@farmerman,
Oh to still have steam in my panties! But if I had you would be the last person I would think of who might be able to take it out. Even after five years us stranded on a desert island together.
You are aware I hope that I have been trained. And like everybody else in training situations I took most notice of what came my way that was interesting to me. That's how we both came to be like we are under roughly the same training conditions. There was the turgid pedantic stuff, in one week and out the next, after the exams: whilst on holiday.
And as I agree with Alexander Pope, who no doubt stole it, like so--
Quote:Know then thyself, presume not God to scan;
The proper study of Mankind is Man.
I didn't bother with God or His creation and concentrated on Mankind. And as all men are ******* ***** *****s ( see Hamlet) I was left with no alternative other than Womankind. I found out everything you need to know about evolution in the higher animals right there. As one would expect seeing as how Woman is evolution's most perfect creation. One might well feel one could have produced a better design oneself but I fancy it would be too subjective to be considered scientific.
As I slowly came to feel that we were ruining women I naturally wondered why. So I became interested to a reasonable extent in signs showing them not feeling right themselves. How many ops they were having, pills they were taking and being subjected to ameliorative treatments to their exterior appearance and the fast growing amount of advertising and "copy" devoted to such matters. It's a long story and involves a good deal of interest. I have other interests of course but I find these as well reflect upon the main interest. The cheer-leaders egging on the Grunts is right out of bison country at Eastertime. I didn't just assert, notice, that they do reflect upon the main interest, as you would have done, I explained how with a neat little snapshot of your much vaunted reality. That such a reflection takes place is a function of my trained interest.
I don't look at fossils. I look at life now and work backwards. Like with the roundabout in Geneva. It matters not to me if she is leaning over a pool table with her short skirt ridden up or popping a bare-arse out of the bushes with two eye-whites gleaming in the moonlight. It's the same thing scientifically. I've seen them take on more difficult shots so they can get their skirt up higher. If ever you saw Sky News' frontwoman gliding on the shoulders of her powerful partner towards the camera with her knees wide apart on the Pro-Celeb Ice Dancing show you should know what a reflection is.
It dawned on me slowly, and against my own interest, that the Church's teachings on these matters were correct. And that these matters were the core of the apple.
So being a gallant gentleman I became a defender of the Church. But only when it is attacked. I don't promote it. I see attacks on the Church as attacks on the well-being of women. All the matters in dispute detract from feminine dignity. And I don't give a monkey's toss-off what the feminists think. The unreasonable focus on a few sick priests tells you all you need to know about the weakness of their position. It avoids their position being examined. Biologically. And the feminists hold positions in media where the products pretending to restore the dignity of women are advertised, which is to say pay their bloated salaries.
That's a glimpse of what I think "proper evolution" embraces.
Your other argument has been dealt with. Only atheists would be able to teach it without causing a raft of court cases. And they might need a separate staff room.
