Evolutionists are insecure

Let's bring this back to the topic..

The OP started talking about "Evolutionists are insecure". This premise starts with an insult and is based on an ideological position. For the OP Evolution isn't about facts, it is about a belief. He will defend his belief with partial "facts" and fill in the rest with insults.

Izzy and Setanta are doing the same thing. The have a narrow ideological view and an emotional need for people to agree with them. It isn't about facts When someone questions their political views they answer with insults.

You will notice on the Physics and engineer threads I have pretty patiently worked through problems with people step by step to explain how the principles work. I don't insult people who are willing to work with me. Likewise I have seen Farmerman be pretty patient with people questioning evolution. He can provide real knowledge rather than insults.

I would hope with legal expertise would do the same. And I have nothing bad to say about Jespah who hasn't been insulting at all.

I don't know where Izzy and Setanta fit into this discussion. They act as inquisitors; protectors of the faith for the Church of Political Correctness. They are just here to weed out and punish the infidels.

In the righteous rage of Izzy and Setanta; I play the role of "evolutionist".

Are you being sponsored for any of this, or are you just talking bullshit in your own time?

You don’t decide what people talk about.

You’re just a control freak who nobody listens to, because nobody is interested.

What would have happened if Izzy and Setanta would have just stayed out of this. Neither of them added anything to the interaction between Jespah and me. They had no experience or knowledge to offer. They didn't even offer any opinion.

I questioned her respectfully. She responded about torts. I asked my question. She responded with her knowledge.

And then it would have ended with no insults and no nastiness. As Jespah has shown, people can question or disagree with each other without personal attacks.

The nastiness in this thread has come from Izzy and Setanta. They have lots of fans. People seem to like the insults, so they will keep doing it (and I am apparently too stubborn or stupid to back down). As in many thread, this thread would have been much less nasty if Izzy and Setanta had resisted their self-righteous need to butt in.

What would have happened if you’d kept your ignorant I’ll informed opinions to yourself instead of trying to get free legal advice?

Everyone would be a lot happier, because not everything is about you, and you’re so insufferably dull.

I take it that’s a good thing. Over here hen is an affectionate term like pet or love. When I say over here I don’t mean Southampton, I mean
chilly Jockland the noo.

Widener is Widener Pride (always thought that was silly, then again my undergrad degree is from BU and we're the Terriers). U. Delaware is the Blue Hens. Widener Pride may or may not be lions. Or gay rights. Helfino.

The MS is the only one with a tough-sounding sports team - Quinnipiac Bobcats.

For you and izzy. The Blue Hens are a diminutive for the Blue Fighting Cock, a game bird. I did an MS in chem there and spent many hours explaining to my parents how a "chicken" can be a respectable mascot for a University

It’s the mascot of Tottenham Hotspur in the premiership. I don’t know if it’s that breed specifically but it’s a great big angry cock nonetheless.

The psychological subtext here is interesting... they are looking for a tacit sign of Jespah's approval. They are defining an "us" here as an acceptable social group. But, let's just ask the question directly.

Jespah, do you appreciate or approve of the behavior of Izzy and Setanta on this thread? They want your approval (and are acting as if they have it tacitly).

That really is the subtext here. I would appreciate a direct answer to this question rather than this weird social winking.

Harumpt! Another evolutionist.

There’s no end to your expertise, now you’re a psychiatrist.

Well, just emeritus . . . I couldn't afford to pay the dues.

I figured that Evolutionists are insecure because of the foul language used by some people on the board. If they really believed in Evolution, they would not have to resort to this.
I see by your post that I had been too general in my posted topic. For that I apologise. I am new to this site

What a whiny, pathetic interlocutor you are. You're a sad case.

I used to work with a guy who graduated from the University of Delaware...His degree was in philosophy and was in the Army Security Agency stationed at Ft. Meade.....He was so bright, so funny and such a good Analyst. I haven't thought about him in years...but the Fighting Blue Hens brought up a lot of memories.

Evolutionist is a word only used by extremists.

Evolution is a process like photosynthesis, but you don’t go around calling people photosynthesises if they happen to recognise the chemical processes in plants.

You have nothing which is why you make stuff up.

You live in a world of lies and mischaracterisation. Your university is called Liberty yet it forces its students to go to Bible classes and sign a pledge to abstain from sex. That’s not liberty, it’s Social control and coercion.

It’s the sort of religious college that’s got more in common with Hitler than Jesus.

Liberty was NOT fully accredited by its regional accreditation board until 2012 and even that accreditation has got several caveats about WHICH programs are fully accredited. (If a student in say, genetics, wants to get into a Stanford research PhD program, many of the courses at Liberty, by not being accredited for specific career paths, have limited kids careeer options.

Now Im not sure whether Liberty has addressed some of these. because I see they offer graduate level genetics and I dont think that can be taught from a Fundamental Basis. Maybe Liberty went a bit more "Protestant " in the ensuing 8 years .

They till dont offer degree in Geology or Evolutionary Biology so I guess they too have stayed within their fences of faith as best as they can.

It was a created term , popular among the YECs and OECs , an was use to denigrate Evolution scholars . It was a word initially only used by fundamental Christians to try to assign a title that suggested that "volution Sciences" are alo religions.

Funny thing though, youll find that many scientists associated with evolution (paleontologists, cell biologists and geneticists, evolutionary biochemists, etc) have taken to the term and use it as a "pet title" (Sorta like the Impressionist Painters took to the term "Impressionism")

When e go to conferences they have tables set up with stickers that say
'"Im an EVOLOOSHIONIST and Im proud"
or
"Let me in your house to tell you about EVOLOOSHIONISM".

So, its really no biggy anymore. The argument trick first posed by the YECKIES has sorta backfired on them,

I did not know that "Evolutionists" was a word that anybody objected to. From now on I will refrain from using it
By the way I never went to Liberty University. However, I do believe that the sexual relationship is special between a man and woman who are married to each other.

I relly dont object to it . Weve gotten to actually celebrate the term, to many of the YECs dismay.
My only question is how did you arrive at the conclusion that evolution scientists are "insecure"? Ill bet that i something you just made up. yes?

As far as using foul language I think that most people familiar with the theory of evolution wonder why the Fundamentalist Christians are so dense as to believe that Bible stories that seem to conflict with nature and even itself.

Your Bible contains two distinct Creation tales, neither of which stands up to evidence.