38
   

Is Evolution a Dangerous Idea? If so, why?

 
 
plainoldme
 
  0  
Reply Sun 18 Apr, 2010 09:29 am
@edgarblythe,
Catching up just now, I have read some of the most distasteful posts I have seen on the internet. Spendius and ionus wrote them. While they lacked the overt insanity of some of a2k's more famous ranters, they were disturbing. I have wondered at spendius' rhetoric since discovering him on my recent return to these boards. This is truly a disturbed individual who probably passes unrecognized as he goes about his daily life with his mouth shut.
spendius
 
  -2  
Reply Sun 18 Apr, 2010 09:40 am
@plainoldme,
Dearie, dearie me. I wouldn't like to have to put up with that sort of inane blurting at close quarters. In fact I would take some pains to keep well out of the way.

What was disturbing about the posts of mine that you have suddenly decided to catch up on? Perhaps if I knew that I could try to calm you down.

I respectfully decline to take advantage of the implied invitation to respond in kind.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  3  
Reply Sun 18 Apr, 2010 10:00 am
@spendius,
I reject your rejection of my rejection and I spot you twenty posts.
0 Replies
 
Ionus
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 18 Apr, 2010 08:24 pm
@farmerman,
Quote:
Here you demonstrate your ignorance of what people in the US "think".
We, in the fray, only care about what is being infiltrated into our public schools.
Your view of what we do in this country is woefully uninformed sir.
My comment was directed at US people on this forum who have been trying to convince religious people that the Bible is wrong. You clearly have not read any other thread or you choose to ignore what you know to be fact. Moderates on both sides are paying the penalty of radicalism. I am a supporter of evolution and I can not fathom why some religious people insist on telling God how he created the universe. I also can not fathom how some "scientists" insist on telling religious people they are wrong to have faith. To me these radicals on both sides are the same fools with different faiths.
Ionus
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 18 Apr, 2010 08:32 pm
@farmerman,
Quote:
I seriously ridicule any beliefs in a magic guy who created the universe . However, the difference , and the point that you wish to make hazy is the FACT that NOONE has tried to interject this ridicule into any official curricula within parochial schools and the only thing thats been going on is that THE EVANGELICALS ARE THE ONLY ONES TRYING TO INFILTRATE THE US PUBLIC SCHOOLS, not the other way around.
You ridicule but say you have not interjected this ridicule into public schools. How many science teachers are you speaking for ? What part of little ol' you thinks they speak for everyone ?

Most countries have religious instruction at schools. Catholics and other religions have embraced evolution because of the number of scientists in their top echelon. You seem to have a unique problem in the USA where scientists have no faith and the faithful have no science.

Quote:
What part of our headlines dont you understand? hmmmm?
Perhaps you should read more than the headlines. hmmmmm?
Ionus
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 18 Apr, 2010 08:35 pm
@plainoldme,
Quote:
I agree with you on Catholicism's subjugation of women.
What about nature's subjugation of women ?
Ionus
 
  -2  
Reply Sun 18 Apr, 2010 08:35 pm
@plainoldme,
Quote:
While Mother Theresa's order did much for dying and abandoned children, the late icon was no saint.
I have no idea why your veto wasnt honoured.
0 Replies
 
Ionus
 
  -2  
Reply Sun 18 Apr, 2010 08:37 pm
@plainoldme,
Quote:
Catching up just now, I have read some of the most distasteful posts I have seen on the internet. Spendius and ionus wrote them. While they lacked the overt insanity of some of a2k's more famous ranters, they were disturbing. I have wondered at spendius' rhetoric since discovering him on my recent return to these boards. This is truly a disturbed individual who probably passes unrecognized as he goes about his daily life with his mouth shut.
All those words for a factless opinion. Do you know what a fact is ?
0 Replies
 
Jason Proudmoore
 
  2  
Reply Sun 18 Apr, 2010 09:43 pm
@Ionus,
Quote:
My comment was directed at US people on this forum who have been trying to convince religious people that the Bible is wrong

Would you say that the Bible is compatible with reality, with nature?...if you agree that the Bible conforms to nature, would you agree that the Earth is flat, that the "firmament" is filled with water, that the human body can be possessed by spirits or demons, that magical enchantment is factual, and other nonsensical, biblical notions that are incompatible with nature and have been refuted by science? In that case...the Bible is as wrong as it can get.

Quote:
Moderates on both sides are paying the penalty of radicalism

Is radicalism a penalty?

Quote:
I am a supporter of evolution and I can not fathom why some religious people insist on telling God how he created the universe.

And what does your support of evolution have to do with "people [insisting] on telling God how he created the universe". What is your point here?
Quote:
I also can not fathom how some "scientists" insist on telling religious people they are wrong to have faith.

Because "faith" is in total opposition with the scientific method. Faith is bias...faith explains "everything" by explaining nothing: "God didit"...."faith" is unreasonable that can lead people to do unreasonable things.
Quote:
To me these radicals on both sides are the same fools with different faiths.

One "faith has divided us and oppressed us with beliefs that are inconsistent with the universe...and the other "faith" has provided us with technology and innovation, which has tripled human lifespan and made life even easier.
Ionus
 
  -3  
Reply Sun 18 Apr, 2010 11:58 pm
@Jason Proudmoore,
Quote:
Would you say that the Bible is compatible with reality, with nature?...
The Bible is compatible with human nature.
Quote:
would you agree that the Earth is flat
Is this your latest nonsense ? You think the earth is flat ?
Quote:
the human body can be possessed by spirits or demons
Are you aware of alien hand syndrome ? Of a case in WWII where a man with a skin disease that could not be affected by self healing was cured by the faith of his curer ?
Quote:
that magical enchantment is factual
Are you aware of the curative power/ healing power of placebos ?

Quote:
Is radicalism a penalty?
That is not what I said. Are you still faking your orgasms ?
Quote:
What is your point here?
It does not surprise me you dont get it. When someone with sense asks, I will explain.
Quote:
Because "faith" is in total opposition with the scientific method.
Your faith in science is pointless. A worship of nothingness, that can not be proven.
Quote:
"faith" is unreasonable that can lead people to do unreasonable things.
You mean like Nazi scientific experiments.

Quote:
Faith is bias...faith explains "everything" by explaining nothing: "God didit"...."faith" is unreasonable that can lead people to do unreasonable things.

Science is bias...science explains "nothing" by explaining everything: "Accident didit"...."science" is inhuman that can lead people to do inhumane things.
Quote:
One "faith has divided us and oppressed us with beliefs that are inconsistent with the universe...and the other "faith" has provided us with technology and innovation, which has tripled human lifespan and made life even easier.
Would this be the same science that is destroying nature and overpopulating the world ? That reduces human existence to carbon atoms ? That your blind faith wants you to worship ?
spendius
 
  2  
Reply Mon 19 Apr, 2010 04:04 am
@Ionus,
Quote:
I agree with you on Catholicism's subjugation of women.


Well POM--the opposition seems to be not only fully signed up but enthusiastic about objecting to the Church's position on masturbation, sex before commitment in marriage, birth control by rubber and plastic gizmos, poisons and infibulations, divorce, abortion and homosexuality. All of which undermine the status of women as divine creatures and turn them into what Cliff Richard called "crying, talking, sleeping, walking living dolls designed as a convenience for men so they can pop off anytime they feel like it at a low price and with little or no trouble.

Which in a way is better than them being monkeys which is what some of them think women are despite what Dr. Hfuhruhurr said in The Man with Two Brains, which I won't repeat on account of my delicate sensibilities, and what biological science insists they are because its severities have no other alternative.



Ionus
 
  0  
Reply Mon 19 Apr, 2010 04:29 am
@spendius,
They never talk about how marriage and other unfashionables were favouring women. In days when most healthy women would get pregnant, sex before marriage meant pregnancy, no income and starvation. Pressure against prostitution saved many womens lives from poverty. Women chose this "subjugation" as in their best interests, yet libbies blame it on men.

Quote:
Catholicism's subjugation of women.
This statement assumes its own accuracy. EVERYONE knows how dreadful Catholicism was for women....poor poor pityful women...or perhaps it is just another stupid throw away phrase backed up by sneers and false intellectualism.
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Mon 19 Apr, 2010 04:41 am
@Ionus,
http://www.dace.co.uk/painting/aphrodite/aphrodite_3.jpg

Some monkey eh.
Ionus
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Apr, 2010 04:44 am
@spendius,
Clearly subjugated....underworked, overfed, playing with babies...dressed for mutual entertainment....
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Apr, 2010 04:51 am
@spendius,
lecherous old fart
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Apr, 2010 05:13 am
@Ionus,
Quote:
Most countries have religious instruction at schools. Catholics and other religions have embraced evolution because of the number of scientists in their top echelon. You seem to have a unique problem in the USA where scientists have no faith and the faithful have no science.
Maybe this is where your ignorance originates. We have a Constitution, the first Amendment of which introduces our "Bill of Rights" with a statement that is a two part one.It;

1 Clearly states that Noone can interfere with an individuals "free expression" of their religion and

2. The Constitution forbids the creation of anything that smacks of a state religion

That second part, called "The establishment clause" forbids injecting anything that is clearly religious from a standpoint of one denomination or wordview, into any public activity (and this includes education). SO far, ever since the appeals had begun on the SCopes trial, the courts have seen the establishment clause as preventing a religious worldview (such as Creationism) from being taught in public shool science.
NOW, what the religious do in their own schools is beyond the reach of the establishment clause and is goverened more by "the free expression clause".

What is done in other countries, where, like UK where there IS a state religion, is waht our founding fathers got away from. SO Id suggest that you should do a lot more reading on this subject.

Further, noone has tried to infiltrate the parochial schools with Evolution science if that goes against their worldview. The parochial schools are able to teach what their credo requires and with which nobody interferes . THATS A FACT . Should you wish to deny that, Im sure there will be plenty of others who will try to set you straight. (Assuming you will accept the facts ).
Several of the parochial schools, like the Catholic Diocesan schools, do teach evolution because the CAtholic Church has, since it abandoned the doctrine of "Special Evolution" in the 1960's, recognized the "mountains of irrefutable evidence supporting DArwin " (except for Cardinal Schoenbrun) . Its only the "Liberty schools" the "Evangelical schools" Baptists, Orthodox Muslim and Orthodox Jewish schools
and the home schoolers that insist in believing these narrow worldviews. In the US, you are free to teach Creationism , just not in the public schools AND, if you teach it in your own parochial schools, noone is busy trying to substitute Darwin for your catechism. If you believe otherwise, youre just flat uninformed.
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Mon 19 Apr, 2010 05:47 am
@Ionus,
heres a link to one of the more recent threads started to discuss "Challenges to Teaching Evolution in the US". Wandeljw has used this thread to post relevant articles about the very subject youve opined upon.http://able2know.org/topic/121621-1
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Apr, 2010 06:02 am
This thread has gone to Hell in a hand basket . . .
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Apr, 2010 06:09 am
@farmerman,
Quote:
1 Clearly states that Noone can interfere with an individuals "free expression" of their religion and

2. The Constitution forbids the creation of anything that smacks of a state religion


And some have argued that the Constitution and the Separation of Church and State were dangerous ideas.

I have seen a headline in an American newspaper as late as 1927 which referred to exterminating the Indians. Slavery ante-dates the Constitution.

So we have ethnic cleansing and slavery going on under the two sacred provisions you mention both of which interfered with individuals "free expression" of their religion and neither of which were possible under an established state religion which involves responsibility of the religious leadership. Escape from such responsibilities looks like having been the motive for the constitutional arrangements you are claiming give you intellectual respectability.
edgarblythe
 
  2  
Reply Mon 19 Apr, 2010 06:44 am
@spendius,
Slippery as an eel, he evades by attacking through the back door. That was beautifully expressed farmerman, but there are those who simply do not wish to know.
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 11/24/2024 at 05:53:44