RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (2) < [1] 2 >   
  Topic: ID: treading water?, Is it a zero sum game?< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10756
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2006,08:12   

As ID has all but given up on research and is pretty much all ‘culture war’ these days, what will change in the future?

In all candor I believe, not much. Their epic struggle to win hearts and minds is somewhat moot, because it only really seams to appeal to the theistically inclined. If they keep fishing in the Christian pond, they’ll just find people affirming their own beliefs. These folks are much less likely to be bright, interested in science and inclined to do research so they’re not going to change the scientific landscape.

http://kspark.kaist.ac.kr/Jesus/Intelligence%20&%20religion.htm

With regard to the political Landscape, I think after the next election the religious right will be somewhat weakened. More importantly, there is an underlying trend that America is moving away from theism.

http://www.pollingreport.com/religion.htm

I suspect this is the real issue, the virus of faith is struggling to evolve to the modern, dynamic landscape.

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
stevestory



Posts: 10127
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2006,08:29   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Sep. 27 2006,14:12)
With regard to the political Landscape, I think after the next election the religious right will be somewhat weakened. More importantly, there is an underlying trend that America is moving away from theism.

http://www.pollingreport.com/religion.htm

I suspect this is the real issue, the virus of faith is struggling to evolve to the modern, dynamic landscape.

If you look at the long-term, religion is slowly dwindling in America.

But in the short term, one problem is that christianity seems to be radicalizing lately.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2006....03.html

   
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2006,09:03   

Quote (stevestory @ Sep. 27 2006,13:29)
Quote (Richardthughes @ Sep. 27 2006,14:12)
With regard to the political Landscape, I think after the next election the religious right will be somewhat weakened. More importantly, there is an underlying trend that America is moving away from theism.

http://www.pollingreport.com/religion.htm

I suspect this is the real issue, the virus of faith is struggling to evolve to the modern, dynamic landscape.

If you look at the long-term, religion is slowly dwindling in America.

But in the short term, one problem is that christianity seems to be radicalizing lately.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2006....03.html

Right, the number of people identifying as Christians in America is steadily declining about 0.9% a year.

But I think this decline and the radicalization of Christianity are definitely related. It's mostly the moderate Christian sects that are bleeding members, while the more fundy sects are growing. So the overall no. of Christians is declining, but the ones remaining are getting more and more radical and extreme. It's not hard to see this as a loop, where fundies become radicalize as they get frightened by secular trends in America, whereas people not prone to religious radicalism get more and more turned off by the Dobson types who are increasingly 'speaking for Christianity' these days, and simply leave organized religion. This in turn gets the fundies all twitterpated, and so on and so on.

I think this century is just going to get more and more polarized as American society continues to secularize and the fundies continue to get more and more freaked out by it. I think it'll get continue to get uglier and uglier. The majority of Americans simply do not want the theocratic state the fundies want, and I don't see that changing, but that's not making the fundies push any less hard for it.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Ved



Posts: 398
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2006,09:06   

That might be the same camp that was mentioned on Colbert last night. One lady was saying something like "I wish kids over here were as fanatical about Jesus as they are over there are about their religion."

Little Johnny, is your love for Jesus this big? (/holds up AK47) or this big? (/holds up grenade launcher)

The bullet said "Fighting Fire with Kids on Fire"...

  
stevestory



Posts: 10127
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2006,09:58   

Quote (Ved @ Sep. 27 2006,15:06)
That might be the same camp that was mentioned on Colbert last night. One lady was saying something like "I wish kids over here were as fanatical about Jesus as they are over there are about their religion."

Little Johnny, is your love for Jesus this big? (/holds up AK47) or this big? (/holds up grenade launcher)

The bullet said "Fighting Fire with Kids on Fire"...

That video...watching those kids learn to lose their minds and go wild gives me the howling fantods.

   
Stephen Elliott



Posts: 1754
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2006,10:12   

Quote (stevestory @ Sep. 27 2006,13:29)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2006....03.html

That video is pretty worrying. I have never really experienced Christian fundamentalism anything like that vid shows.

  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2006,13:07   

In the short run, both ID/fundamentalism and the neocons are dead.  Dead, dead, dead.

But once the Democans take power, look for the Republicrats to INCREASE their ties to the fundies and neocons, not decrease them.  The Republicrats need that power base --- they simply cannot survive without it.

The real fighting will begin, though, once it appears, in the future, that the Republicrats have another chance to take power.  The fundies are FINALLY beginning to realize that the Republicrats give them lip service and nothing else (not terribly bright, are they), and you can look for lots of table-pounding from them.  The neocons, on the other hand, think the fundies are nuts, and just keep them around to take their votes and their money.

The resulting civil war for control of the party will cripple the Republicrats for a long long time.

And on top of that, the periodic swing in politics from left to right to left to right, is about to swing left again.

And what a swing it will be . . . . . . .


The 60's were just a dress rehearsal.

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
tiredofthesos



Posts: 59
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2006,14:00   

The Bu--sh-- Coalition of the Stupid & Vicious should expect nothing but the coldest form of justice for the crimes they have managed to commit through their utter, perfect dishonesty and bullying.
 At the end of "The Ox-bow Incident," when the real sheriff puts the lynch mob under arrest, I recall him saying something like, "May God have mercy upon you, because I will not."
 If one regards the use of "God" as poetic, they should see how the investigations and prosecutions will be handled, though not doubt the media which has shielded and excused their rape of decency and the law will continue whoring themselves by asking for "reason" (covering up the depths of Bu--sh-- depravity)and "moderation" (not applying the laws as intended to white,rich Xians and their foul neocon tools). :angry:

  
skeptic



Posts: 1163
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2006,17:51   

I don't want to scare you guys too much but there was an article in USA Today that echos an article from earlier this spring discussing the demographics of the nation (US for our visitors from across the pond) and the outlook for conservatives and liberals.  It seems that a convergence of factors are increasing the numbers of children born to conservative households vs those in liberal households.  The prediction is that if these trends bear out then liberalism is slowing being bred out of the US which is a stark contrast to demographic shifts in Europe.  Just thought I'd let you guys know that the short-term may actually be much better off for you than the long-run.  While getting rid of Bush may be cause for celebration in certain circles it has very little long-term impact because there are much greater factors in play.  Consider it an example of natural selection.  By defintion, the fittest are those that reproduce and survive and in this case it seems that conservatives are out-producing their liberal counterparts.  Interesting irony.

  
mcc



Posts: 110
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2006,19:25   

Quote ("Rev Dr" Lenny Flank @ Sep. 27 2006,18:07)
But once the Democans take power, look for the Republicrats to INCREASE their ties to the fundies and neocons, not decrease them.  The Republicrats need that power base --- they simply cannot survive without it.

It seems to me there are noticeable portions of the Republican party whom are beginning to be unhappy with the amount of power the religious right holds within the Republican party (at least as of the peak of that power that we've seen under the Bush administration). And no, I'm not even talking about libertarians. I suspect the backlash we see from these people in the near future, if any, will probably be about equal regardless of the outcome of the 2006 elections.

  
Ichthyic



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2006,21:49   

Quote
Interesting irony.


it's not irony and it's not selection, but then you never really did understand the theory to begin with, did ya?

catholics are outreproducing protestants by a huge margin in mexico.

is that religious selection, ya think?

you really should spend more time thinking before you post.

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2006,02:12   

Quote (skeptic @ Sep. 27 2006,22:51)
I don't want to scare you guys too much but there was an article in USA Today that echos an article from earlier this spring discussing the demographics of the nation (US for our visitors from across the pond) and the outlook for conservatives and liberals.  It seems that a convergence of factors are increasing the numbers of children born to conservative households vs those in liberal households.  The prediction is that if these trends bear out then liberalism is slowing being bred out of the US which is a stark contrast to demographic shifts in Europe.  Just thought I'd let you guys know that the short-term may actually be much better off for you than the long-run.  While getting rid of Bush may be cause for celebration in certain circles it has very little long-term impact because there are much greater factors in play.  Consider it an example of natural selection.  By defintion, the fittest are those that reproduce and survive and in this case it seems that conservatives are out-producing their liberal counterparts.  Interesting irony.

You just keep telling yourself that, Skeptic.  (shrug)

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2006,02:27   

Quote (mcc @ Sep. 28 2006,00:25)
It seems to me there are noticeable portions of the Republican party whom are beginning to be unhappy with the amount of power the religious right holds within the Republican party (at least as of the peak of that power that we've seen under the Bush administration). And no, I'm not even talking about libertarians. I suspect the backlash we see from these people in the near future, if any, will probably be about equal regardless of the outcome of the 2006 elections.

Yes.  But the fundies and the neocons dominate all the Party machinery, and they still have huge influence in who gets into office and who doesn't (just ask McCain, who despite his contempt for them, had to kiss their ass anyway).

The moderate Republicans (McCain, Schwarzenneger, the other RINO's) will have one #### of a fight if they want to take back their party.  They'll have to replace the entire existing Republicrat power machinery.

But then, the right-wing nuts have already changed the political landscape in the US.  What once were considered to be lunatic John Birch Society positions are now mainstream, the far-right has become "centrist", the moderate right has become "left", and the real left has disappeared completely.  The Democans have attempted to keep up by out-Republicanning the Republicans, and both parties now accept virtually the same political program --- the US should rightfully run the the world as it sees fit, and anyone who doesn't like it can go to ####. Amerika uber alles.

The good news in all of this is that the fundies, who 20 years ago actually posed a very real threat, now do not.  Even the hard-right Republicans don't pay any attention to the fundies, and are happy to just take their money, take their votes, and then not do diddley for them.  So the real threat now are the neocons, who have shot themselves in the head in Iraq, but have managed to scare everyone into accepting their political program anyway.

In the 60's, the reaction against right-wing power and fear-mongering was pretty thoroughgoing (and it was all carried out by those very same kids-of-conservatives that Skeptic is crowing about).  I expect the same to happen once the Republicrats are out of power.  And, as in the 60's, I expect the Democans to oppose it just as much as the Republicrats do.

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2006,03:58   

Quote (skeptic @ Sep. 27 2006,22:51)
I don't want to scare you guys too much but there was an article in USA Today that echos an article from earlier this spring discussing the demographics of the nation (US for our visitors from across the pond) and the outlook for conservatives and liberals.  It seems that a convergence of factors are increasing the numbers of children born to conservative households vs those in liberal households.  The prediction is that if these trends bear out then liberalism is slowing being bred out of the US which is a stark contrast to demographic shifts in Europe.  Just thought I'd let you guys know that the short-term may actually be much better off for you than the long-run.  While getting rid of Bush may be cause for celebration in certain circles it has very little long-term impact because there are much greater factors in play.  Consider it an example of natural selection.  By defintion, the fittest are those that reproduce and survive and in this case it seems that conservatives are out-producing their liberal counterparts.  Interesting irony.

So even tho he doesn't believe in evolution, Skeptic does apparently believe that party affiliation is genetic...

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
k.e



Posts: 1948
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2006,04:28   

Arden:
Quote
So even tho he doesn't believe in evolution, Skeptic [b]does[b/] apparently believe that party affiliation is genetic...


And is a social 'Darwinist'....

Septic:
Quote
By definition, the fittest are those that reproduce and survive and in this case it seems that conservatives are out-producing their liberal counterparts.  Interesting irony.


Indeed the irony is .....that the political and religious conservative plutocrats whose biggest fear is that 'Darwinism' leads to atheism and the breakdown of society because it makes 'god' irrelevant and reduces mankind to raw flesh eating animals and a fear that the law of the jungle will predominate ...actually support a breeding program that would allow success of a particular species of political animal to gain the upper hand by a dominant population wiping out a weaker opposition in the fight for resources in the environment.....aka... the law of the jungle or natural selection.

--------------
The conservative has but little to fear from the man whose reason is the servant of his passions, but let him beware of him in whom reason has become the greatest and most terrible of the passions.These are the wreckers of outworn empires and civilisations, doubters, disintegrators, deicides.Haldane

   
incorygible



Posts: 374
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2006,04:28   

Okay, admittedly I don't know the nuances of political partisanship for ALL news programs in the States. Could someone please tell me if the introduction to the most critical voice in that Jesus Camp piece was tongue-in-cheek?

"?Lauren? Sandler, who is a secular liberal feminist from New York City, ..."

  
Ved



Posts: 398
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2006,04:56   

Well, now that I've been home from work and actually watched that vid, I see my paraphrase wasn't the best (dang drug-addled brain). But that was the one, it was "good" to see the rest of it. Speaking in tounges??? We need them to do that more often so they won't even be able to understand each other!

  
Ved



Posts: 398
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2006,05:20   

"secular"=bad word
"liberal"=bad word
"feminist"=bad word
"from New York City"=bad word
I suppose it's her technical description, and one might need all those words to distinguish her from the subjects of the film, but I would describe her as just "a person"  :p

Quote ("skeptic" @ ,)
By definition, the fittest are those that reproduce and survive and in this case it seems that conservatives are out-producing their liberal counterparts.  Interesting irony.

How do you know they are surviving? Also, there are two different strategies to producing offspring. Quantity, and Quality. They are kind of old fashioned I guess, so they might as well go back to being salmon in a stream.

Am I not successful because I haven't bred yet?

  
k.e



Posts: 1948
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2006,05:36   

Quote
Okay, admittedly I don't know the nuances of political partisanship for ALL news programs in the States. Could someone please tell me if the introduction to the most critical voice in that Jesus Camp piece was tongue-in-cheek?

"?Lauren? Sandler, who is a secular liberal feminist from New York City, ..."


I too would be interested in that question now that incorygible has raised it.
It didn't seem that way to me.
It's almost as if they were saying she 'is a baby eating, church burning, ebola girl' so don't call this TV station we just show the news and a whole lot of kids immitating Linda Blair IS NEWS.

What an excellent day for an exorcism.


Psychiatrist: Is there someone inside you?
Regan MacNeil: Sometimes.
Psychiatrist: Who is it?
Regan MacNeil: I don't know.
Psychiatrist: Is it Captain Howdy?
Regan MacNeil: I don't know.
Psychiatrist: If I ask him to tell me, will you let him answer?
Regan MacNeil: No.
Psychiatrist: Why not?
Regan MacNeil: I'm afraid.


--------------
The conservative has but little to fear from the man whose reason is the servant of his passions, but let him beware of him in whom reason has become the greatest and most terrible of the passions.These are the wreckers of outworn empires and civilisations, doubters, disintegrators, deicides.Haldane

   
incorygible



Posts: 374
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2006,06:09   

If it's not tongue-in-cheek, they could at least have used technically accurate code that would poison the well in similar fashion, (e.g., "Lauren Sandler, a New York City journalist with a background in cultural studies"). But I guess the American right and its media proponents don't even strive for a thin veneer of objectivity (or even"plausible deniability") anymore?

  
skeptic



Posts: 1163
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 29 2006,18:14   

Once again, there's no conspiracy here, no conservative breeding program just census bureau facts.  I know facts are a tough thing to deal with sometimes and they tend to rattle the echo-chambers that many live in but don't worry you guys seem to be well insulated.  As far as the reasons why, well there could be many different variables driving this trend, who knows and who cares.  More important than the actual topic I find your reactions to it very amusing.

and Ved according to Darwin (or my interpretation, that sound better Ichy) you are not successful unless you reproduce and reproduce well.  How would we define that?  Well that's a conversation for another day but I would warn you of an impending contradiction should you go down that road.  Better to ask first are humans currently evolving?

  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 30 2006,17:07   

You just keep telling yourself that, Skeptic.  (shrug)

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
skeptic



Posts: 1163
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 01 2006,01:49   

and what would that be, Rev?

  
Alan Fox



Posts: 1391
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 01 2006,06:55   

Quote
As ID has all but given up on research


All but given up? The implication is there was something to give up, and a little bit not yet given up. What was that, pray?

OT Senator McCain was interviewed on UK TV today. Compared to Bush, he seems an intellectual giant. Not my place to say, but I reckon he would be an improvement as a potential president.

  
Stephen Elliott



Posts: 1754
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 01 2006,07:01   

Quote (Alan Fox @ Oct. 01 2006,11:55)
Quote
As ID has all but given up on research


All but given up? The implication is there was something to give up, and a little bit not yet given up. What was that, pray?

OT Senator McCain was interviewed on UK TV today. Compared to Bush, he seems an intellectual giant. Not my place to say, but I reckon he would be an improvement as a potential president.

I believe that IDists do actual research.



They research book sales, apearance fees, site hits, opinion polls etc. etc. etc.=Lots of research.

  
skeptic



Posts: 1163
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 01 2006,13:50   

that would be Market Research and judging by book sales I think you'd have to agree that they're getting very good at it.  Maybe they can get that published...

  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 01 2006,17:20   

Quote (skeptic @ Oct. 01 2006,18:50)
that would be Market Research and judging by book sales I think you'd have to agree that they're getting very good at it.  Maybe they can get that published...

The flying saucer kooks routinely outsell all of the ID "luminaries".


Anyway, a quick look at Amazon.com reveals:

Ranking for Dembski's "magnum opus"  _No Free Lunch_:

489,236

Ranking for Hitler's _Mein Kampf_:

132,302



Yes, that's right --- Dembski is being outsold, four to one, by a lunatic dictator who shot himself in the head sixty years ago.

(shrug)

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 01 2006,18:34   

Quote
Yes, that's right --- Dembski is being outsold, four to one, by a lunatic dictator who shot himself in the head sixty years ago.


Well, Lenny, we both know there's a very simple reason for that.

Hitler had a massive impact on the history of the world in the 20th century. Caused a war, killed millions of people, turned Europe upside down. Set the world up for the start of the Cold War. A book of his self-indulgent rantings provides a lot of insights as to why he did it all. That's of interest to a lot of people.

Dembski? He's a dishonest shmuck who teaches at a jerkwater Bible college in Texas who isn't taken seriously by anyone with any credentials in any of the fields he purports to write about. He churns out ridiculous books and sells them to gullible people for a living. In 10-20 years (generously) he'll be a very minor footnote in the history of American fundamentalism's attempts to wreck science and higher learning.

Hard not to see who's more, uh, important.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
The Ghost of Paley



Posts: 1703
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 02 2006,05:23   

Skeptic:

 
Quote
Once again, there's no conspiracy here, no conservative breeding program just census bureau facts.  I know facts are a tough thing to deal with sometimes and they tend to rattle the echo-chambers that many live in but don't worry you guys seem to be well insulated.  As far as the reasons why, well there could be many different variables driving this trend, who knows and who cares.  More important than the actual topic I find your reactions to it very amusing.

and Ved according to Darwin (or my interpretation, that sound better Ichy) you are not successful unless you reproduce and reproduce well.  How would we define that?  Well that's a conversation for another day but I would warn you of an impending contradiction should you go down that road.  Better to ask first are humans currently evolving?


Well said. I can't believe people are giving you grief for stating a simple fact. One doesn't have to like this trend to acknowledge its existence.

--------------
Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10756
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 02 2006,05:30   

Politics - nurture or nature? Take your time, GoP, as it's you, I'll give you three guesses...

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
deadman_932



Posts: 3094
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 02 2006,05:52   

The USA Today Op-Ed piece is found here: http://www.usatoday.com/news....t_x.htm . The European polling data mentioned in the article from Ron Lesthaeghe and Johan Surkyn can be found here:   http://econpapers.repec.org/article....3A3.htm .

The conclusions reached in the article made me think of a few historical situations that run counter to the thesis, like the 1960's -- I don't think that generation of liberals arose from anything else but a conservative majority. Granted, the majority remained conservative, but a large percentage did not. Political ideology is subject to too many variables to be so glibly forecast.

--------------
AtBC Award for Thoroughness in the Face of Creationism

  
Ichthyic



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 02 2006,10:19   

Quote
One doesn't have to like this trend to acknowledge its existence.


yes, but this "trend" has nothing to do with selection or evolution, which is why i mentioned the preponderance of catholics in mexico.

it isn't "knowledge", but is a mere misrepresentation of observation based on ignorance.

something you and skeptic seem to share.

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 02 2006,15:49   

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Oct. 01 2006,23:34)
Quote
Yes, that's right --- Dembski is being outsold, four to one, by a lunatic dictator who shot himself in the head sixty years ago.


Well, Lenny, we both know there's a very simple reason for that.

Hitler had a massive impact on the history of the world in the 20th century. Caused a war, killed millions of people, turned Europe upside down. Set the world up for the start of the Cold War. A book of his self-indulgent rantings provides a lot of insights as to why he did it all. That's of interest to a lot of people.

Dembski? He's a dishonest shmuck who teaches at a jerkwater Bible college in Texas who isn't taken seriously by anyone with any credentials in any of the fields he purports to write about. He churns out ridiculous books and sells them to gullible people for a living. In 10-20 years (generously) he'll be a very minor footnote in the history of American fundamentalism's attempts to wreck science and higher learning.

Hard not to see who's more, uh, important.

Come on, more important than THE ISAAC NEWTON OF INFORMATION THEORY ??????????

;)

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
  32 replies since Sep. 27 2006,08:12 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (2) < [1] 2 >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]