Maine yet. I thought that those people fought and won the culture wars with the events at Houlton and the rise of the Godless Evolution program at the College of the ATlantic in Bar HArbor .
Not my beloved Maine. Rexred must be the new governor
Hey- get this from the Sunday Times woman on the spot-
Quote:A Hollywood wife with older children advised me: "You gotta get on the school board because then you have control over admissions, so people have to come to you begging. A big cash donation will do it."
Don't bother with the blogs fm. Once on the school boards they have to gob off something or other and there's a whole bag of cliches to pick from none of which there is any need to explain.
You're just scared of engaging with the likes of Veblen and Spengler because they might cause you to have to go round apologising to all your intimates for the years of subjectively based assertions, such as the one above, which you have belted out over the years and entirely based on ignorance and fear of education and which actively eschew the slightest sign of any science.
I have explained that Disco has nothing to do with the concept of intelligent design although I am aware that you have a desperate need to think or pretend that it does as doing so keeps everything nice and simple and within the purview of your limited understanding.
If you would care to make the case that Disco does have something to do with the concept in the thread title, as opposed to a purloined label, then get on with it. But I can shred it as you probably know so I expect you to duck the challenge as is your usual habit.
Quote:But I can shred it as you probably know so I expect you to duck the challenge as is your usual habit.
Never knew you played the guitar . I thought your only talents were drinking and self abuse.
wandeljw wrote:(farmerman: did you hear about this one?)
NEW ANTI-EVOLUTION CONTROVERSY IN MAINE
Quote:School District Director: Evolution, creationism are unproven theories
(KENNEBEC MORNING SENTINEL, May 6, 2008)
Linkletter, a Christian, said there is no way to prove either evolution or creationism.
"You can't show, observe or prove it," Linkletter said of the belief systems. "It's something you have to believe by faith. It doesn't meet the criteria of science.
This guy doesn't understand the criteria of science. I suppose it's just a coincidence that he's a christian reciting creationist propaganda as support for his misunderstanding of basic science. No religious motivations here, just coincidence.
Nothing new there ros. Same old school-boardese.
Why don't you try stretching yourself a bit. Not a lot to start with. It gets a bit freaky in the higher atmospheres.
I used to be handy on the guitar fm but my fingertips have gone soft now. Do you wanna buy a '62 Fender Precision Bass? $4 grand eh. Plus p+p of course. No haggling. This place has bloody instruments all over the place. There's two pianos under my bed.
Do you want a verse from one of my songs-- right-o then
"I said, 'Stop the boat, I wanna get off!'
That mate said, 'That's the limit!!'
He stuck out a plank o'er the ocean wide
He said, ' You want freedom boy? Get in it!
Get phucking in it.' "
Wiki writes-
Quote:Henry Kissinger: National Security Advisor and Secretary of State to Presidents Nixon and Ford, Kissinger stated he was influenced by Spengler and urged Nixon to read Decline of the West.
Second line back there should read "The mate".
I'll make the effort to facilitate Spengler for you on the subject of expression language/communication language. ( I'll induge my self with parenthetical comments as it goes.)
Quote:It is well to recall here the distinction between the two great speech-groups. Expression-speech treat the Other as witness, and aims purely at effects upon him, while communication-speech (the AIDser's forte) regards him as a collocutor and expects him to answer. (Talks down to him--an aspect of control freakery). To understand means to receive impressions with one's own feeling of their significance, and it is on this that the effect of the highest form of human-expression-speech, art, depends. (The highest form of CS is the order). To come to an understanding, to hold a conversation, postulates that the Other's feeling of significances is the same as one's own. The elementary unit of an expression-speech before witnesses is called the Motive. Command of the motive is the basis of all expression-technique. On the other hand the impression produced for the purpose of an understanding is called the Sign, and is the elementary unit of all communication-technique--including, therefore, at the highest level, human speech. (Twit, bullshit, psuedo intellectual rubbish, quick march etc).
Of the extensiveness of both these speech-worlds in the waking consciousness of man we today can scarcely form an idea. Expression-speech, which appears in the earliest times with all the religious seriousness of the Taboo, includes not only weighty and strict ornament--which in the beginning coincides completely with the idea of art and makes every stiff, inert thing into a vehicle of the expression--but also the solemn ceremonial--whose web of formulae spreads over the whole of public life, and even over that of the family--and the language of costume, which is contained in clothing, tattooing and personal adornment, all of which have a uniform significance. The investigators of the nineteenth century vainly attempted to trace the origin of clothing to the feeling of shame or to utilitarian motives. It is in fact intelligible only as the means of an expression-speech, and as such it is developed to a grandiose level in all the high Civilizations, including our own of today. We need only think of the dominant part played by the "mode" in our whole public life and doings, the regulation attire for important occasions, the nuances of wear for this and that social function, the wedding-dress, mourning; of the military uniform, the priest's robes, orders and decorations, mitre and tonsure, periwig and queue, powder, rings, styles of hairdressing; of all the significant displays and concealments of person, (important in classrooms especially), the costume of the mandarin and the senator, the odalisque and the nun; of the court-state of Nero, Saladin and Montezuma--not to mention the details of peasant costumes (see Gaugin), the language of flowers, colours and precious stones. As for the language of religion, it is superfluous to mention it, for all this (and much more) is religion.
Even the most rabid fundamentalist must sometimes have doubts about his beliefs but the religion described there superficially is embraced by AIDsers without any doubts. Which is why their attacks on religious belief are so wearingly trite and half-baked. I'll bet fm's firearms have ornamentation and Bernie and Lola had a go at making costume jewelry. Ever had white-wall tyres ros? or chromium emblems on the coachwork? Any lace-edged pillows wande? Inlays on the dog-lead Set?
To not know about this simple stuff and to be found pontificating about the education of 50 million kids is a very sad spectacle indeed.
I daresay fm's boat has a bloody name like as if some magical incantation is at work. Spirit of Darwin maybe.
And all those lady journalists, teachers and school-board members who want science taught strictly scientifically and arrive for action all primped up to hide their belly-vessel function for replenishing the species.
You have to laugh. Sexual selection indeed.
ros, Its been the experience of all who have respect for science that folks like Linkletter are showing their vast ignorance of how the world works and what constitutes sound evidence. These people will scream at the top of their lungs about how
1Creationism/ID is really science , and , failing that:
2Evolution is also a religion just like Creationism/ID
Maine, with the NEw England Yankee traditions, has made a religion out of "critical analyses" of just about every law and principle and theory in science. Im amazed that this chowderbrain has gotten this far. (Of course, the people may just be turning a deaf ear to him).
I suspect that this is not a case in which FM would be happy to see a demonstration of the old political saw of "As Maine goes, so goes the nation."
fm wrote-
Quote:Its been the experience of all who have respect for science
There's only me on this thread who has that fm.
It's a badge for the rest of you which you put on for rowing the boat ashore purposes and take off for rowing the boat towards another shore when you fancy.
Jesus sees the Seventy off in Luke Ch 10 verse 4 with the words-
Quote:And salute no man on the way.
A. Bertholet in
Kulturegeschichte Isreals says that the ceremonial of greeting on the high-road is so complicated that people in a hurry have to omit it.
Today, we just nod a greeting to a passing stranger and if we read "salute" our way we might get the wrong idea of the tale.
Hence the wonderfully lucrative world of Biblical scholarship conducted on scientific lines rather than going off the first thing that comes into your head.
Notice the ladies are not mentioned.
Who is this Linkletter guy? Is he a big cheese?
Not going after the tiddlers again are we?
What I noticed, spendi, is that it is late at night where you are and you are becoming more obscure.
Another twenty minutes yet wande to start the obscurantism going again.
Did my post on "salute" not lead you to think that your knowledge of the Bible, the source book of our science, might be a trifle obscure?
In fact the Christian image of the pilgrim going along a path in the widerness to spread the message which has brought us to where we are "till deltas twoport", as Mr Joyce had it, is something of a cliche in our literature. He's usually leaning forward and has a staff with a bundle on the end.
spendi is like an old 33.3 rpm vinyl record whoe needle is stuck in one groove. HE has been on the same drum beat for about 2 years now and hes pitching that others are "Afraid" to challenge him. Weve successfully challenged, busted his act, and rendered him irrelevent to this discussion.
Im somewhat amazed that he still dregs up his "Faustian v Appolonian" mantra and his favorite dudes of letters.
Im afraid that his anal cranial inversion has allowed for his anus to do the speaking. Thus his words are still garbled but his breath is the same.
Actually, I think, that America is much more a creation of 1789 than France itself has turned out to be.
Asking "Is the thing rational?" rather than "Is the thing legal?" is hardly what the modern Frenchman thinks.
Appealing to an order of ideas which are permanent, universal and certain, in short, scientific, is not really your average Frenchman's cup-of-tea.
The question, "Is a thing rational?" is all very well but is it practical?
Does it work? Not just in the here and now. That's easy. The lights are on. Of course it works in the here and now otherwise we wouldn't be here arguing the toss.
What about 100 years from now? There are 20 year olds reading this thread whose lovely grandchildren will only be in their mid-life stage in 100 years.
The English Revolution of Charles the 1st went further than "Is it legal?" It went all the way to "Is it according to conscience?" Obviously that led to some fancy footwork but what's new about that?
And what does conscience have to do with science?
Everbody knows that a standing prick hath no conscience and they are all wrong because it is science that has no conscience. Standing pricks have a little. Some more than others.
The elderly lady who viciously attacked the actor who played the evil Richard Ellman in Coronation Street when he was opening a small supermarket in a small town in the sticks (a perk) was obeying an impulse to which millions of rational scientific thinkers are strangers.
Reason and rationality would have had her handcuffed and shackled but here in Ye Olde England the cops, in their riot gear, bullet proof vests and overtime claim forms in the top drawer of their desks, escorted her home, made her a cup-of-tea and settled her down in front of the snooker.
In the US, working on reason and rationality, two legal teams would have dipped their bread in, the media stirring it up of course, and got themselves, temporarily, onto what Andy Warhol called "Easy Street".
The decimal coinage is the rational scientific outcome of our evolving with five fingers, counting the thumb as a finger I mean, which is alright for counting but not for country house parties, and having a hand on either side.
With four fingers, and little fingers are a bit pointless as the Duchess of Athlone said, five ceases to exist and 2+3=6 which is even dafter than 2+2=5, unless you call five six and that's fivism.
So, look at your little finger and meditate on it's importance. The magic of round numbers ending in 0, 00, 000, 0000, 00000, 000000, 0000000, and so on and so forth.
(That's enough bullshit spendi--Ed)
{Hang on a minute boss- there's some Yanks here who need straightening out.}
(That can wait--we've run out of space and it's your bedtime anyway.)
A fundamentalist zeal penetrating a whole nation in favour of "pure reason and rational critical thinking", ardently vouchsafed, is a most remarkable turn of events don't ya know? From a social evolution point of view it constitutes a rather dramatic mutation. And an untried one to boot.
That those who do so ardently vouchsafe such an amazing proposition might well be guilty of thinking that to declaim the virtues of PRARCT (a word which conjures up what a pterodactly may have sounded like when seeking a blind-date) from high perches constitutes the actual practice itself of PRARCT is much too silly a proposition to discuss on a thread noted for its intellectual severities as even a casual glance at their lifestyles will readily demonstrate under the very exigencies of PRARCT its very self. Such psychological categories are best left to those who are qualified to deal with them.
It is in the way of a sort of bird-call. A tweeting ego which feels attention starved might well be desperate enough to envisage a nation of 300 million people, in what is often called an "advanced state", engaging to a man, and woman, in the virtues of PRARCT but it might do well to consider that there will be 300 million separate and distinct defininitions of PRARCT within the borders of such a nation and it's satellites abroad. Any divorce lawyer will set you straight on that matter. In fact any lawyer of any sort.
The tweeting ego might well make the presumption, presumption being a defining characteristic of tweeting egos, that its own definition of what PRARCT consists of is exactly the same as that of the other 299,999,999 members of the society. A rather difficult proposition to prove I should imagine.
It's the old story.
It is much more likely that the tweeting ego's definition of PRARCT is anything which makes it more money, gets it more influence and have its name up in lights more often that the common 15 minutes. (Actually Andy was being polite--he meant 15 seconds).
PRARCT is somewhat of a nebulous concept. Elastic even. And, as such, anti-scientific.
In fact to worship at the altar of PRARCT is to give Mr Darwin himself the two fingered salute unless you can agree that eagerly following the waddling duck-tail into the pond for a paddle in the May sunshine is a reasonable, rational and critically thought through course of action.
(Turn it up spendi- you're back to the lingerie shops again. Ed)
I know you silly moo.
(What about Viagra then? Ed)
What about it--it doesn't grow on trees does it. A plant suffused with the active ingredient of Viagra would soon go extinct assuming that any organism would be daft enough to create a need in itself over and above that provided naturally which already leaves it hung out like a wombat on a washing line drying in the sun.
Can anybody get to be a professor of philosophy at Southeastern Louisiana University and post a plea for help to fight a pair of balls in the state's Legislature.
fm wrote-
Quote:spendi is like an old 33.3 rpm vinyl record whoe needle is stuck in one groove. HE has been on the same drum beat for about 2 years now and hes pitching that others are "Afraid" to challenge him. Weve successfully challenged, busted his act, and rendered him irrelevent to this discussion.
Im somewhat amazed that he still dregs up his "Faustian v Appolonian" mantra and his favorite dudes of letters.
Im afraid that his anal cranial inversion has allowed for his anus to do the speaking. Thus his words are still garbled but his breath is the same.
Meaningless fm. Serious viewers know what that is worth by now. And your claque are already on board.
So I don't see the point. That I'm a "twit" is quite adequate. Conservation of energy principle you see?
The words I write have nothing to do with me once I submit. They are the property of the reader. I'll be onto the next thing. I'm not going around in circles. I heard they get smaller and smaller until you fly up your own arse to fit yourself into the narrowing space.
