ONLY a theory. As I said earlier, evolution fits into inteligent design.

Rob,
You need to drop the “creationist” aspect of this argument. Intelligent Design and Ben Stein is not creationist based in the theory.

I agree, the bible is not a science book. It was written 500 years after Christ was killed.
We need to take religion with a grain of salt.

Just watch the movie. It is a quick 90 minutes.

Mickey - And what created the big bang?

I don’t know.

I don’t claim to have the answers.

Or was it ....magic?

I think it’s pretty magical that we exist at all.

Evolution and Darwinian Theory is a good primer but it is not the total answer.

Faith.

Evolution still can not explain the missing link between man and ape.

Begging the question.

Evolutionary science is still crawling out of the dark ages, and you are jumpin’ ugly that we don’t have all of the answers yet. *shrug*

I really do thinkthat Ben Stein haslost it. I do agreethat thosethe teach ID sould not be shunned and loose their jobs.

But ID is just another name for creationism.  Darwimism does not say anything about the Big Bang.

And the Militant Darwinist are called Social Darwinist and they are idiots that use Darwin to kill others not like themselves. Rev Wright is using it, Blacks use Left Brain and whites use Right Brain is what the KKK used to justify thier idiotic stance that whites are better than blacks.  And that is not true Darwinism. Margeret Snager used Social Darwinism to say we should abort black kids and Itlalian kids This is not Darswinism either.  that is saying that Mitt Romney is just like the pedophiles in Texas.

Darwinism does not explain everything,but it is the best Thery of how animals evolve.

Science is a process.

It is the process by which we test theories to learn new things.

Unlike evolution, which may one day cure AIDS (the virus evolves in accordance with Darwin’s theory), Creative Design is not going to give us any new answers. So can we just agree that regardless of its veracity, it is a completely useless “theory” and there is no point teaching it in science class? Even if it accounts precisely for how we came into being, it tells us fuckall about anything useful. Teach it in philosophy or, better yet, in theology.

“Behind Communism, Fascism, behind all occupations and invasions lurks a more basic, pervasive evil… a parade of people marching by with raised fists and shouting identical syllables in unision.” - Milan Kundera

He said “science leads you to killing people.”

In the context of the influence of science within political ideology he may have a point.  I really don’t care though.  It is typical of ideological opponents to attack the single remark of Stein and ignore the facts brought out in “Expelled”. 

For all you who are so put out by the thought that creationists believe in a 6-10,000 year old earth answer this:  what the hell does it matter to you either religiously, ideologically, or politically if others hold to something you all forsake—faith?  and… What difference does it make politically? 

The issue Stein brings out is similar to that in “Indoctrinate U”.  Higher education and the institutions closely aligned therewith, have all but written legislation to ban any sort of thought which it disagrees with.  That is the more important issue than how old the earth is.

There is a whole lotta guessing going on in here regarding Intelligent Design.

The advocates of Intelligent Design are not trying to replace Darwin’s theory.
Darwin made some brilliant observational conclusions. But to believe in evolution without question involves a great deal of faith in itself.

Intelligent design is not threatening if you approach it with an open mind.

...his anti-evolution movie…

I thought the larger theme was about the left’s control of the education system, leading to an elimination of choice and a narrowing of discourse.  Oh well.

In all fairness, Eugenics, as practiced by Hitler and others(including Margaret Sanger) was a perversion of the teachings of Darwin, and so is the stuff put out by modern “evolutionists”.  Darwin himself was a man of God.  Secular humanists, like they did when they devised Eugenics, have perverted his teachings to justify the elimination of God from the creation process.

"If the good men are silent only the wicked are heard.” - Edmund Burke

Folks,

Several of the common elements of Progressvism which passed on to socialism, Communism, fascism, and modern liberalism (which are all linear descendents of Progressivism) is a belief that the full power of the state must be harnessed to enforce the progress of man.  This “progress” is measured and defined by science (and more often, pseudo science) as directed by technical/scientific/party elites.  The body count thus piled up exceeds 200,000,000 and may exceed 300,000,000 (the Communists were lousy record keepers in such matters).

While I would not lay the blame with science qua science, it would take a willing suspension of disbelief to discredit the uses to which totalitarian systems have applied science (and more often, pseudo science) in the pursuit of their political goals.  Science, to the Progressives and their intellectual descendents, is merely a tool in the political tool chest to be used where deemed appropriate (or where it can be perverted to fit).

Out Here
Rodney G. Graves

Persia delenda est.
Latin: “Persia (modern day Iran) should be destoyed”

Good point, RG!  The lefties completely ignored science in the matter of DDT and malaria, didn’t they?  They cared more about power and control than they did about the millions in Africa who would die as a result.  Not so scientific.

"If the good men are silent only the wicked are heard.” - Edmund Burke

Likwidshoe is awesome. I’m not even gonna bother making arguments anymore, I’m just going to quote from his logic page from now on.

I thought the larger theme was about the left’s control of the education system, leading to an elimination of choice and a narrowing of discourse.

Appeal to Pity

Darwin himself was a man of God.  Secular humanists, like they did when they devised Eugenics, have perverted his teachings to justify the elimination of God from the creation process.

Appeal to Authorty

But to believe in evolution without question involves a great deal of faith in itself.

Excluded Middle

Intelligent design is not threatening if you approach it with an open mind.

Tying (the scientific with the ethical question of open mindedness)

it would take a willing suspension of disbelief to discredit the uses to which totalitarian systems have applied science (and more often, pseudo science) in the pursuit of their political goals.  Science, to the Progressives and their intellectual descendents, is merely a tool in the political tool chest to be used where deemed appropriate (or where it can be perverted to fit).

Extended Analogy

“Behind Communism, Fascism, behind all occupations and invasions lurks a more basic, pervasive evil… a parade of people marching by with raised fists and shouting identical syllables in unision.” - Milan Kundera

Lots of links with no facts.  Not so good.

"If the good men are silent only the wicked are heard.” - Edmund Burke

Rob, sigh....

1. ID isn’t creationism. Arguing that there must have been an intelligent designer is not the same as arguing that the Eart was created in 6 days. It’s rather dishonest to keep dismissing ID as creationism.

2. The Crusades were to reclaim the holy lands against Muslim agression. The Spanish Inquisition was the (secular) crown exerting it’s influence over the Catholic Church. And by lumping in the Palestinian/Jewish conflict in there...it impugns both Islam and Judais, which isn’t fair.
And if we compare Aushwitz alone to that, the crimes of the modern athiest far surpass the ancient religions, including Islam.

3. Hitler may have spoken about God to the masses, but he made it clear in his writings that he was virulently anti-Christian. It was a slave religion in his mind. Believing a few words Hitler said, instead of looking at his record of persecution, is silly.

4. Islam and Christianity are not the same thing. Comparing them is not fair.

5. The athiest nature of Mao, Hitler, Stalin, et al, was integral to their philosophy. The “Christian” nature of the attrocities attributed to Christianity is exaggerated. The Salem Witch trials were not Christian crimes by any nature, nor were they even superstitious. They were cold calculated murders using public hysteria to get public support.

6. Stein is not anti-science.

Unlike evolution, which may one day cure AIDS (the virus evolves in accordance with Darwin’s theory), Creative Design is not going to give us any new answers.

So, to paraphrase, who cares if it’s correct? EVOLUTION HO!

The theory of evolution will do nothing to cure AIDS. What nonsense.

Science the one thing that kills us and saves us. I wonder if religion saves us from the science that kills us.

There is a huge scrap pile of abandoned scientific theories on the earth. 

There are lots of Religions on another pile.  Came and went.

Somehow for over 6000 years worship of the one true God has persisted from then till now.

Not yet abandoned.  What Stein was saying and correctly in my opinion is that reason and philosophy will lead you to Hitlerian rationale.

It’s sad and I don’t think science is the answer.  Science is a moving target.  Faith in God is Unchanging.

the AVATAR
Old Tigers are more dangerous when they believe this could be their last hunt.

From , “The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen”
Old tigers, sensing the end,
they’re at their most fierce. 
And they go down fighting.

Kenny: Good points, all!  Unfortunately, atheists(even reasonable ones like Rob) tend to lump all religions together.  When you reject God altogether, you tend to miss the differences between how the various religions interpret God’s Teachings, which varies widely.  Atheism, on the other hand, is pretty homogenized.  They have human judgment and randomness; that’s pretty much the range of possibilities.

"If the good men are silent only the wicked are heard.” - Edmund Burke

Kenny: It’s quite probable that secular humanism enabled the spread of AIDS through declaring homosexuality “just another lifestyle”, and “if it feels good, do it.”

"If the good men are silent only the wicked are heard.” - Edmund Burke

Science is nothing more than a tool.

I no more blame science when bad things happen than I blame the gun when a criminal shoots someone.

The site really does account for all the crap you guys spout.

Lots of links with no facts.  Not so good.

Dodgedness

Somehow for over 6000 years worship of the one true God has persisted from then till now.

Bandwagon

Kenny: Good points, all!

Argument Ad Nauseam (I’m also a bit guilty of this one here)

“Behind Communism, Fascism, behind all occupations and invasions lurks a more basic, pervasive evil… a parade of people marching by with raised fists and shouting identical syllables in unision.” - Milan Kundera

HP: I hope you don’t think your snark is actually making any sort of an argument here.

"If the good men are silent only the wicked are heard.” - Edmund Burke

"It is interesting to note that, in the forward to the most recent edition of Darwin’s Origin of Species, a leading evolutionary biologist, Professor L. Harrison Matthews, F.R.S., recognizes that ”Belief in evolution is thus exactly parallel to belief in special creation - both are concepts which believers know to be true but neither, up to the present, has been capable of proof.”

“If evolution is taking place today, it operates too slowly to be measureable, and, therefore, is outside the realm of empirical science.” “There is no way to prove that changes within present kinds eventually change those kinds into different, higher kinds.”

“Thomas Huxley, probably more responsible than any other one man for the acceptance of Darwinian philosophy, nevertheless recognized that: ”creation in the ordinary sense of the word, is perfectly conceivable. I find no difficulty in conceiving that, at some former period, this universe was not in existence; and that it made its appearance in six days . . . in consequence of the volition of some pre-existing Being.” Why? The presence of such massive complex design demands a pre-existent Designer, as random mutations over time can never result in complex design.

I should point out to Rob that Christians do not claim the earth is two thousand years old, but 6,000 to as much as 10,000. If you say bullshit, I ask how do you know, were you there? If not, you are basing your billions of years theory on an atheistic religious faith.

Lastly, while Rob can be a very reasonable atheist, I must point out that most of the greatest scientists in all human history were Christians and believed in the Divine Creation model for life. Further, there are a great many, innumerable reputable scientists today that believe either in special Creation, Divine Creation, Intelligent Design or at a minimum admit that evolutionary theory is as much faith based as is that of the Creation model.

None of this gets us anywhere because atheists and so-called secular scientists are in matter of fact adherents to a model of life that is faith based, as it cannot be absolutely established by observable, empirical scientific methodology. Thus, we have two competing faith based systems for explaining the existence of all life, both using the exact same data, with one struggling to prove what they cannot prove and the other predicting what the data eventually establishes as being fact.

No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

What pisses me off is people trying to tell us that man walked around with dinosaurs and the earth is only a few thousand years old.

Why does that piss you off rob?  I thought you said that you don’t care if people believe that.  Freedom of speech goes both ways.

And the number of people that the Crusades killed are dwarfed in comparison to the amount of people that have been killed by Muslims.  And with your Moses killing people link, if you believe that the Bible is not true then you cannot understand the context of the scripture.

You say that young eathers piss you off.  Well I’m sorry.  But I get really tired of people who believe in atheism and darwinism that tell me that I am crazy because of my religious beliefs. 

You may think that creationists are crazy and have junk science but prominent darwinists in Ben Stein’s movie (I saw it opening night) say they believe that either life began somehow on the back of crystals or that some alien life from planted life on our planet.  Kinda sounds like science fiction and Planet of the Apes to me.

A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers.

Dougee, in wide round numbers, how old do you think the earth is?

“If a conservative is still a republican after the last 13 years, he is blind to the fact that his party of choice has failed him utterly.” – Realitybasedbob

Honestly, about 12,000 to 20,000 years old.

A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers.

Neiman, in wide round numbers, how long have homosapiens walked the earth?

“If a conservative is still a republican after the last 13 years, he is blind to the fact that his party of choice has failed him utterly.” – Realitybasedbob

Thank you dougee.

How did you come to those numbers and did homosapiens live here from the beginning?

“If a conservative is still a republican after the last 13 years, he is blind to the fact that his party of choice has failed him utterly.” – Realitybasedbob

Honestly, about 12,000 to 20,000 years old.

Should have been a CE instead of an ME.  A geology class could have done you wonders Dougee.

Honestly, about 12,000 to 20,000 years old.

Wow

Now hold on...I really want to know how dougee has come to believe those numbers.

dougee?

“If a conservative is still a republican after the last 13 years, he is blind to the fact that his party of choice has failed him utterly.” – Realitybasedbob

Dougee: For your own good, I encourage you to not even read what RBB and Hannitized write, they are not interested in honest debate, they are only interested in attacking anyone not agreeing with their liberal beliefs. I won’t anymore and I certainly won’t respond to them. Ask Pparets among others, these guys are not nice people.

No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

Should have been a CE instead of an ME.  A geology class could have done you wonders Dougee.

CE classes are too easy.  I wanted something with a challenge.

Now hold on...I really want to know how dougee has come to believe those numbers.

Sorry, was watching Bill’s interview with Hillary.  But I do believe that because of my religious beliefs.  I am not afraid or ashamed of my Christian faith where I will hide that fact like many other Christians.  I know that I believe it mostly by faith but then again any person who believes that the earth is billions of years old has to do so with a certain degree of faith.

Wow, Hannitized, I admit my beliefs and am not scared to say so.  I am pretty sure I have already heard and been called any childish name that you can come up with.

A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers.

Thanks Neiman, you truly are a friend.  I have taken crap for my personal belief in Jesus for years from people just like rbb and Hannitized.

A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers.

Dougee, I see that you are more of a man that Neiman. He typically cowers from challenging topics. Thank you for your answers.

I hope you are able to dismiss the private messages you must certainly be receiving.

Dougee, how do you account for what is now accepted as a scientific base line, the carbon dating process?

“If a conservative is still a republican after the last 13 years, he is blind to the fact that his party of choice has failed him utterly.” – Realitybasedbob

dougee: They’re simply playing “Attack the Christian”.  It’s a lot like Salem.

"If the good men are silent only the wicked are heard.” - Edmund Burke

dougee, have I attacked you here?

“If a conservative is still a republican after the last 13 years, he is blind to the fact that his party of choice has failed him utterly.” – Realitybasedbob

The Earth has been around a lot longer than the current version of “science”, but the believers in science are unshaken in their faith.  They are simply unable to understand why believers in God are unshaken in theirs, or are too threatened by a diversity of opinion about why things happen, and have to attack anything that questions their orthodoxy.

"If the good men are silent only the wicked are heard.” - Edmund Burke

The Earth has been around a lot longer than the current version of “science”, but the believers in science are unshaken in their faith.

r, you think the earth is older that what scientist currently believe?

r, how old do you think the earth is?

“If a conservative is still a republican after the last 13 years, he is blind to the fact that his party of choice has failed him utterly.” – Realitybasedbob

r, how old do you think the earth is?

How old do you believe the Earth is?  Will you modify your belief when some scientist changes the orthodox version?  Why do you believe what scientists tell you?  Have you personally verified their information/opinion?

"If the good men are silent only the wicked are heard.” - Edmund Burke

r, how old do you think the earth is?

“If a conservative is still a republican after the last 13 years, he is blind to the fact that his party of choice has failed him utterly.” – Realitybasedbob

Intelligent Design is simply the science of design detection—how to recognize patterns arranged by an intelligent cause for a purpose.

Evolutionary science claims an undirected process such as natural selection as the apparent design of life.

The hard part is to be objective because science impacts religion.

Mickey, does ID use science to approximate the earths time line or animal time lines?

“If a conservative is still a republican after the last 13 years, he is blind to the fact that his party of choice has failed him utterly.” – Realitybasedbob

Wow!!  You all have had an extremely open-minded and interesting discussion (except of course when our resident whacked-out lefties butted in - as I have said before ‘get a life’.

At the beginning Rob posted ‘I think creationism is about the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard of (though I respect people’s right to believe it if they want)‘ which is easily reversed to say ;I think atheism is about the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard of (though I respect people’s right to believe it if they want)’.  Neither expression has any value and is really disrespectful rather than respectful.  Sorry, Rob, but your anti-religions bias is showing.

As for science, one thing that is easy to forget is that hard science is primarily concerned with discovery, finding WHAT is already in existence, not WHY it exists or HOW it came into existence.  The WHY and HOW are more philosophical questions than science.  Now cosmology and other ‘soft’ sciences will stray into the HOW question is some areas such as determining the age of the univers but all of their ‘discoveries’ are just theories based on assumptions and projections of ‘old’ data which cannot be reproduced by any know method.

The subject of Intelligent Design reduces to the question of whether there is a God since it would take a godly entity to create the universe and everything in it.  Now those that don’t believe in a God are quick to point out there is no solid scientific evidence of a God.  While there may be some substance to their viewpoint, they do not come forward with the irrefutable evidence that there is no God.  The best they can say is gibberish statements like this ‘Eventually we will have the scientific knowledge to physically prove this’.If the non-existence of God cannot be proven than the God question remains open and cannot be ruled out as some have tried to do.  All Ben Stein is saying is that the creation question should be open to all possibities, not which is not unreasonable in science terms or any other.

Being liberal is never having to admit you’re wrong

rbb: How old do you believe the Earth is?  Do you believe what the scientists say?  Why do you believe that?  Do you have any way of verifying it for yourself, or is it based on faith?

"If the good men are silent only the wicked are heard.” - Edmund Burke

I read, at one time , that the greatest minds on this planet taught the fact that this world was flat. Need I say more about glorious science.

How old do you believe the Earth is?  Do you believe what the scientists say?  Why do you believe that?  Do you have any way of verifying it for yourself, or is it based on faith?

Robert108: Perfect response! I wish I had used that approach. Now let us wait for him to detail how he investigated the matter for himself, rather than just accept by faith the dogma of certain scientists!

Dougee: You are not alone in your faith here! There are many of us that believe as you do!

No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

Billion r, billions.
4b, 10b?
I don’t know.

And yes, I believe the ongoing scientific discoveries and no I have not verified it myself.
Speed of light, carbon decay, and iridium spikes…you know the drill. What’s piqued my interest recently is panspermia and what Mancinelli and Rothschild are positing.

“If a conservative is still a republican after the last 13 years, he is blind to the fact that his party of choice has failed him utterly.” – Realitybasedbob

I think the universe is as old as God wants it to be.

Who invented time?  After all