Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

rosborne979 wrote:

real life wrote:
hi Pauligirl,

You reading The Pitch[/i] now?

I pulled my copy off the bottom of the birdcage, but it wasn't very readable , so I copied this from their site

You live in Kansas? For some reason I thought you lived in Australia.

No, I don't live there.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

rosborne979 wrote:
real life wrote:
hi Pauligirl,

You reading The Pitch[/i] now?

I pulled my copy off the bottom of the birdcage, but it wasn't very readable , so I copied this from their site

You live in Kansas? For some reason I thought you lived in Australia.

No, I don't live there.

You don't live where? Kansas, or Australia?

0 Replies

real life wrote:

Glad to see you're citing the Pitch, Pauligirl.

Are you saying the story is not true?
If it's not, provide a source.
If it is true, what difference does it make where it appeared?

P

0 Replies

None at all. A tale stands on its own. The author is neither here nor there.

To generate distaste for the tale by bringing the author into it is just so old, cliched, and bleached out and boring one needs to have hardly emerged from the cradle to allow it bed-space.

0 Replies

rosborne979 wrote:

real life wrote:
hi Pauligirl,

You reading The Pitch[/i] now?

I pulled my copy off the bottom of the birdcage, but it wasn't very readable , so I copied this from their site

You live in Kansas? For some reason I thought you lived in Australia.

Kansas City (for the most part) is in Missouri. At least, the office where The Pitch is published is.

Silly coastal people...

0 Replies

I live in front of the Kansas City Star. :-) In Missouri.

0 Replies

stlstrike3 wrote:

rosborne979 wrote:
real life wrote:
hi Pauligirl,

You reading The Pitch[/i] now?

I pulled my copy off the bottom of the birdcage, but it wasn't very readable , so I copied this from their site

You live in Kansas? For some reason I thought you lived in Australia.

Kansas City (for the most part) is in Missouri. At least, the office where The Pitch is published is.

Silly coastal people...

Silly me. I knew that at one point way back in Jr-high school. Smile

But I was so shocked that RL implied he lives somewhere near where The Pitch is published that I forgot all my 7th grade geography.

So, do we know where RL lives yet? His previous answer was ambiguous.

0 Replies

Are we certain it is on this planet?

0 Replies

If the $ doesn't stop sliding soon it'll be in a black hole.

0 Replies

Pauligirl wrote:

real life wrote:

Glad to see you're citing the Pitch, Pauligirl.

Are you saying the story is not true?
If it's not, provide a source.
If it is true, what difference does it make where it appeared?

P

hi Pauligirl,

I guess it's just the whole tabloid tone that cracks me up.

'Ooooooooooo , some creationists got some MONEY together, and published a BOOK! Oooooo, I wonder where they got their money? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm????' (Are there no evolutionists who have published books?)

' Oooooooooooooooooo, creationists from different countries met together!' (Are there no evolutionists from different countries who have had meetings?)

It's such a non-story.

Keep quoting the Pitch. It's great comedy. Laughing

0 Replies

rosborne979 wrote:

stlstrike3 wrote:
rosborne979 wrote:
real life wrote:
hi Pauligirl,

You reading The Pitch[/i] now?

I pulled my copy off the bottom of the birdcage, but it wasn't very readable , so I copied this from their site

You live in Kansas? For some reason I thought you lived in Australia.

Kansas City (for the most part) is in Missouri. At least, the office where The Pitch is published is.

Silly coastal people...

Silly me. I knew that at one point way back in Jr-high school.
But I was so shocked that RL implied he lives somewhere near where The Pitch is published that I forgot all my 7th grade geography.

So, do we know where RL lives yet? His previous answer was ambiguous.

I live in the Kansas City area, on the Kansas side. (There is actually a city called Kansas City, MO and another called Kansas City , KS . The MO city is larger, but the KS side suburbs about even the score if you measure the metro area to include both on each side of the line.)

But I grew up (many years ago) on the Missouri side.

My sister spent considerable time living in Londonderry, possibly near you.

Not sure why you thought I lived down under, ros. Not a big deal and I don't want to derail the topic for it.

Unfortunately, tabloids like The Pitch plague both sides of the metro.

The Pitch article, IMO, addresses no relevant topic. Do you agree?

0 Replies

real life wrote:

I live in the Kansas City area, on the Kansas side. (There is actually a city called Kansas City, MO and another called Kansas City , KS . The MO city is larger, but the KS side suburbs about even the score if you measure the metro area to include both on each side of the line.)

But I grew up (many years ago) on the Missouri side.

Well well, welcome to the USA Smile

(just kidding)

I don't know where I got the idea you were down under. I seem to remember something you posted quite a while back (possibly over a year) which I must have interpreted incorrectly which led me to think you were an Aussie. Anyway, my bad.

real life wrote:

My sister spent considerable time living in Londonderry, possibly near you.

Yes, Londonderry is about 45 minutes from me, but my father lives right near there. It's a nice are. I hope she enjoyed her time here.

So, is she a Bible Thumper like you, or is she a skeptical New Englander like me Wink

?

real life wrote:

Unfortunately, tabloids like The Pitch plague both sides of the metro.

The Pitch article, IMO, addresses no relevant topic. Do you agree?

I haven't had much time to consider the article, sorry. And I'm not familiar with "The Pitch".

Best Regards,

0 Replies

rl wrote-

Quote:

The Pitch article, IMO, addresses no relevant topic. Do you agree?

I don't.

It seemed, on the face of it, to be pushing the bounds of respectibility in a direction which is entirely consistent with the decline of religious belief, presumably with the enthusiastic approval of anti-IDers, media, the legal profession and those with a taste for libertinage.

The fact that it is somewhat wimpy peepy in that regard does not mean it won't embolded braver souls to push the boat further in that direction and thus render the natural chaste shyness of the young ladies, and possibly some older ones, even more of an anachronism than it is at the moment.

So I think it very much on topic.

0 Replies

rl wrote-

Quote:

The Pitch article, IMO, addresses no relevant topic. Do you agree?

The very fact that you think such a thing shows clearly that you see this debate as some sort of abstract mind-game rather than the serious matter it is regarding social consequences and thus your contributions to this thread, as I have told you before, serve merely to discredit the side of the argument I am on and which is the only one worth discussing on a Science forum.

0 Replies

rosborne979 wrote:

real life wrote:
I live in the Kansas City area, on the Kansas side. (There is actually a city called Kansas City, MO and another called Kansas City , KS . The MO city is larger, but the KS side suburbs about even the score if you measure the metro area to include both on each side of the line.)

But I grew up (many years ago) on the Missouri side.

Well well, welcome to the USA (just kidding)

I don't know where I got the idea you were down under. I seem to remember something you posted quite a while back (possibly over a year) which I must have interpreted incorrectly which led me to think you were an Aussie. Anyway, my bad.

real life wrote:
My sister spent considerable time living in Londonderry, possibly near you.

Yes, Londonderry is about 45 minutes from me, but my father lives right near there. It's a nice are. I hope she enjoyed her time here.

So, is she a Bible Thumper like you, or is she a skeptical New Englander like me ?

real life wrote:
Unfortunately, tabloids like The Pitch plague both sides of the metro.

The Pitch article, IMO, addresses no relevant topic. Do you agree?

I haven't had much time to consider the article, sorry. And I'm not familiar with "The Pitch".

Best Regards,

She very much enjoyed Londonderry. She is neither a 'Bible thumper' nor a 'skeptical New Englander'. (I don't recall that I've ever 'thumped' my Bible either. Laughing

)

Regarding the Pitch article, is it considered particularly scandalous that creationists meet together and/or publish books? I really hadn't thought so.

I was surprised that Pauligirl found the article to be of any value whatsoever.

0 Replies

spendius wrote:

rl wrote-

Quote:
The Pitch article, IMO, addresses no relevant topic. Do you agree?

The very fact that you think such a thing shows clearly that you see this debate as some sort of abstract mind-game rather than the serious matter it is regarding social consequences and thus your contributions to this thread, as I have told you before, serve merely to discredit the side of the argument I am on and which is the only one worth discussing on a Science forum.

hi spendi,

I have tried to make sure that my posts speak only for myself, not for you. I think most folks know that to be the case.

Sorry if you have thought that I somehow cast a bad shadow on you.

The social consequences of Darwinism which seem to interest you a lot are important IMO also, but they are generally not what seems to be of interest to a lot of other folks on the science forum. I can't help that either, sorry.

I don't want to discourage you, but the politics forum might be a better venue for discussion of social trends, etc . Just a thought. I'm glad to have you here. Take good care. Cool

0 Replies

rl wrote-

Quote:

I don't want to discourage you, but the politics forum might be a better venue for discussion of social trends, etc . Just a thought. I'm glad to have you here.

Are you trying to be funny or what? I'm the mainstay on this thread. The life and soul of it. And you are "glad to have me here"! Good gracious mate. Have you seen the viewing figures. They are certainly not down to you.

And your chances of discouraging me are a lot less than those of you winning the national lottery three weeks in succession so it is of no consequence what you want in that regard or, for that matter, what gladdens your heart.

The social consequences of root and branch Darwinism are the only thing that matters to a social scientist. With no social consequences one might as well fill one's head up with Harry bloody Potter.

The anti-IDers started off on social consequences. They claimed that unless strict Darwinism was taught in schools American science would lag behind in competition with other countries.

All Creationists will achieve on here is to lose the argument. Anti-IDers love Creationists. They enable them to coast along in neutral.

You should read the thread before entering it with puerile mush from The Pitch and descriptions of gerrymanderings in Kansas.

Okay?

You might have edited out Bob Dylan's name or did you include it on purpose.

0 Replies

what a strange fellow you are Spendius

0 Replies

Steve: what a strange fellow you are Spendius

You're finally realizing this? LOL

0 Replies

Steve wrote-

Quote:

what a strange fellow you are Spendius

What exactly do you have in mind Steve which justifies your empty assertion? Any plonker can go around calling other people "strange" if they needn't bother justifying it.

For example- What an extremely, unbelievably and extraordinarily strange fellow you are Steve.

It's that easy. Both statements are of equal validity. Zero.

Still- c.i. agrees with you it seems so you are in very exclusive company.
Rarefied even.

0 Replies

Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know