AE BB DB Explorer


Action:
Author:
Search Terms (separate with commas, no spaces):


form_srcid: MidnightVoice

form_srcid: MidnightVoice

form_cmd: view_author

Your IP address is 54.204.215.209

View Author detected.

view author posts with search matches:

Retrieve source record and display it.

form_author:

form_srcid: MidnightVoice

q: SELECT AUTHOR, MEMBER_NAME, IP_ADDR, POST_DATE, TOPIC_ID, t1.FORUM_ID, POST, POST_ID, FORUM_VIEW_THREADS from ib_forum_posts AS t1 LEFT JOIN (ib_member_profiles AS t2, ib_forum_info AS t3) ON (t1.forum_id = t3.forum_id AND t1.author = t2.member_id) WHERE MEMBER_NAME like 'MidnightVoice%' and forum_view_threads LIKE '*' ORDER BY POST_DATE ASC

DB_err:

DB_result: Resource id #4

Date: 2005/08/28 10:16:33, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
http://www.ncseweb.org/resourc....005.asp

Well, Memphis TN is trying the same tired old thing.

Textbook disclaimer proposed in Shelby County
A member of the board of education of the Shelby County Schools has proposed a textbook disclaimer sticker for biology books used in the district. Shelby County surrounds the city of Memphis. According to news reports from the Associated Press and the Memphis Commercial Appeal, board member Wyatt Bunker made the suggestion at the February 15 board meeting. The proposed text of the sticker reads

''This textbook contains material on scientific theories about creation. There are many scientific and religious theories about the nature and diversity of living things. All theories should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered.''

The school board reportedly deferred any action, with several members questioning whether a disclaimer was necessary and whether it might trigger an expensive court battle. Mr. Bunker was quoted by the Commercial Appeal as saying that he is "concerned that students are being taught only scientific theories such as evolution and the Big Bang." He also told the newspaper that "several board members have been dismayed that no state-approved texts teach the religious creationism approach along with scientific theories."

February 21, 2005

Date: 2005/08/28 10:22:40, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
http://www.venganza.org/

OPEN LETTER TO KANSAS SCHOOL BOARD

I am writing you with much concern after having read of your hearing to decide whether the alternative theory of Intelligent Design should be taught along with the theory of Evolution. I think we can all agree that it is important for students to hear multiple viewpoints so they can choose for themselves the theory that makes the most sense to them. I am concerned, however, that students will only hear one theory of Intelligent Design.

Let us remember that there are multiple theories of Intelligent Design. I and many others around the world are of the strong belief that the universe was created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster. It was He who created all that we see and all that we feel. We feel strongly that the overwhelming scientific evidence pointing towards evolutionary processes is nothing but a coincidence, put in place by Him.

It is for this reason that I’m writing you today, to formally request that this alternative theory be taught in your schools, along with the other two theories. In fact, I will go so far as to say, if you do not agree to do this, we will be forced to proceed with legal action. I’m sure you see where we are coming from. If the Intelligent Design theory is not based on faith, but instead another scientific theory, as is claimed, then you must also allow our theory to be taught, as it is also based on science, not on faith.

.....more

:)

Date: 2005/08/28 10:30:58, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
One way to get round the current impasse in the States is to persuade the AAAS or a similar body to make an announcement at the next Annual Conference.  Some thing along the lines of  “Having passed all the required scientific analyses for over a Century, we hereby declare that evolution is no longer a theory, but has the status of a law.  

As a corollary to this, as it is now a Law, no alternate theories need be taught, and such theories should be rigorously excluded from text books at any level.  “

Date: 2005/08/29 05:21:22, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
My big question in all this is why it is only evolution and anything assiated with it that is a scientific fraud?  Why do all other fields get a free pass?  If that is not a true indication of a religous rather than a scientific agends, I don't know what is.

Date: 2005/08/29 06:33:25, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Interesting that you mention only the American people.  Doesn't the rest of the world count?

And I find it fascinating that the only real anti-evolutionists are a minor Christian cult in the United States - the rest of the world by and large ignores such inscientific ideas.  

Something to do with American education, or lack of it, maybe?  CP Snow would be having a field day were he still alive!

Date: 2005/08/29 12:01:59, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Did anything happen here?  :D

Date: 2005/08/30 10:54:33, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (evopeach @ Aug. 30 2005,09:34)
The poll showed the overwhelming sentiment by people that the ID and IC etc. should be taught , that its good to have some debate and open controvesy, that  kids and adults do have brains and can sort it out and that ther is merit in the ID and IC schema.

I agree absolutely that ID and Creatioism should be taught, but in their proper place - Religous education classes.  They do NOT belong in science classes because they are not scientific disciplines.  They are as scientific as numerology, alchemy, astrology etc.

This has nothing to do with the Bible, or God, it is merely that science is science and they are not.  And scientifically, there is no dispute about evolution, merely about its mechanism.

Date: 2005/09/08 07:10:35, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
To everyone except Evopeach:

I think you should leave the poor guy alone to his irrelevant ramblings.  They are hardly a threat to the Law of Evolution.  Everything will become clear to his descendents in time.   :D

Date: 2005/09/08 11:32:49, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (GCT @ Sep. 08 2005,13:00)
Interesting,
So, gc is 1, unless you change the units (not the actual system) and then it becomes some other value, even though the system didn't change, but the result somehow did.  Got it.  Moron.

Lie number 1 from you:
The 2% figure.

Lie number 2 from you:
Quote mine that I pointed out.

Lie number 3 from you:
Misrepresenting my position (multiple times, but I'll give you just one lie for it.)

Lie number 4 from you:
Asserting already debunked Creationist claims.

Lie number 5 from you:
Saying that you did not challenge anyone to look at any text book on modern biology and answer your questions.

Lie number 6 from you:
Saying that Wikipedia backs up your claim when it clearly did not.

Lie number 7 from you:
Falsely claiming scientists are frauds and liars without any evidence.

Also, evasions:
1.  Side bar on F=ma and totally ignoring the reason it was brought up.
2.  Threatening to bring mounds of quotes that were never produced.
3.  Talking nebulously about SLOT, but never backing up why it is a supposed problem for evolution.

I'm sure I could find more, but I'm just going off of memory.

Midnight Voice, I agree with you whole-heartedly.  The only reason I engaged this yahoo was to show that creationists can't make arguments without resorting to distortions, evasions, and outright lies.  I just thought it would be funny, especially with the ironic title of this post.

No sweat.  You see I have a secret - I know the truth because I talked to God - and Boy!! is she pissed at you lot!!  :D

Date: 2005/09/09 05:56:33, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (GCT @ Sep. 08 2005,17:34)
MidnightVoice said:

Quote
You see I have a secret - I know the truth because I talked to God


Did you talk over the phone?  What's the number?  I want to call her up and see if she's free tomorrow night. :)

I am keeping that to myself.  She is hot  :D

Date: 2005/09/09 07:44:45, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (GCT @ Sep. 09 2005,11:37)
Quote (MidnightVoice @ Sep. 09 2005,10:56)

I am keeping that to myself.  She is hot  :D

Hey MV, I hear she's got enough "love" for all of us. :p

I'm greedy.  And I was naturally selected for a conversation.  It might evolve into something more serious.  :D

Date: 2005/09/15 08:19:10, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (evopeach @ Sep. 14 2005,16:48)
The egomaniacs who make up the evolutionary community are of course primarily interested in demonstrating the superiority of their intellect by whatever means

Sorry old bean, but you are a tad in error here.  The majority of those supporting evolutionary theory are primarily interested in keeping religion out of science classes and keeping it in religous education classes; and in demonstrating the validity of the Law of Evolution.  Most of them have read their history books, and know that the earth is not flat, the sun does go around the earth, the solar system is not at the center of the universe and the earth was not created in 6 days.

And furthermore, many of them believe in a God of some description, and are members of one of the mainstream religous groups.  It is mainly in America that a minority cult of Christians has a problem with science, and I partly blame the lack of a good educational system for that.

Date: 2005/09/16 05:59:31, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin....=1;t=34


:D Beat you to it!

Date: 2005/09/16 07:47:40, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (DonFernando @ Sep. 16 2005,12:29)
oops- may He forgive me!  :(

Better to have it posted twice rather than not at all.

Anything we can to demonstrate the lack if intellectual honest and intelligence that seems to be present in the ID camp.  :D

Date: 2005/09/16 08:48:06, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Home mad pasta!!

Date: 2005/09/19 04:40:41, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (evopeach @ Sep. 16 2005,16:10)
PLease enlighten me as to a few people in the ID or IC movement who hold that the earth is flat, etc.

Otherwise I might conclude you are just another clown throwing up meaingless red herrings.

Just waht is the LAW of evolution since its never been described as a such before.

I was merely putting creationism in a historical context - religion usuaally fights science in certain areas, and eventually accepts reality.

Evolution is as close to a Biological Law as gravity is a physical.  It is a Law in the sense that it is accepted as accurate, and no one with valid scientific credentials suggests otherwise.  It is merely that some of the mechanisms are theories.

Date: 2005/09/22 09:04:20, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (evopeach @ Sep. 22 2005,13:48)
4) Don't waste taxpayers dollars on origin of life experiments by the billions trying to prove there is no God, which after 100 years are 100% failures.

Wow - we agree on something!!  Thank God (:D) that science is not trying to prove there is no God.

Science is mute on this matter, as it deals with the natural and leaves the supernatural to religion.  Some scientists are, however, far from mute on this subject.  Richard D comes to mind, but one should be able to separate his scientific arguments for evolution from his philosophical and logical arguments against the existence of God.

Date: 2005/09/23 06:27:57, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Alan Fox @ Sep. 22 2005,15:55)
What purpose is served by responding to the drivel served up by Evopeach?

I had come to a similar conclusion  :)

Date: 2005/09/25 11:33:17, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (kurt @ Sep. 23 2005,19:52)
I am a bio teacher and a huge fan of evolution.  I integrate it throughout my curriculum and am psyched to the collegeboard adopt a new design centered on evolution (which any biology class that makes sense has to be).  We discuss intelligent design and creationism and the reasons why people may choose to reject scientific discoveries.  

Having had many conversations on this awesome topic, I often wonder whether allowing students to make the choice of accepting ID might not be such a bad idea.  Of course, recognizing that there is no evidence for it whatsoever and it obviously must be taken on faith, is it wrong to let them hang on to ID?  

Although I truly enjoy discussing religion (I'm an atheist), my goal is not to convince students that god or spirits or whatever don't exist, but rather to let them see the difference between science and faith, and to allow them to accept both.  ID seems like a good compromise.  

I think the important thing is for them to see what a beautiful perspective of life's history we have discovered.  Evolution is cool, and I want them to see it.  If I make it a choice between science and religion, then I am guaranteed to lose many of them.  I could  say that what looks like its random mutations could be directed by a higher power, but we'll never know because it wil always appear random to us.  This is true and I certainly don't need to buy into that, but do I really care if they do?   They will still have a true knowledge of evolution and may find a way to reconcile it with their personal beliefs.

My problem is not with a higher power ar any problem with religion - it is teaching the difference between science and not science, which I think is crucial.

Let them belive in ID in private, but in the classroom can you give anyone a high grade who calls it science?  Why not allow them to believe in Alchemy, numerology, astrology of the flying spaghetti monster?

Date: 2005/09/28 08:06:28, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (evopeach @ Sep. 28 2005,09:13)
Biology is one of the narrowest of all fields of study

Now that is an interesting concept!!

And one that displays a truly staggering lack of understanding of understanding of education, the world, and the English language.  :D

Date: 2005/09/28 09:19:17, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
http://media.the-scientist.com/talkingpoints/

The Scientist (a magazine) has just opened a forum to discuss various aspects of science:

How do scientists communicate with one another and with the public? Is discussion becoming polarized, oversimplified or exaggerated? Here at The Scientist, we've had cause to wonder, and many recent events have made us feel that we all need a place to talk sensibly and rationally about the many things that affect us as a community.

Our discussion forums, "Talking Points", will enable free-flowing exchanges of opinions and ideas among members of the life sciences community. If you want to read, it's open to all. If you want to post, all we ask is that you become a registered user and log in. Registration is free.

We're launching "Talking Points" with access to three forums: covering the role of evolutionary theory in experimental biology, the question of researchers hyping stem cell research and the stories of Hurricane Katrina's aftermath - which we hope will become part of a support network for displaced scientists. We'll add other topics regularly.

To reprise the catchphrase of an old British advertisement: "It's good to talk."


One of the forums is:

Why do we invoke Darwin?

http://media.the-scientist.com/talkingpoints/display/112/

Date: 2005/09/28 09:22:18, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
And could some kind Mod or Admin please correct my really terrible spelling in the thread title?  :D

Sorry about that.

Date: 2005/09/28 10:32:00, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
http://aclupa.blogspot.com/

Daily briefings

http://www.aclupa.org/legal....ial.htm

List of media reports

Date: 2005/09/29 05:42:43, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Hmmmm

Annoying: The state of being a hindrance to harmonious, or even interesting, discussion. Repeatedly being annoying will be considered excessively annoying.
:Excessively annoying: The state of being a hindrance to harmonious, or even interesting, discussion to such a degree that immediate termination of access is warranted or demanded.

:D

Date: 2005/09/29 08:11:40, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Wonderpants @ Sep. 29 2005,12:45)
Really? In that case, I look forward to the Flying Spaghetti Monster replacing creationi.....ID. It has as much evidence as ID, after all.

Lets be sensible here, of all the psuedosciences and junk science, Astrology is the only one that has more supporting evidence than ID.

Actually, it is the only one that has any evidence.  :D

Date: 2005/09/29 08:20:56, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (evopeach @ Sep. 29 2005,11:14)
When an entire body of true believers is in a state of dysfunction and denial its simply impossible to carry on an intellectual discussion.

Perfect description of the proponents of ID and creationism!

But eventually they will be cured, as America slowly matures and joins the rest of the world.  This particular minor cult will then go the way of the flat earthers.

Date: 2005/09/29 09:47:15, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Maven @ Aug. 29 2005,08:24)
Then what happens to faith built on the so-called evidence for a designer? Does that faith waiver when the ''evidence'' disappears? Faith should not require scientific evidence; looking for physical evidence of a designer only serves to undermine faith. Scientists are battling to keep intelligent  design out of the science classroom because it is not science. Religious leaders
should join the fight.

When I was young I was taught that Faith was Faith.  Belief in God without proof was a basic part of the teachings.  I am horrified when I see these people trying to prove the existence of a God, and as pointed out, what happens when their "proof" goes away?

Date: 2005/10/03 10:16:46, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (evopeach @ Oct. 03 2005,13:42)
When tallying the data I'd stay away fromm the "bad designer" argument, especially regarding the so called poorly designed mammalian eye.

This months ICR journal contains an analysis of this issue in the context of rebutting the sophmoric analysis of one of you Dover boys, Miller I believe.

By the time the two "superemely qualified" writers fininsh with that goathead he should stick to dissecting frogs for a HS biology class.

Really its pitiful the lack of analytical ability and real in depth knowlwdge in the evo community... laughable.

Evopeach

http://www.icr.org/index.p....ID=2476

just so people can easily read it and see that it is irrelevant to any discussions on evolution.

Date: 2005/10/03 10:24:58, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Biochemistry – 8 years

Biophysics – 3 years

Microbiology – 5 years

Analytical Chemistry – 6 years

Molecular Biology – 5 years

:D

Date: 2005/10/04 02:54:29, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
And one of the most convincing arguments against an intelligent designer is the fact that Creationists exist.  :D

Date: 2005/10/04 10:58:06, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (evopeach @ Oct. 04 2005,10:14)
Midnight,

I am convinced you have a firm grasp of biology and such chemistry as relates thereto. My purpose is that in the current arena the more robust and wide spectrum studies of the advanced degreed engineer is more likely to have a realistic grasp of all the science, math, physical laws etc, regarding evolution than the most outspoken, most committed evolutionists. Yet the credentials of engineers are insultingly belittled regarding math, physics, chemistry , thermo, materials in addition to the life science where they ARE the least trained as though thats all that matters.

Thanks for your Intellectual Honesty.

I am not belittling engineers.  But their grasp of biology is no better, and frequently worse, than my grasp of engineering

Date: 2005/10/04 11:17:08, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (evopeach @ Oct. 04 2005,15:30)
Ultimately the ability of anyone including science teachers to present the ID argument will win because the fundamental principle is that of Free Speech and not the separation of church and state. The case of most merit is the Scopes Trial where it was not the separation argument but rather the denial of information and free speech that won the day.

People in America understand that our strength lies in free speech because that is the critical tool that enables the marketplace of ideas to function in the public square.

If the ideas of ID are not meritorius in the eyes of the entirety of the student and adult population it will fade and die quickly, much more quickly than scientific theories which become intellectual protectorates, escounced and enthroned despite their faults and failings for reason of money (grant funding to study origins, for instance: rna first, protein first and enzyme first and dna first and clay first and silicon first, ad finitum); prestiege, tenure and textbook royalties to name a few.

If ID proves meritorius and practical upon application over time it deserves the full and complete attention of the scientific community as a superior explanation of the natural world.

The American people, the wisest and best in all the world, understand these things very well and that (not stupidity , ignorance, and religion) is the reason polls always and forever show that the great majority prefer that alternative explanations of the natrual world be given in science classes, by 2:1 margins.

The American people and their duly elected representatives and the courts are divided here but a strict constructionist supreme court , now an absolute certainty, will certainly take the view that free speech a clear and unmistakable right trumpts the recent and questionable hyperleft separation of state interpretation of the Warren oriented courts.

Maybe not at Dover but soon,very soon the elitest misquided dogmatic majority element of the scientific education community will be humbled by the will of the American people, their common sense, their experience with free speech and the open debate of ideas and on that day the Supreme Court will set the nation on a course to return to just such a preeminently important state of affairs.

There is always an argument against the presentation of alternatives ideas that oppose deeply held views by some powerful and well placed elite minority and they prevail at great expense to the majority in many ways for a while; but, it simply cannot be maintained in the face of the will of the people in our system forever and forever is one more confirmed appointment away.

I wouldn't bet on the next generation being quite so easily brainwashed as the last few have, they are familiar with snobbery, egomania, herding and such and they think quite well for themselves, thank you. All they need is access and a level playing field and they'll figure it out in a New York Minute.

That's why your team is whistleing past the graveyard as we speak... in desperate tones.

Free Speech?  Let me use an analogy.  If one goes to a French class, one is expected to learn French.  If one is taught Latin instead, then one will fail the exam and the teacher has blundered.  Similarly, if one goes to a Biology class, one is there to learn biology, and if one learns religion, one will fail the biology exam and the teacher has blundered.

Yes free speech is important, and the Creationists are allowed to spread their ideas in the appropriate place, which is not a science class.  Just as there are restrictions of free speech, such as hate speech and shouting “Fire” in a crowded theater, there are restrictions on teaching religion in schools, and expectations of teaching the content of the subject in question, and not some other completely different subject.

As for the American people being the wisest and best in the world, well, Ye Gods and Little Fishes, they might be that, but they are certainly not the best educated.  Fortunately, they are isolated amongst developed countries both in the strength of their religious convictions (they are the least secular of the developed world) and in their lack of education in science.  And I must emphasize that in the broader context of worldwide Religion, it is only a minority cult in America that cannot understand, and hence rejects, evolution.

And minority scientific views are welcome, and if they prove correct after scientific analysis, they often win the Nobel prize, as shown this year and with Peter Mitchell and the chemi-osmotic theory (although personally, I believe the concept of vectorial proton translocation was equally important).  In both cases the proponents allowed their scientific theories to be tested, and in the end their idea were validated.  Just like evolution.

Date: 2005/10/05 07:12:25, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (evopeach @ Oct. 05 2005,08:29)
If the American people are so uneducated, ignorant and behind the rest of the world is it God's providence that we are the most developed, generous, wealthy, advanced in science and technology the world has ever seen.

Actually old bean we are one of the least generous of the developed nations, both in terms of foreign aid and how we treat our own citizens (inequality in the USA is greater than in most developed countries).  And the fact that most Americans don not know either of those facts says volumes about our educational system. And I guess explains why so many of our population do not understand the Law of Evolution.

Date: 2005/10/05 09:17:14, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (evopeach @ Oct. 05 2005,12:01)
No you can take it that your arguments are so specious and you have zero credibility and I don't thow pearls to swine.

Now go marry two women, start a brothel, shoot some senior citizens or whatever fun thing turns you on today.

Bye Bye Pig Barf

Well, at least you silly abuse clears one thing up.  You are obviously not a practicing Christian!

Date: 2005/10/05 12:46:49, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (evopeach @ Oct. 05 2005,17:02)
I just looked up the aid to developing countries as a percenmtage of GNP equivalent and per capita and gross dollars and USA leads in every category for the last 25 years at least. Try it yourself meatball.

Facts please not assertions... you read like an evolutionist.. oh thats right you are one.

Certainly.  But first I must request that you cease to use abuse as a discussion tool, at least when directed at me.



The United States ranks last among the world's 28 top foreign aid donor countries, and its foreign assistance levels have dropped dramatically over the past 10 years, according to the United Nations Human Development Report (2002). When you look at countries' foreign aid relative to the size of their economies, the United States is devoting 0.1 per cent of its gross national product (GNP) to help the world's poorest countries, less than any other industrialized nation.

http://hdr.undp.org/

"[Americans] are regularly told by politicians and the media, that America is the world's most generous nation. This is one of the most conventional pieces of 'knowledgeable ignorance'. According to the OECD, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, the US gave between $6 and $15 billion in foreign aid in the period between 1995 and 1999. In absolute terms, Japan gives more than the US, between $9 and $15 billion in the same period. But the absolute figures are less significant than the proportion of gross domestic product (GDP, or national wealth) that a country devotes to foreign aid. On that league table, the US ranks twenty-second of the 22 most developed nations. As former President Jimmy Carter commented: 'We are the stingiest nation of all'. Denmark is top of the table, giving 1.01% of GDP, while the US manages just 0.1%. The United Nations has long established the target of 0.7% GDP for development assistance, although only four countries actually achieve this: Denmark, 1.01%; Norway, 0.91%; the Netherlands, 0.79%; Sweden, 0.7%. Apart from being the least generous nation, the US is highly selective in who receives its aid. Over 50% of its aid budget is spent on middle-income countries in the Middle East, with Israel being the recipient of the largest single share"

http://www.vexen.co.uk/USA/foreign_aid.html

Norway 0.92
Denmark 0.84
Netherlands 0.81
Luxembourg 0.8
Sweden 0.7
Belgium 0.61
France 0.41
Ireland 0.41
Switzerland 0.38
Finland 0.34
United Kingdom 0.34
Germany 0.28
Canada 0.26
Australia 0.25
Spain 0.25
New Zealand 0.23
Greece 0.21
Portugal 0.21
Austria 0.2
Japan 0.2
Italy 0.16
United States 0.14




http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/42/61/31504039.pdf

Please note I have given web addresses and tables.  I am afraid that your assertion that the USA leads in every category for the last 25 years is demonstrably false.  I would assume most posters would have already guessed that, as you were unable to provide a link.

Date: 2005/10/06 06:02:22, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (evopeach @ Oct. 05 2005,17:02)
I just looked up the aid to developing countries as a percenmtage of GNP equivalent and per capita and gross dollars and USA leads in every category for the last 25 years at least. Try it yourself meatball.

Facts please not assertions... you read like an evolutionist.. oh thats right you are one.

Dear evopeach.  You specifically stated, and the quote is below, that "aid to developing countries as a percenmtage of GNP.....USA leads in every category for the last 25 years at least"  Apart from the spelling, that statement is incorrect.

As you were wrong in your statement, I expect you to admit your error and apologize for the insult.

Date: 2005/10/06 08:10:16, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (evopeach @ Oct. 06 2005,11:12)
What I did not say was to use only foreign aid as the calculus so please review the money given in total from all American sources not just the government allocation.

GDP is a great measure of economic activity for the denominator but the numerator has to include all sources of giving because Americans are the most personally cheritable in the world.... except Al Gore of course.

Hey - go read what you posted.  It is factually incorrect, and I documented that with links.  I can only go by what you actually wrote, not what you wish you had written.

Of course, just like the Bible, I suppose you are inerrant.  I see it makes it difficult for you to admit making a mistake.  It clearly demonstrates, however, you total and absolute lack of Intellectual Honesty.  It is here in the public domain for all to see.

Date: 2005/10/06 09:16:24, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (GCT @ Oct. 06 2005,13:44)
Quote
Midnight,

I am convinced you have a firm grasp of biology and such chemistry as relates thereto.

'You're just wrong is all.'

:p

He forgot physics I had to learn to do biophysics, and I forgot to mention all the years in the bioprocessing industries, working on the engineering of food and beverage production.  And I forgot to mention the years I spent on the Advisory Committee for a State University Engineering School.  :D

Date: 2005/10/06 09:34:14, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Wonderpants @ Oct. 06 2005,14:15)
:02-->
Quote (MidnightVoice @ Oct. 06 2005,11:02)
[quote=evopeach,Oct. 05 2005,17:0]I just looked up the aid to developing countries as a percenmtage of GNP equivalent and per capita and gross dollars and USA leads in every category for the last 25 years at least. Try it yourself meatball.

Facts please not assertions... you read like an evolutionist.. oh thats right you are one.

Dear evopeach.  You specifically stated, and the quote is below, that "aid to developing countries as a percenmtage of GNP.....USA leads in every category for the last 25 years at least"  Apart from the spelling, that statement is incorrect.[/quote]
Which is backed up according to this page:

http://www.oecd.org/documen....00.html

No doubt Evopeach will further demonstrate his lack of civility and respect for Christian principles by insulting me in response.  <!--emo&:D

To quote Ghandi - I like your Christ.  It is your Christians I do not like.  :D

Date: 2005/10/07 03:18:30, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ Oct. 06 2005,17:57)
Ignorant, evil evolutionists deny reality becuase deep in their hearts they know they will have to answer to God for their heinous misdeeds. I can't wait to watch him send you all to the Lake of Fire at the Final Judgment!

Aw, c'mon, she is much nicer than that.  :D

Date: 2005/10/07 03:22:56, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Once more those who cannot get it - I was pointing out a factual error in your post.  It is not my fault you posted it.  But it is interesting to see that you will not admit your error.  How very unscientific of you - it casts doubt on both your intellectual and moral credentials and honesty.

Date: 2005/10/07 05:34:31, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (evopeach @ Oct. 07 2005,09:53)
Liar Liar Pants on Fire Midnight,

There is no factual error unless I adopt you definition of aid to developing countries as meaning only those dollars allocated by the feds as foreign aid. That is a convenient socialist U.N. sort of definition to support the view expressed here that we are stingy compared to Denmark.

Of course when direct charitable giving from people and companies is added the US swamps the field and that destroys your argument in toto so you have to resort to evo tricks like defining the terms absolutely to fit your position arbitrarily and then attacking those who don't except it. Just like defining science arbitrarily so no other approach to explanations is judged valid.

You are a liar, a cheat, a deceiver and an arrogant ass and I am not prepared to give any credibility to such people... period.

Is there a ROFL smilie on this board?  I desperately need one right now.

You really are a peach, dear evo.  :D  And so full of juvenile insults, which makes me wonder how old you really are.

Never mind, your error is in writing, in the public domain, and perfectly clear for those with eyes to see.  As is you intellectually and morally despicable refusal to admit error.

Date: 2005/10/07 08:12:55, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (evopeach @ Oct. 07 2005,12:29)
Your error is maifold in world view, philosophy, logic, ignorance and egomania.

My conclusions are backed up by the Hudson Institute and simply require that one consider the total dollars given by all Americans both through taxes and personal giving.

Your's is a narrow and inaccurate figure that doen't even consider the facts on the ground reality and actual effects.

Again its just the same old evo illogical mind and intellectual dishonesty we have seen for decades.

I repeat, I can only reply to what you actually wrote, and not what you meant to write.  And you still do not have the intellectual or moral honesty or courage to admit that you made an error in your post.

That fact alone speaks volumes about your character, truthfulness and intelligence, and indicates how little value the casual reader should give to the rest of your posts.  Add in your penchant for childish and baseless personal insults to all and sundry, and a pretty pathetic picture emerges.

Date: 2005/10/07 08:16:30, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (evopeach @ Oct. 07 2005,12:37)
Had a hard time holding a job huh?

Actually, my experience is just a might broader and my education sweeping by comparison.

Bur then that's obvious to anyone reading your sophmoric posts and watching me cram them up your nose continually... and please stop whining its so unbecoming to a grownup.

:D

What a peach!  :D

Date: 2005/10/07 10:10:36, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (evopeach @ Oct. 07 2005,14:37)
Here is a good reply you can copy and publish to demonstrate some capacity for honesty.

Evopeach,

I understand the context of the debate was my assertion that the US is one of the stingiest nations and peoples among all civilized nations when their support of developing nations is measured by aid to developing nations/GNP.

That of course in socialist countries and most others is 99% of their giving in total while in the USA it is only about 1/4th of the giving according to the Hudson Institute research (and other sources as well).

I agree that if one counts all giving as aid and not assume that unless it comes from the government its not aid and can't really help anyone then you are 100% right and I am 100% wrong.

I guess its true that your post never said let's be incomplete and inaccurate and not include charitable dollars in fact foreign aid was never even mentioned.

I guess if we want  the actual true numbers and have some feel for the actual good that is done in those countries rather than just making the US look bad compared to Denmark and puff up my left leaning socialist ego while championing atheism around the world and denigrating the religious community in the USA so I can continue to claim that atheist evos are morally superior and smarter than USA people of faith... well I suppose I owe you an apology for my intellectual dishonesty and I'll really try to debate from a position of truth telling from this point forward.

It will be difficult since half-truths, omission, misrepresentation, character assination, vitriolic personal attack, vendettas and blackmail are stock in trade for the evo community and such are built-in reactions from years of training and mind control ... but I will try.

Sincerely,

Midnight

Oh you are a delight!  :D  Still not admitting to error, and still denigrating someone who has actually carried out long and short term foreign aid work in Africa and Asia.  :)

What a glowing example you are, and what a true representation of anti-evolutionists!  :D

Date: 2005/10/08 10:03:30, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Wonderpants @ Oct. 08 2005,14:37)
Quote (evopeach @ Oct. 08 2005,10:20)
If you want to argue your stupidity with Cal Berkley, Cal Tech and Rice go ahead but to me you have zero credibility compared to the entire world community of physics Phds.

Would this be the same world community of physics PHDs that you deem to be elitist ivory tower atheistic/socialist/communist liberals for daring to accept biological evolution, perchance?

I really, really do need a ROFL smile soon.  :D

Date: 2005/10/11 02:13:31, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
KF:

Most scientists and evolutionists do not attack the Bible as a religous text. They merely do not believe it literally describes the creation of the earth.  It was, as you say, designed to educate people at a level they could understand.

Science is mute on the existence of God.

Date: 2005/10/11 04:27:04, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (kurt @ Sep. 26 2005,05:20)
It should be obvious from my post that students will be able to identify ID as non-science, just like astrology, psychics, etc.  I certainly want my student identifying pseudoscience as well as the cultural and psychological reasons why they exist.  What I am saying though is that the inclusion of ID would allow tem to understand and appreciate evolution without having to make a perceived choice between science and religion.

I don't think ID proponents want people to "not make a choice".  They flat out say that the Bible is correct, and evolution is wrong.

I guess ID could be included with Lamark and Lysenko in discussing how science got things wrong, and in discussing junk science

Date: 2005/10/11 10:42:10, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (evopeach @ Oct. 11 2005,15:19)
CGT, First God planned, then He acted in agreement with His plan because otherwise He would be imperfect in His planning and not God, He would therefore in acting sequentially He created using common design elements as man always does for a variety of engineering and "economic" interests that are apparently beyond the grasp of biology types. As to physical laws, since He made them, defined them and put them into operation His creation should and would be consistent with them otherwise they wouldn't work, live etc. ... that's common sense .. something evos don't have or appreciate.

Immutable: Unchangeable, but really do you really think an atheist god-hater has any possible knowlege to pass on about such matters ....please.

Every so called bad design argument has been dealt with by people with more expertise than I no need to rehearse. I have posted a devastating critique of the so called mammalian eye's bad design on this forum... learn to read.

How about that 100% reversal by your evo club on the bird dinosaur lineage... guffaw  ... another icon of forty years down the toilet.

"Thing just aren't adding up for feathered dinosaurs," said lead researcher, avian evolutionist and paleobiologist Alan Feduccia of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. He described the prevailing theory that birds descended from theropods as paleontological "wish-fulfillment" based on "sloppy science."

Your nasty comments on the religious beliefs of scientists are not only inappropriate, but wrong as well.  Many evolutionists are Christians or believers in other religions, and as has been pointed out, it is only a minor sect of Christianity that has a problem with evolution.  And it is localized mainly in one particular country, which makes Dawkins’ meme idea seem very apropos.  

You really do need to rehearse, as your performances on this board obviously need considerable rehearsal before they are meaningful.  I might also suggest that better punctuation might make your posts more comprehensible.  I know you mock the proper use of language, but language is a communication tool, and the easier it is to comprehend someone’s writings, the better the tool is being used.

Individual bad design arguments may come and go, but the point is still valid, and none of your posts have negated the basic principle of such points.  As has been pointed out, scientists make mistakes and discover new things – that is science.  Yet another reason why ID is not science, but religion.

Date: 2005/10/11 10:45:11, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (evopeach @ Oct. 11 2005,15:38)
I am open to your civility.

And we are waiting for yours.  Although I admit in your case it seems a commodity in remarkably short supply. :D

Date: 2005/10/12 03:42:48, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
OK, so I will put my thinking cap on.  I am glad someone has been thinking along these lines, and your idea is an improvement on mine!

Date: 2005/10/12 16:11:21, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ Oct. 12 2005,16:09)
Quote
Ah so Bill is religiously motivated. Thanks for the confirmation. So much for the claim that ID is science and not religion.


Ad hominem!

Fox seems to think citing a man's personal faith refutes his arguments, but his own Darwinian religion should be exempt from such critique. Well, he is right. Whether a man believes in Jesus Christ or Charles Darwin is irrelevant to the strength of his arguments!


Quote
ROTFL What? Where? Bill Dembski is a pedestrian mathematician and demonstrably dishonest.


Thorough, cogent refutations of Darwinian "science" are not dishonest. They are truthful. As believers in the ninth commandment, both Dembski and I defend truth. What do Darwinians believe in beyond selfish acquisition of power?

I am personally working on a project using information theory to demonstrate the mathematical impossibility of common ancestry in light of data involving intron loss in the white gene of butterfiles and similar organisms. The data has clearly demonstrted intron loss occurs randomly and not in a nested heirarchy as common ancestry predicts. This has been reported in a paper published by Oxford journals--this is the same organization that employs Richard Dawkins, the Pope of Darwinism himself! (Notice that Christians like myself accept data from evolutionary sources, we do not reject their writings on a priori grounds.)

Since you evolutionists have such poor reading comprehension skills, at the bottom is a link to the chart showing the data explicitly.



Now, I hope you evolutionists will start arguing like the scientists you claim to be instead of Sunday morning pundits.

Chart

From the quoted paper

"We believe that intron indels can offer valuable insights into evolutionary history"

What is that horrid word "evolutionary doing in there?  :D

Date: 2005/10/14 10:39:26, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (cogzoid @ Oct. 14 2005,14:37)
But, the question remains.  Will Evo ever ADMIT to being wrong about his ideas?  He made a big fuss over Midnight's error in another thread.  He even went through the trouble to write a letter for Midnight to post.  I wonder if he can do the same when it is his own errors that are pointed out.  -Dan

And in fact it was not an error.  He only made it an error by changing his version of the meaning of what he posted, despite the fact that I pointed out that I could only respond to what he posted, not what he wished he had posted.  :D

And he still did not admit that he made an error in his original post.

I believe this is what passes for intellectual honesty in his camp.

Date: 2005/10/19 10:13:20, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ Oct. 19 2005,14:52)
Quote
Can somebody perhaps tell me why it's amoral to think (1) that complex organisms had ancestors or (2) that an organism will be very similar to some of its recent ancestors, or (3) that organisms with extensive similarity of some part of its DNA probably inherited that from a common ancestor? (and the greater the similarity, the greater the probability thereof.)


Because the Holy Bible says otherwise. The entire ediface of evolutionism is about finding excuses for immoraity. Since if you no Almighty God to answer to, it follows that you can act in any way you wish.

This especially true of the sin of sodomy, the unholy communion of the Darwinian faith. How else can you explain that almost all of the so-called "Christian" evolutionists are Catholoics? That is, they belong to a church where Christian ritual has been exposed as a front for this most germane and heinous Darwinian act.

OMG, this is hilarious  :D

We will having a Darwinian Conspiracy thread next  :D

Glad to see some people have a sense of humor though.

Date: 2005/10/19 10:17:33, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (evopeach @ Oct. 19 2005,08:27)
The only difference between the 420 people that reported to me during my active career and the wireheads on this forum is that they had the common sense to listen closely, agree and say yes sir.

Ah ha!! All is explained.  You surrounded yourself during your career with people of no intellectual ability and insufficient guts to tell the truth (AKA "Yes Men").  No wonder you are unable to make cogent arguments in these fora.

Date: 2005/10/19 10:36:14, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
http://www.nytimes.com/2005....emc=rss

A leading architect of the intelligent-design movement defended his ideas in a federal courtroom on Tuesday and acknowledged that under his definition of a scientific theory, astrology would fit as neatly as intelligent design.

Personally, I have always thought there was far more evidence supporting Astrology than there is supporting ID.  :D

Date: 2005/10/19 10:44:18, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (evopeach @ Oct. 19 2005,15:23)
Yes that's logical

Glad we agree on your intellectual skills.  Nice to see you admit your fear of intelligent and capable employees.  :D

Date: 2005/10/19 12:45:35, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I have been involved in other boards and some of them have an "ignore" feature.  This can very useful at times.  Does anyone know if this board has one?  :D

Date: 2005/10/20 11:34:09, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (evopeach @ Oct. 19 2005,16:13)
Captain Midnight ... still putting a little crank in your ovaltine I see. Lets take that unbiased NYT article as purely objective. LOL

Now I wonder if you would care to read what Behe said?

http://www2.ncseweb.org/kvd/trans/22051018_day11_pm.pdf

Date: 2005/10/24 04:52:10, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
You don't rally expect an intelligent reply do you?  :D

Date: 2005/10/24 04:54:51, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ Oct. 23 2005,15:07)
Quote
If I have to read many more of these 'evolution is a dogmatic atheist religion' claims, I'm going to go spare on the authors.

 Sorry, but I am not conversant in Ebonics (unlike liberals, I prefer squandering time on frivolous languages such as Greek, Italian, and Irish Gaelic instead). Could you please translate this?

Maybe it would help if you spent some time learning English?  :D

Date: 2005/10/24 07:03:27, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Wonderpants @ Oct. 24 2005,11:22)
Midnight Voice is almost right.

'Going spare' is a phrase we use here in the UK. It means going mad, getting pretty angry indeed, to start ranting at someone.

Well, I did specify "English".  And of course my problem is I am bilingual in American and English.  :D

Date: 2005/10/25 06:44:48, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ Oct. 25 2005,10:06)
Quote
Every century has seen a lot of bloodshed.  There was nothing different about the 20th century.  Obviously there is nothing different about the 21st.  Religion is no preventer of war.  Technology is no provocateur.  Human nature is the same no matter what mask you wear.

 So do you agree that there is nothing inherent in Christianity that causes war? Personally, I think that religion can be a great source of friction, but at least it provides (admittedly imperfect) protection against completely sociopathic behavior. I think if you try to quantify the destruction caused by theocratic vs secular governments, then religion comes out ahead, although both sides can reference plenty of horror stories to support their case.

There is a huge amount in the teachings of Christ against war.  The problem is not with the teachings of Christ, it what some of those #### Christians have done with the teachings.  :D

I once watched a fascinating discussion where a pastor tried to reinterpret the "eye of the needle" story to mean that rich people could go to heaven.  Can you belive it?

Date: 2005/10/25 07:46:23, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ Oct. 24 2005,20:52)
Oh please, it's obvious to anyone with a room temperature I.Q.

K, F or C?

Date: 2005/10/25 08:49:20, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Henry J @ Oct. 25 2005,13:03)
Re "K, F or C?"

Kentucky Fried Chicken? ;)  :p

Nah, just a little test of scientific lieracy at the Elementary School level.   :)

Date: 2005/10/25 10:05:26, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ Oct. 25 2005,14:23)
Quote
Answer: F, but I suspect the average I.Q. level is more C-oriented. What prize did I win?

 Obviously, this should read:

Answer: F, but I suspect the average I.Q. level here is more C-oriented. What prize did I win?

 As if I don't italicize enough already.

You seem to be getting your Cs and Ks confused.  Evolutionists are obviously Ks, whereas ID proponents and their ilk are presumably Cs, as they don’t have the capacity to understand reality or science  :D

Date: 2005/10/26 10:04:13, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ Oct. 26 2005,14:45)
You have to wonder why active, deliberate genocide became more prevalent during the 20th century. But violence has been a constant throughout history, that's for sure.

Largely because we now report it in full, and because we have the means and weapons available to attempt to commit it more easily.

Date: 2005/10/26 10:06:57, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (sir_toejam @ Oct. 25 2005,23:43)
totally off topic, but interesting to those who follow local economics:

http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily....016.htm

Uncomfortable? yes
Surprising? No

I truly hope this is the beginning of the end for Walmart as it currently exists.

First of all, What do you mean by local?  :)

And second, I hope it leads to a decent health care system in the States!

Date: 2005/10/26 10:19:25, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (IMind @ Oct. 26 2005,09:47)
Hehehe there are exceptions to every rule. And the degree no matter what it's subject is worth the paper it's printed on.

I was a philosophy major in college. I make a signifigant amount more than most of the engineers who I would have graduated with.

My uncle has a chemistry degree from an excellent school with an outstanding chemistry department. He's a wine salesman.

There are so many variables at play that determine a persons worth and the worth of a degree than salary...

I may also make a lot more than say an English teacher, but I'd be loath to say that I am "more valuable."

I was fortunate to grow up in a meritocracy, where the brightest went to college and were paid for it - no matter what they took as their major.  It helped increase education, it helped broaden people's horizons, it help break down the barriers caused by money (or lack thereof).  It helped people who were bright but poor get an education. So I think any degree is valuable to  society.

It is not the only way to improve things, and someone with a degree can be as stupid and worthless as someone without, but it can be beneficial.  I am all in favor of free education.

Date: 2005/10/26 11:41:09, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ Oct. 26 2005,16:01)
Comments?

None

Date: 2005/10/27 02:53:37, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
http://law.wustl.edu/WULQ....ges.pdf

Comes to the conclusion that Creationism can't be taught, and that "modern governments can't alter basic scientific conclusions to suit the requirements of politically powerful gous groups".

:D

Date: 2005/10/28 09:05:20, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ Oct. 28 2005,11:49)
Any reasonably careful reading of the Bible makes it clear that Geocentricity is the correct view of the issue. Hence, geocentricity has been proven. If you want to use autonomous human reason to settle the question, it will be just one opinion against another

Of course, you mind being fallible, you cannot come to that conclusion, so we can ignore it.  :)

Date: 2005/10/28 10:39:33, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ Oct. 28 2005,15:11)
Quote
Of course, you mind being fallible, you cannot come to that conclusion, so we can ignore it.

 Well, we're also relying on an outside source, the Bible. Yes, our relations with the Bible are filtered through our senses; that is where blind faith comes in. With it, we can escape the logical paradoxes/ undecidable propositions that are imbued in any man-made construct. Since all systems are built on quicksand, we must realise that we are only capturing a projection of truth, not truth itself. We are prisoners of our senses and logic; only God possesses the key that liberates.

Blind faith in your case is HIGHLY approriate  :)

I perfer my fallible mind, thank you very much.  At least it has a chance of getting it right, and changing, and is not ossified.  :)

Date: 2005/10/30 03:28:31, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (stevestory @ Oct. 29 2005,21:58)
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture," -Ray Mummert, Dover creationist.

Just had to remind people of that, after reading about it in Welcome to Idiot America, an excellent essay in this month's Esquire.

Is that a real quote?  :)

Date: 2005/10/31 11:32:02, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
[Graffiti moved to Bathroom Wall. - Wesley R. Elsberry]

Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ Oct. 31 2005,15:47)
America's Christian taxpayers

Don't forget, Jesus was a Liberal Jew.  :D

Date: 2005/11/01 07:08:01, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
[Graffiti moved to Bathroom Wall. - Wesley R. Elsberry]

Well, at least 67% think that it is possible to believe in both God and evolution, which is encouraging.

And don't forget we are talking about the USA here, which is unusual amongst the developed nations in that a very high percentage of the population claim that religion is very important in their lives.  Europe, for example, is much more secular.  The States is closer to a developing country in this specific regard.

Date: 2005/11/01 12:06:40, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (cogzoid @ Nov. 01 2005,17:18)
The question of the ages...  Why do any of us waste our time here?  

Because the more one knows about one's opponents the better.  :D

Date: 2005/11/02 03:02:51, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (RBH @ Nov. 01 2005,22:56)
It was originally a news story carried on Yahoo news, on a page that is no longer available.  The full context is given here: http://atheism.about.com/b/a/160018.htm.

RBH

That is truly, truly wonderful.  Of course, the logical deduction is that he believes the Creationists are the stupid and eneducated segment of society, which I don't suppose is what he meant, but IS what he implied.  :D

Date: 2005/11/02 11:37:31, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
[Graffiti moved to Bathroom Wall. - Wesley R. Elsberry]

Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ Nov. 02 2005,16:33)
Think about this: if Christianity is so useless in creating a stable society, then why did America's exploding crime rates coincide with the secularization of the public sphere in the mid-sixties? And why did crime rates start falling after Reagan assumed office and Christians resumed a more active role in public life?

If you check the statistics, it is because Roe vs Wade made abortion available.  The subsequent reduction in teenagers caused the reduction in crime rate.

Quite fascinating stuff, statistics.

Date: 2005/11/03 03:59:25, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
[Graffiti moved to Bathroom Wall. - Wesley R. Elsberry]

Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ Nov. 02 2005,21:54)
But if you read criminology books from the time period, the overriding concern was the nature of the crime committed, not merely its frequency.

Hmm - if you read the current literature instead of the out of date literature, maybe you would be more aware of what was going on.  :)

Date: 2005/11/04 09:13:17, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
[Graffiti moved to Bathroom Wall. - Wesley R. Elsberry]

The other issue is that the vast majority of "Black" people are not incarcerated for violent crimes. They are in prison mostly because of drug crime. The numbers at the government site for Health and Human services (http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/nhsda.htm) show that while 13 percent of drug users are "Black", they make up 38% of those arrested for drug use and 59% of those convicted of drug use.


http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/nhsda.htm[/i]

There has been a lot of data generated recently that suggests that for a variety of reasons an African American is more likely than a white person to be charged with a crime, and even more likely to be convicted.  There are some serious studies that suggest this bias is a major contributing factor to the apparently higher rate of black crime than white crime.  Reasons  include the poverty level - lack of access to good lawyers both before and during a trial.

http://www.peace.ca/truthaboutblackcrime.htm

Statistics on black crime are, on the surface, very bleak. There are, however, some very important factors that help to influence the numbers. Consider those and a strong case for a much different view unfolds. Since 62% of persons admitted to Federal prison and 31.1% of those admitted to State prison for the first time were sentenced because of drug offenses, let us first take a look at the racial disparity in the war on drugs:

The National Institute of Drug Abuse estimated that while 12 percent of drug  users are black, they make up nearly 50 percent of all drug possession  arrests in the U.S. (The Black and White of Justice, Freedom Magazine, Volume 128)
According to the National Drug Strategy Network, although African Americans  make up less than one-third of the population in Georgia, the black arrest  rate for drugs is five times greater than the white arrest rate. In addition,  since 1990, African Americans have accounted for more than 75% of persons  incarcerated for drug offenses in Georgia and make up 97.7% of the people in
that state who are given life sentences for drug offenses.


In six California counties independently surveyed in 1995, 100% of those  individuals sent to trial on drug charges were minorities, while the  drug-using population in those same counties was more than 60% white. (The  Black and White of Justice, Freedom Magazine, Volume 128)  A CNN article in 1996 sited U.S. government figures that show more than 90
percent of all federal prosecutions for crack cocaine in 1995 were of African  American defendants. In addition, unlike convictions for powered cocaine and
other drugs (which wealthy, Caucasian defendants are more likely to use), a conviction for selling crack cocaine can carry a lengthy prison term without benefit of parole.

Date: 2005/11/05 07:51:08, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ Nov. 05 2005,12:33)
Given the tragic violence currently happening in the City of Light, and recent eruptions a bit closer to home, I have pondered the future of America and Europe, leading to one question:

Mandarin, Korean, or Japanese?

Cantonese.  China is amazing.  And BIG

Date: 2005/11/07 02:53:54, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I refuse to say anything bad about France.  Half the population is French women, and.......

Date: 2005/11/08 06:24:46, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (stevestory @ Nov. 07 2005,23:47)
Quote

Cantonese.  China is amazing.  And BIG
And polluted. And noisy. And they hassle americans about Visas. And have a police state.

But very friendly.  And the women are gorgeous - almost up to French standards

Date: 2005/11/14 08:23:28, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Good Afternoon, Oh all-seeing and ever-wise Moderator.  :D

Date: 2005/11/14 08:28:11, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I was thinking along the same lines as your point 2.  The UK, for instance, has been suffering waves of immigration for about 2,000 years, and the US for about 300.

One wonders if GoP's (how like the GOP  :D) thoughts are that immigration of non-European types is somehow different to immigration of European types.  :D

Date: 2005/11/15 04:14:34, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Actually, GOP has a good point here.  We should send all immigrants home who don't have respect and sympathy with the Native American Culture, and don't agree to abide by its basic tenets.  That could be very interesting.

Date: 2005/12/19 03:10:13, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I rather liked:

To the extent that creationists allow their un-evolved supernatural designer to have sprung into existence ab initio, they should allow natural agents the same dubious privilege. Intelligent design is not only bad science; it is bad logic, bad philosophy and even—as my theologian friends point out—bad theology.

Date: 2005/12/30 03:12:44, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I have always said that Churches in the US perform the same functions as Pubs and Clubs in the UK.  :)

Date: 2005/12/30 03:20:38, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
:01-->
Quote (stevestory @ Dec. 29 2005,15:01)
Feel free to argue orthogonal points like that big-city educated east-coast atheists like myself don't really have any cultural identity with insane evangelical Left Behind readers in Des Moines anyway, &c.

Hey, stop knocking Iowa.  It has a democratic govenor, a split legislature, no death penalty and usually votes for  the Democratic candidate for president  :D

And does not teach ID in schools

Date: 2005/12/30 09:45:04, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ Dec. 30 2005,10:08)
No, but the Judeo-Christian culture that made America great is absolutely essential to our collective well-being. Your use of "whitebread" demonstrates the success of red diaper brainwashing in our schools. Let's be honest here: almost all the religion, science, technology, architecture, art, culture, law, cuisine and everything else that make the U.S. and Europe worth living in is due to "whitebread" culture (with a huge assist from N.E. Asians and substantial input from India, of course).

Hmmm.  Well, if you go learn some Arabic and Mandarin you might learn of some of the things that were not produced by Europeans  :D

And check out the publications in the molecular biology literature to see where the future lies!  :)

Date: 2006/01/02 09:45:48, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (stevestory @ Dec. 29 2005,15:01)
America has largely had a dominant culture over the last half of its history.

I am not sure America has a culture yet.  One of the things that fascinated me when I first came to the states was that people were constantly talking about their heritage, saying “I am Scottish” or “I am Italian”.  My reply was always along the lines of “I am surprised, I thought you were an American”.  Americans also seem far more interested in where they cam from than many other cultures, and far more interested in where they came from than where they are right now and where they are going.

Date: 2006/01/03 12:05:44, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Ignorance is bliss, oh uneducated one  :D

Date: 2006/01/04 06:53:40, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
My theory is that Leonard Vincent was sent back from the 20th century and became Leonard da Vinci   :D

Date: 2006/01/09 05:28:42, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I am pretty much with everyone else so far, (1) being a 2, (2-9) being a 6 because almost nothing in science is a 7!

As regrds (10), I would just point out that evolution does tend to favor cooperation (eg the Prisoners Dilema), so there are good reasons to belive it could be true, and this makes it a complax question to answer.

Date: 2006/01/16 04:56:48, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I have lived decades in both UK and USA, and a few years in Africa, and know many people of African descent.  And racism exists in all those places, but there do seem to be differences between the UK and the US, and I do think much of it comes from the history of slavery in the States versus immigration in the UK.  Lets face it, in the states the Civil War is not yet over, and there are places where the confederate flag is still revered.

Date: 2006/01/16 11:31:08, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Well, I guess in a sense he/she accepted the "permanent banishment" bet  :D

Date: 2006/01/17 03:05:12, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Having only been an American for part of my life, I tend to look on the Supreme Court with an outsider's eye.  And to me, the decisions it makes have always been political decisions, not legal ones.  Why else would everyone talk about getting a President to puck judges who agree with him?

So if it goes to the court, there will be a political choice made, and what the law says will be irrelevant.

Date: 2006/01/17 03:10:31, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I pretty much agree with DM here.  Much of the right wing rhetoric about lazy and useless welfare recipients presupposes a level playing field for everyone, and that as #### ain't so.

Date: 2006/01/17 03:54:23, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
By the way, I apologize for the ####, it was meant to be "just" and I am not sure what I typed  :D

Date: 2006/01/17 05:02:35, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
As to point #3, I agree.  I did exaggerate when I said the law was irrelevant.  But the constitution was written by fallible humans, and can be interpreted in many ways.  Slavery is probably the most obvious example.  We have the same constitution as we did before the emancipation proclamation, and yet it now means something quite different.  And look at the second amendment:

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country; but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person."

To

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

· And look at all the questions raised by that amendment - Who does the Amendment mean by the "militia"?
· Who does the Amendment mean by "the People"?
· What "arms" does the Amendment protect?
· What does "shall not be infringed" mean?

The answers to those questions are political, as we can no longer ask the Founders what they would do about the AK 47 or the Uzi.

And more on intent - well I am sorry, but the framers could not possibly have predicted some of the changes that have occurred in the last two hundred or so years, so in some cases they could not have had an intent on something they could not know about.

This is what I really mean - if a judges political views are in one direction, that is how he will interpret the constitution.  His or her interpretation trumps the will of the people, if the two differ.

One of the biggest indicators of politics in the SC is the fact that so many decisions are 5 to 4.  Clear and obvious the answer is not  :)

Date: 2006/01/17 06:55:47, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I think we are in pretty good agreement here  :D

The Constitution is one of the most important documents of the Western World, and one of the most amazing.  It was waaaaaay ahead of its time.  But it needs to be remembered that it was written by a bunch of rebellious Brits  :D  And times change.

Date: 2006/01/25 09:44:16, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
1) I actually learn something sometimes

2) I go away for a while

3)Ignorance, stupidity and fundamentalist religion.

:D

Date: 2006/01/25 10:31:33, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Try:

http://www.newscientistspace.com/article.ns?id=dn8633

Date: 2006/02/23 09:43:33, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Alan Fox @ Feb. 21 2006,03:18)
BTW, my claim to fame is that I met Eric Idle's mother... more than once!

Just as a bit of one-upmanship, I went to the wedding of one of the python's  :D

And he believes in evolution.

Date: 2006/02/26 09:25:10, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Just my two cents worth:

I have lived half my life in UK and most of the rest in the States.  If one looks at the history of the States, it has always been very religious, as numerous European commentators have noticed over the centuries.  The Pew Research foundation did an interesting survey a couple of years ago, and commentated that in its devotion to religion the States was closer to the African level of belief than the European.

I think some of it comes from being such a young country.  And like every country, when it teaches history it tends to concentrate on its own history, and there is not too much of that.  So there is lack of exposure to the rest of the world, and no religious instruction, so little exposure to other religions.  I learnt a great deal about religions by just studying the history of the British Empire!

Finally, I blame the lack of pubs.  There are beer joints in the States, but few good pubs.  When I were a lad the Pub was often a very significant part of social life (football teams, cricket teams, darts, crib, Christmas Club etc).  This role in the States seems to have been  taken over by Churches.

Date: 2006/03/02 07:22:07, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
One thing I was staggered to learn when my daughter went to High School - very few events or sports training sessions were held on a Wednesday night.  When I asked why, I was told it was because it was a traditional night for Church Events!!

Date: 2006/03/02 07:28:13, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Once two competing cognitions are held simultaneously, the individual can be said to be in a state of "cognitive dissonance".

That is the honest people.  Many of the prominent IDers are probably just liars

Date: 2006/03/02 07:31:08, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Where is the spaghetti monster when you need him?

Date: 2006/03/05 13:20:32, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I enjoyed them when I was young.  They are terribly dated, but enjoyable.

Start with the early ones?

Date: 2006/03/05 14:01:45, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I am readng some of Deborah Lipstadt at the moment - she studies
Holocaust Deniers.  There are some fascinating parallels with
ID.  Especially things like not entering debates because there is no debate, and the efforts of  "Research Institutes" to "validate" their theory. And the media constantly  taling about people hearing both sides of a story.

She is the one who was sued for Libel by the British nutcase David Irving (currently in Jail in Austria) for calling his "research" into question.  She won.

Date: 2006/03/07 03:06:16, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Sheikh Mahandi @ Mar. 06 2006,07:21)
I always preferred Tom Sharpe myself, "Riotous Assembly", "Indecent Exposure", "The Throwback", all of the "Wilt" series.
If only there was a satirist of his calibre to write about ID, and fundamentalism.
:D

Wilt is one of the funniest books I have ever read.  Riotous Assembly and Indecent Exposure come a close second and third.  :D

Date: 2006/03/09 03:20:50, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I use a Mac at home (where I have to look after it myself) and a PC at work (where I have an IT person who will do for me - eventually - all the things I don't have to do at home because I have a Mac).

I prefer the Mac to be honest.  It was plug and play before the term existed, it is very fast and a delight to use.

Date: 2006/03/09 10:26:31, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (thordaddy @ Mar. 09 2006,15:37)
 Why do scientists have such a hard time conveying their findings in language that can be understood by a majority of people?  Are we just too darn ignorant or are the scientists to slick for their own good?

It is not ignorant in the pejorative sense, merely not cognizant of the background knowledge to fully comprehend.  Just as I have trouble with fully understanding string theory, even though I am a biochemist, so do non-scientists have trouble understanding biology in general.

And we also get back to the fact that in MOST cases, these people seem only object to those portions of science that seem to contradict their particular version of the bible, at one particular point in time (flat earth, sun going round the earth, evolution etc).  They are quite happy to accept the rest is just peachy.

On another board I was fascinated to reads the posts of someone who admitted his last science class was in 10th grade, and happily admitted he understood almost no chemistry, physics or math, yet still believed he understood biology well enough to know that it was fine except for evolution, which was wrong.  Now THAT is arrogant.

Date: 2006/03/09 10:32:14, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (hehe @ Mar. 09 2006,16:27)
Hey, this is exactly the procedure used at Holocaust denial forums! Who would've thunk...

Me  :D

http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin....;t=1475

Date: 2006/03/09 11:12:49, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Some of the (free) widgets are really cool   :D

Date: 2006/03/17 11:42:05, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (JMax @ Mar. 17 2006,15:17)
since you guys are all on a french kick, how do you think they will fair at the cup this year??   another flame out in group stages?

I think they will beat Wales and take the Championship  :D

Date: 2006/03/31 06:15:46, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Going back to the original post, obviously life exists with or without conception.  But some (please note - some) biologists consider pregnancy begins at implantation of the embryo.  This is spatially and temporally distinct from fertilization.

If human consciousness were to start at fertilization, then we would surely have to do something about all those fertilized eggs that are NOT successfully implanted by mother nature.

Date: 2006/04/01 10:00:30, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Stephen Elliott @ April 01 2006,08:42)
Faid,
I know you are correct. Somehow I can't help myself. I must be an addict. Or maybe my rose tinted glasses need to be removed. Despite all evidence to the contrary, I still expect people to respond to rationality.

42

:D

Date: 2006/04/04 03:01:36, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (thordaddy @ April 04 2006,02:14)
We have had 30+ years to evaluate the "societal good" that supposedly would transpire under FEDERAL legal abortion.  What are the benefits exactly, I ponder?  Less unwanted children?  More compassionate society?  Less national conflict?  What exactly has abortion done other

Reuduced crime by reducing the number of children living in homes that have insufficient resources to support them, if you believe the statistics.

Date: 2006/04/05 04:18:16, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
To actually insert just a little science into the debate ( :D )

http://www.newscientist.com/channel/sex/mg18424690.800.html

If homosexuality is an inherited trait, why do genes for it survive? Because these genes may make women more likely to reproduce.

Andrea Camperio-Ciani's team at the University of Padua, Italy, asked 98 gay and 100 straight men to fill in questionnaires about their families. They found mothers and aunts had more children if related to a gay rather than a straight man. Mothers of gay men averaged 2.7 babies, compared with 2.3 born to mothers of straight men. Aunts on the mother's side had 2 babies compared with 1.5 for maternal aunts of straight men (Proceedings of the Royal Society B, DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2004).

The team suggests that gene variations on the X chromosome make women more likely to have more children, and men more likely to be gay. "We think of a gene for male homosexuality, but it might really be a gene for sexual attraction to men," says Simon LeVay, a neuroscientist at Stanford University and a writer on sexuality.

But the "maternal effect" could at most account for only 14 per cent of the prevalence of male homosexuality, the Italian team cautions. "Our findings, if confirmed, are only one piece in a much larger puzzle on the nature of human sexuality." :D

Date: 2006/04/05 04:27:31, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
And even a book review:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg15721225.600.html

Jim McKnight's Straight Science? asks why, if there is a homosexual gene, should the human genome maintain a population predisposed to non-reproductive sex? McKnight argues that straight men carrying just one gay gene have a reproductive advantage. That's to say they make better fathers and their children are more likely to survive. McKnight has political nous, but—let's face it—he'll still get a kicking. Published by Routledge, £14.99, ISBN 0415157330.

Date: 2006/04/05 07:57:10, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Mother nature does not mind homosexuals, hence the gay necrophiliac rapist mallard  :D

http://www.nmr.nl/deins815.htm

On 5 June 1995 an adult male mallard (Anas platyrhynchos) collided with the glass façade of the Natuurhistorisch Museum Rotterdam and died. An other drake mallard raped the corpse almost continuously for 75 minutes. Then the author disturbed the scene and secured the dead duck. Dissection showed that the rape-victim indeed was of the male sex. It is concluded that the mallards were engaged in an ‘Attempted Rape Flight’ that resulted in the first described case of homosexual necrophilia in the mallard.

Keywords: homosexuality, necrophilia, non-consensual copulation, mallard, Anas platyrhynchos

Date: 2006/04/05 08:00:00, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
and, apparently:

Mr Moeliker was informed of an American case involving a squirrel and a dead partner, although in this case it is not known whether the necrophilia observed was homosexual or not as the victim had been run over by a truck shortly before the incident.

http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher....00.html

Date: 2006/04/10 03:59:35, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Did God design the necrophiliac, homosexual rapist duck?

:D

Date: 2006/04/11 02:56:50, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (sir_toejam @ April 10 2006,21:01)
"Don't play games with pickups that have shotgun racks."

Dennis Hopper and Peter Fonda taught me that.

Wow.  Someone else as old as I am  :D

Date: 2006/04/11 15:00:51, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (thordaddy @ April 11 2006,19:56)
Why would living organisms need an "orientation" outside that which provides for reproduction, namely, evolution?

Homosexuality is counter to reproduction.  Evolution provides for this?

Read all the posts, and your question will be answered

Date: 2006/04/11 15:04:17, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ April 11 2006,15:51)
Indeed, ever since he's been gone, no one says 'billions and billions' anywhere near as well anymore.  :p

I miss the "Yuman " race

Date: 2006/04/12 05:45:06, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I am begining to think Eugenics might be a good idea - for instance, if we could stop all these fundamentalists from breeding, the world might end up a saner place.  :D

Date: 2006/04/12 05:48:18, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
And don't forget, AIDS started out as a heterosexual disease, and in many parts of the world is still prediminantly heterosexually transmitted

Date: 2006/04/14 02:44:27, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (thordaddy @ April 12 2006,15:29)
No, I am claiming that homosexuality is a high-risk behavior associated with disease like AIDS.

Please explain why lesbians are exhibiting high risk behavior associated with AIDS

Date: 2006/04/18 07:06:56, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (afdave @ April 18 2006,08:32)
I would never just say something non-sensical like "You just have to have faith".  

This is the part that fascinates me.  When I were but a whippersnapper, many decades ago, "Faith" was one of the basic tenets of religion.  In fact, many current theologians still believe that to be true, and think that the search for "proof" of God harms religion more than it helps.

Date: 2006/04/18 07:18:24, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Wow - I have not seen the word "Grauniad" for eons.  Reminfds me of my youth!:D

Date: 2006/04/19 11:59:48, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (dhogaza @ April 18 2006,12:10)
'Speaking of Australia, when a British friend of mine was going through customs the Australian customs officer asked him if he’d ever been convicted of a felony. With a stiff upper lip my friend replied, “I wasn’t aware that was still an entrance requirement.”'

In about 1956 I think, when he was going to cover the Ashes series for the Telegraph.  

E W Swanton

Date: 2006/04/19 12:05:19, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I still want to know why two women getting married leads to the spread of AIDS

Date: 2006/04/24 04:02:31, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (afdave @ April 24 2006,07:47)
I wanted to see if there is anything new which might convince me that Macro-Evolution really happened, but there's apparently not ...

I wish we had a :rofl: smiley  :D  That quote is so precious

Date: 2006/04/24 07:00:01, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ April 24 2006,11:48)
One more thing: I know a lot of you are skeptical about my model. But let's review the reasons why a model is necessary in the first place:

1) Fact: When progressives try to tinker with the social fabric (single parenthood, free love, etc.), very bad consequences often ensue.
2) Fact: Many of these consequences are unanticipated, even by conservatives.
3) Fact: Some traditions resist change more than others. These traditions are usually the ones that, however irrational they seem on the surface, have a long history within the society that seeks to eliminate them.
4) Fact: These traditions are often deeply embedded within that society's legal code.
5) Fact: Mathematical models exist that seek to explain societal changes.
6) Fact: One model (scale free networks) has been successfully applied to a wide range of natural phenomena. Cultural change plausibly satisfies some of the model's prerequisites.
7) Fact: The existence of bold, free-thinking individuals allows these models to be studied and (possibly) applied to cultural change.
8) Fact: These individuals often experience ridicule as they work out the model's consequences.  :p

1) Fact: When conservatives try to tinker with the biological fabric of society (single parenthood, free love, etc.), very bad consequences often ensue.
2) Fact: Many of these consequences are unanticipated, even by liberals.
3) Fact: Some traditions resist change more than others. These traditions are usually the ones that, however irrational they seem on the surface, have a long history, such as homosexuality in society.
4) Fact: These traditions are often deeply embedded within that society's legal code, and sometimes not.

7) Fact: The existence of bold, free-thinking individuals allows these models to be studied and (possibly) applied to cultural change, hence the success of evolutionary theory.
8) Fact: These individuals often experience ridicule as they work out the model's consequences, usually be conservatives

Date: 2006/04/24 07:05:44, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Whoever he is, he is persistent and blinkered.  :)

Date: 2006/04/25 05:50:56, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
In the gay genes threads, much of the anti-gay commentary seems to be directed at male homosexuals rather than gays in general.  Are female gays less gay than male gays?  Do we need a scale of gayness?

Or are the objectors secretly turned on by gay women??  Or are they men repressing their own homosexual instincts???

Date: 2006/04/25 06:37:07, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ April 25 2006,10:54)
These are all very important questions, but there's one even more vital issue we must get out of the way first: is it too late for you to fix that typo on 'Lesbiand'? It's gonna bug the shlt outta me til it's fixed...

I do not have the authority to fix the typo as far as I can see.  I think you need to ask a friendly admin  :)

Date: 2006/04/25 07:22:08, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I guess the big question is  "Why did the Intelligent Designer design things this way?"  :D

Date: 2006/04/25 14:15:10, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Russell @ April 25 2006,12:29)
I suppose it's true, the "evolutionists" have a near-monopoly in the "intelligent and educated" segment of society. It's possible, however, that that suggests something other than bias and bigotry.

What was it Mummert said?  "We are being attacked by the educated segment of society"??

Date: 2006/04/25 14:19:15, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (C.J.O'Brien @ April 25 2006,18:49)
Y'know, I don't think this forum has gone far enough in our discussion of various sexual orientations and their effects on science, religion and society.

So here's a question: when a gay man and a lesbiand have sex, is it gay sex?

If a gay man and a lesbiand get married, is that bad for the american family? (Bonus question: how about if it's fictional, but it's on prime-time network TV?)

C'mon people. Let's take it higher!

There was a young gay from Khartoum
Who to a prostitute up to his room
They argued all night
About who had the right
To what, with what, and to whom.

:D

Date: 2006/04/25 16:06:55, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Russell @ April 25 2006,20:06)
Indeed, that was the reference I had in mind:
Quote
"Christians are a lot more bold under Bush's leadership, he speaks what a lot of us believe," said [pastor and school parent Ray] Mummert.
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture," he said, adding that the school board's declaration is just a first step.

A truly wonderful quote destined to hound creationists for generations to come. Illustrating the principle that many a true word is spoken in stupidity.

Thank you - a quote for the ages that one  :D

Date: 2006/04/25 21:35:33, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (thordaddy @ April 26 2006,02:28)
Anyone reading your rants would have a hard time comprehending how you could be on the side of "good and decency" unless we now define such things in terms of profanity and juvenile language.

Even the best of us us get frustrated and irritated when faced by asine, intellectually dishonest hatred and bigotry.  The vileness of such positions sometimes gets to us.

Date: 2006/04/28 07:16:01, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (guthrie @ April 28 2006,08:33)
My sig on a different forum goes something like:
"Warning!  The above writing is only my opinion based upon my limited view of reality, and should not be used as an actual guide to reality."

A useful caveat I find.

I sometimes mention in mine that "This is nly a message board.  It is not real life"

:D

Date: 2006/04/29 11:46:34, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I've met God!  And She's black!!

:D

Date: 2006/04/29 11:46:34, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I've met God!  And She's black!!

:D

Date: 2006/04/30 10:05:58, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (afdave @ April 29 2006,16:48)
they help confirm my theory that the Christian Bible is inerrant

http://www.bidstrup.com/bible2.htm

A few more inerrancies to explain away.....

I particularly like the Easter ones..

When the sun was coming up (Matt. 28:1) while it was still dark (John 20:1), Mary Magdalene (John 20:1) or Mary Magdalene and the other Mary (Matt 28:1) or "the women" [note the plural] (Luke 24:1) went to the tomb. There was an earthquake, and an angel came down and rolled the stone away (Matt. 28:2) from the entrance of the tomb and sat on it, even though it had apparently already been rolled away when Mary Magdalene had got there (John 20:1, Mark 16:4, Luke 24:2). The reason for the visit was to anoint the body with spices (Mark 16:1, Luke 24:1) or just to look at the tomb (Matt. 28:1), take your pick.

When she or they, take your pick, arrived, she/they witnessed the earthquake and angel coming down from heaven (Matt. 28:1), or they walked into the tomb to discover a young man dressed in white sitting on the right (Mark 16:5) or two men in bright shining clothes (Luke 24:4), take your pick.

At this point, John says that Mary had run back to fetch Peter and another disciple. The other gospel writers make no mention of Mary taking leave of the tomb to go back and get any of the men at this point.

If/when she/they returned, the angel (Mark 15:6) or the angels (Luke 24:5) is/are quoted by the gospel writers as having said one of three things. Either "He is not here, he is raised, just as he said." (Matt. 28:6) or "He is not here, he has been raised." (Mark 15:6, Luke 24:6) or "Woman, why are you crying?" (John 20:13).

So the woman or women ran from the tomb to tell the disciples (Matt. 28:8) or they left, too terrified to say anything to anyone (Mark 16:8), take your pick.

Mary Magdalene saw Jesus appear to her and decided he'd been resurrected (John 20:14-18). Or the women, having left the tomb and thinking things over, were sure that Jesus' body had been stolen, so they tried to bribe the soldiers guarding the tomb to tell them where the body had been taken (Matt. 28:11-15).

Date: 2006/04/30 10:05:58, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (afdave @ April 29 2006,16:48)
they help confirm my theory that the Christian Bible is inerrant

http://www.bidstrup.com/bible2.htm

A few more inerrancies to explain away.....

I particularly like the Easter ones..

When the sun was coming up (Matt. 28:1) while it was still dark (John 20:1), Mary Magdalene (John 20:1) or Mary Magdalene and the other Mary (Matt 28:1) or "the women" [note the plural] (Luke 24:1) went to the tomb. There was an earthquake, and an angel came down and rolled the stone away (Matt. 28:2) from the entrance of the tomb and sat on it, even though it had apparently already been rolled away when Mary Magdalene had got there (John 20:1, Mark 16:4, Luke 24:2). The reason for the visit was to anoint the body with spices (Mark 16:1, Luke 24:1) or just to look at the tomb (Matt. 28:1), take your pick.

When she or they, take your pick, arrived, she/they witnessed the earthquake and angel coming down from heaven (Matt. 28:1), or they walked into the tomb to discover a young man dressed in white sitting on the right (Mark 16:5) or two men in bright shining clothes (Luke 24:4), take your pick.

At this point, John says that Mary had run back to fetch Peter and another disciple. The other gospel writers make no mention of Mary taking leave of the tomb to go back and get any of the men at this point.

If/when she/they returned, the angel (Mark 15:6) or the angels (Luke 24:5) is/are quoted by the gospel writers as having said one of three things. Either "He is not here, he is raised, just as he said." (Matt. 28:6) or "He is not here, he has been raised." (Mark 15:6, Luke 24:6) or "Woman, why are you crying?" (John 20:13).

So the woman or women ran from the tomb to tell the disciples (Matt. 28:8) or they left, too terrified to say anything to anyone (Mark 16:8), take your pick.

Mary Magdalene saw Jesus appear to her and decided he'd been resurrected (John 20:14-18). Or the women, having left the tomb and thinking things over, were sure that Jesus' body had been stolen, so they tried to bribe the soldiers guarding the tomb to tell them where the body had been taken (Matt. 28:11-15).

Date: 2006/05/01 03:08:06, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
She's black.

And pissed  :D

Date: 2006/05/01 03:13:00, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (afdave @ May 01 2006,06:34)
 But I am also very sincere that IF a person from the "Evolution Camp" was to offer a very convincing argument for the fine-tuning of the cosmos, the amazing biological machines, etc., etc., I would adopt that belief and become an Atheist.  

Why?  You seem under the terribly mistaken and totally confused and irrational belief that someone who believes in evolution cannot believe in God.  And quite honestly, I don't think God would be very ompressed with that attitude.

Date: 2006/05/01 03:21:45, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Chris Hyland @ May 01 2006,07:53)
Maybe if we understood what your specific problems were then we could help.

AFD does not want help.  He is absolutely convinced, and the facts of life will never change his mind.  It is amusing to point out his mistakes and total lack of intellectual honesty, but his mind, unlike that of scientists, is fixed and unchanging.

Date: 2006/05/01 06:04:22, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Faid @ May 01 2006,11:01)
Dave, before I answer in any more of your arguments, I want to make this perfectly clear: Have we agreed that we are NOT discussing in scientific terms? Yes or no?

Well, he is an engineer, not a sciemtist  :D

Date: 2006/05/05 11:16:09, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Please tell me that Thursday isn't going to say that aging starts at conception, thus a bag of cells is a human being, thus abortion is wrong, thus the Pope is right, thus masturbation is OK for women because they don't spill any seed, thus women are all wankers, thus they should not be allowed out of the house, thus we should vote for right wing Christian nutbar fundamentalists.

Date: 2006/05/05 11:21:56, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Back on topic.

I guess the root of the matter is that the Bible can be interpreted as saying "men should not lay with men", but as far as I remember it is mute on the topic of women laying with women.  So I guess to the homophobic right, taking the Bible literaly, lesbians are acceptable but gay men are not.  :D

Date: 2006/05/11 03:04:49, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Don't forget the Flying Spaghetti Monster!  :D

Date: 2006/05/11 12:25:29, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Silence strikes

Date: 2006/05/12 03:12:57, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Sorry, but that is waaaaay out of my league.  I do know much work goes into a message board, but I am afraid I don't know how to do it!!

And thank you for all your efforts.

Date: 2006/05/13 06:03:19, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ May 12 2006,16:50)
This thread is for any further topics AFDave feels that he must expound upon. If AFDave opens any other topic, it will be deleted immediately upon notice.

Do you have a "merge threads" option?  We used to on VBull, and used it all the time

Date: 2006/05/13 11:13:26, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (stevestory @ May 13 2006,13:02)
Wesley's the one to thank, I just hang out here and bite ankles.

The Board Corgi?  :D

Date: 2006/05/15 10:30:01, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
What show?

Date: 2006/05/17 10:10:55, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (thurdl01 @ May 17 2006,11:23)
Step one: Identify that they're designed.

Step two:Come to understand the designer is a moron for making pathogenic bacteria
Step three:Abandon all faith in the "intelligent" designer
Step four: go back to where we started.

:D

Date: 2006/05/17 10:20:35, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ May 16 2006,14:45)
When you respond, respond with data, please.

Why should we do that which you do not?

Date: 2006/05/19 09:40:12, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (stevestory @ May 18 2006,21:27)
Not directly related, but my favorite name of anything is the name of the band Stark Naked and the Car Thieves.

I always like "Tonto and the exploding head band" myself  :D

Date: 2006/05/19 09:47:10, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
For a name, how about appendage_preserve_esquire?

Or, if you are a darts fan, Lord Hockey  :D

Date: 2006/05/19 09:49:50, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (ericmurphy @ May 19 2006,13:07)
I have an aversion to sex with old women. What does that say about me?

Please define "old"  :D

Date: 2006/05/20 08:40:29, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Very funny.  Many a good chuckle there  :D

Date: 2006/05/21 05:09:58, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I have been recording the new(ish) Dr Who series on SciFi, and last night I got around to watching a couple.  As they approached the space station to watch the end of the world, a computer PA voice said "Remember - No weapons, no teleportation and no religion are allowed on the Space Station"  :D

Date: 2006/05/23 09:02:02, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Actually sonny, we were looking for your opinions and knowledge.  Do you have any?  :D

Date: 2006/05/28 08:40:30, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (afdave @ May 28 2006,06:41)
My approach is to analyze the writings of scientists with advanced degrees on both sides of the Creation/Evolution debate.  

Ooops - Logical Fallacy Alert!!

There are only scientists on one side of this particular debate.  The other side consists of religous "experts" and nutcases. :D

Date: 2006/05/28 10:24:46, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Ye Gods, I have just come back from a trip and found this amazing post 1) Writing only developed a few thousand years ago.

2) I can't imagine that people lived for millions of years without writing!

3) Therefore, people were created just before writing occurred. ~5,000 years ago.


I just can't belive it.  I am totally staggered.  I just didn't think anyone could be this illogical.  I am just totally perplexed.

And I wonder why we didn't sort out all mathmatics as the same time we sorted out all writing  :D

Date: 2006/05/31 12:16:32, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
http://www.livescience.com/animalworld/060531_new_ecosystem.html

At a cement quarry in Israel, researchers have discovered eight previously unknown species of small creatures in a newfound underground cave.

The limestone cave has long been sealed off from it surroundings—even outside water cannot seep through an overlying layer of chalk—and it contains an entire ecosystem unlike anything known.

The newly named Ayalon Cave stretches for about 1.5 miles and is "unique in the world," said Amos Frumkin of the Hebrew University Department of Geography.

A small opening was uncovered at the quarry, leading to the cave, which extends more than 100 yards below the surface. It is situated between Jerusalem and Tel Aviv.

Scientists found seawater and freshwater crustaceans in underground lakes that are a brackish mix, as well as a terrestrial scorpion that, owing to the eternal darkness in the cave, is blind. The new species were all found alive except the scorpion, but live scorpions will be found in further expeditions, said university researcher Hanan Dimentman.

Date: 2006/05/31 14:17:00, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Umm - scientists don't do ID

:D

Date: 2006/06/02 03:01:50, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
One speciality I refused to try was "Ice Diving".

Not my idea of fun at all  :D

Date: 2006/06/03 07:50:03, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Yes it is beautiful.

No, I am not going to try it  :D

I prefer warm, warm water and relaxation  :)

Date: 2006/06/04 09:27:59, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Rilke's Granddaughter @ June 03 2006,17:37)
And quite frankly, I've never seen someone who is both a biochemist AND a computer programmer.  Quite puzzling.

I think that can happen.  Many of the people (of an advanced age, who grew up before computers :D) who are carrying out in silico experiments, were in fact biochemists at first.  They then developed advanced math and computer skills.  It can be done.

Date: 2006/06/06 06:31:30, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Fractatious @ June 06 2006,10:41)
Where did the Laws of Physics (erm, phisics), Space and Time come from?

The Flying Spaghetti Monster?

Date: 2006/06/09 03:39:44, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
English (native)
American (fluent)
French (poor and rusty)
KiSwahili (poor and rusty)
Smattering of Turkish
Forgot all my Latin

Date: 2006/06/10 10:19:59, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Christian film rated PG

http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=23426

The Motion Picture Association of America is crystal clear when it describes why its "PG" rating exists -- it's a warning flag.

"The theme of a PG-rated film may itself call for parental guidance," the online explanation of the rating system states. "There may be some profanity in these films. There may be some violence or brief nudity. ... The PG rating, suggesting parental guidance, is thus an alert for examination of a film by parents before deciding on its viewing by their children. Obviously such a line is difficult to draw."

Disagreements are a given. The Christian moviemakers behind a low-budget film called "Facing the Giants" were stunned when the MPAA pinned a PG rating on their gentle movie about a burned-out, depressed football coach whose life -- on and off the field -- takes a miraculous turn for the better.

"What the MPAA said is that the movie contained strong 'thematic elements' that might disturb some parents,"

Date: 2006/06/11 08:43:59, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ June 10 2006,16:41)
Midnight Voice - thanks for the link. I actually think the PG rating's a good thing in this case. Aren't adult-oriented movies usually given a PG regardless of content? I seem to remember that was the rule at one time.

The Motion Picture Association of America is crystal clear when it describes why its "PG" rating exists -- it's a warning flag.

"The theme of a PG-rated film may itself call for parental guidance," the online explanation of the rating system states. "There may be some profanity in these films. There may be some violence or brief nudity. ... The PG rating, suggesting parental guidance, is thus an alert for examination of a film by parents before deciding on its viewing by their children. Obviously such a line is difficult to draw."


And what makes you think I am British?

Date: 2006/06/11 08:53:02, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (jeannot @ June 11 2006,13:49)
- Nobody, not even a YEC, can seriously claim this:  
Quote
You fail to understand my ground-breaking theory. [...] Since both humans and apes--and guines pigs too--eat bananas, their alleged "similarities" are based on this. [...] My theory becomes very plausible once the morally and intellectually corrosive dogma is Darwinism is discarded!

C'mon now.  One of the strengths of these people is that they can claim anything, as all the evidence against their claims is wrong  :D

Date: 2006/06/12 04:25:48, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (afdave @ June 12 2006,09:21)
 There are two reasons I will leave:  Wesley bans me or I finish what I set out to do.

Well, it could be a long time, as you apparently set out prove that reality does not exist, and even the Catholic Church had to give that up after a few hundered years.  :D

So I guess Wesley is our only hope  :D

Date: 2006/06/24 09:39:31, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Whoever runs the site can set the rules and ban anyone they want to ban for any reason they want to ban them.

Been there, done that.  :D

Date: 2006/06/27 11:18:03, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (deadman_932 @ June 06 2006,22:25)
I voted for gay marriage because I plan on proposing to Thordaddy. Can't wait to see him in skimpy lingerie.  ;)

There is an image I would have preferred to keep out of my brain.  :D

Date: 2006/06/29 04:18:23, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
First question:  "Which Scripture?"

Please define

Date: 2006/07/03 09:05:10, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Apparently this is the current conservative view in the United States

http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/15793.html

Let's face it. Public education is a mess. Some may even say it is dead. Many subjects being explored and indoctrinated into our children's minds in the public education system these days doesn't even have anything to do with education at all...........

nine key things that conservatives and Christians believe:

1) Evolution is a myth. Creation is real. God is real. It is still legal to say the word Jesus.

2) The Earth is only around 6000 years old. Noah built an ark and the world was flooded which created the Grand Canyon. Millions of years is absurd.

3) Global Warming is a myth and is totally junk science that should be trashed. Volcanoes produce more harmful pollutants in one eruption that all of the cars and factories in the United States have in the last 50 years. For more on the junk science of global warming and Al Gore's post election failure elusions, take a look at Tom Bethell's bestseller, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Science at www.booksamillion.com/ncom/books?id=3517879932526&isbn=089526031X <www.booksamillion.com/ncom/books?id=3517879932526&amp;isbn=089526031X> or

4) Jesus was resurrected from the dead and will one day return to judge the world and create a new one while the one we live in now will be destroyed.

5) Merry Christmas! Yes, it's still legal and above else, normal to say these words at CHRISTmas.

6) Abortion is murder because God alone has the authority to create and take a life in the womb.

7) Homosexuality is sin because God CREATED (again going back to creation) a woman for Adam, not another man. God condemns homosexuality and any sexual sin including sex outside of marriage.

8) The Holy Bible is the divine, inspired, infallible Holy Word of God.

9) The Second Amendment is in the constitution and should stay just as it is. Prosecute criminals, not victims!

Again I say that the National Education Association is indoctrinating ideals of falsehood into the minds of American kids by having them learn junk science and how to become professional sinners. Condom education, homosexual marriage, evolution, and other such subjects belong in a liberal forum, not in a elementary school classroom. There were times when I was in college when I would have given anything for a seat with an eject button built in it. Perhaps we should start building those because if we continue down this failing and wide path to destruction, we will need a quick way out.

Date: 2006/07/05 11:27:13, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ July 05 2006,16:19)
People have a need for trancendence;

What is I need?  And why do I need it?

Date: 2006/07/05 12:46:05, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ July 05 2006,17:11)
I define transcendence as a need to be part of something higher/greater than oneself. Could be God, could be a social ideal. But without the fulfillment, individuals often feel empty, bored, and deprived. Remember, American citizens are among the happiest in the world. Americans are also the most religious (at least among highly technological societies). I don't think it's a coincidence.

Well, I don't.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3157570.stm

Nigeria is the happiest country.  US ranks 16th.  I guess our sufferings at the hands of moronic religous fanatics have driven us down the table.  :D

Or, if you prefer the subjective view:

1. Puerto Rico
2. Mexico
3. Denmark
4. Colombia
5. Ireland
6. Iceland
7. N. Ireland
8. Switzerland
9. Netherlands
10. Canada
11. Austria
12. El Salvador
13. Venezuela
14. Luxembourg
15. U.S.
16. Australia
17. New Zealand
18. Sweden
19. Nigeria
20. Norway
21. Belgium
22. Finland
23. Singapore
24. W. Germany
25. France
26. Argentina
27. Vietnam
28. Chile
29. Indonesia
30. Philippines
31. Taiwan
32. Brazil
33. Spain
34. Israel
35. Italy
36. Portugal
37. E. Germany
38. Slovenia
39. Japan
40. Czech Rep
41. S. Africa
42. Croatia
43. Greece
44. Peru
45. China
46. Morocco
47. S. Korea
48. Iran
49. Poland
50. Turkey
51. Bosnia
52. Uganda
53. Algeria
54. Bangladesh
55. Egypt
56. Kyrgyzstan
57. Hungary
58. Slovakia
59. Jordan
60. Estonia
61. Serbia
62. Tanzania
63. Azerbaijan
64. Montenegro
65. India
66. Lithuania
67. Macedonia
68. Pakistan
69. Latvia
70. Albania
71. Bulgaria
72. Belarus
73. Georgia
74. Romania
75. Moldova
76. Russia
77. Armenia
78. Ukraine
79. Zimbabwe


Of course, I wouldn't expect you to get your facts right, especially the inconvenient ones that disagree with your preconceptions.  :D

Date: 2006/07/05 15:20:07, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Stephen Elliott @ July 05 2006,20:03)
Wow! You surprise me. I thought it was very plain that the majority on this board are non-religious. I would be surprised if the anti-religious did not outnumber the religious (by which I mean theist).

Anti-religous?  Hmmmm, I don't consider myself anti-religous, merely anti-extremist.  :D

Date: 2006/07/08 08:18:37, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (ericmurphy @ July 07 2006,14:38)
drinking, drugging, and skirt-chasing don't strike me as activities normally associated with professional scientists.

Hmmmm.  For those of us who got our degrees in London in the sixties and early seventies............

Never mind, I would not want to corrupt you  :D

Date: 2006/07/09 04:53:46, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (ericmurphy @ July 08 2006,17:49)
Question: was this before you got your graduate degree and started working as a professional scientist, or after?

Before, during and after.  It was a fun time, but all good things come to an end eventually, and I got old and responsible - or older and somewhat more responsible.  :D

Date: 2006/07/10 07:36:19, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (GCT @ July 10 2006,11:42)
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ July 10 2006,10:53)
I suspect this crush is just another one of Paley's sillyass PR moves to distract us from his inability to construct a coherent argument or indeed to say anything that makes sense. If you assume GOP is a big joke, it suddenly falls into place.

Fixed it for ya!

Well, some of us know the GOP is a joke in one way, a world class disaster in another   :D

Date: 2006/07/11 13:21:04, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ July 11 2006,11:12)
I've never met a black, Jewish, or gay liberal in my life.

I know you probably have never met him, but Jesus was an unmarried, dark skinned liberal Jew.  :D

Date: 2006/07/16 04:59:46, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (afdave @ July 16 2006,07:16)
1) First, we have Circular Reasoning ... i.e. Fossil Age = Age of Rock in the "Fossil" article, and Age of Rock = Age of Fossil in the "Paleontology" article.

2) I thought sedimentary rocks could not be dated radiometrically ... Deadman told me that this is true of the GC layers that contain fossils.  But this article says  you CAN date sedimentary layers radiometrically.  What's up with that?[/b]

A Radiometric Dating Resource List

http://www.tim-thompson.com/radiometric.html

Date: 2006/07/16 09:30:10, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (stevestory @ July 16 2006,13:58)
Did anybody here see that report quietly released by the government a few days ago, which said that conservative christian private school students are behind public school students in math?

http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/BER/Public-Schoo_Students_Score_Well.html

The current study found that self-described conservative Christian schools, the fastest-growing sector of private schools, fared poorest, with their students falling as much as one year behind their counterparts in public schools, once socioeconomic factors like income, ethnicity and access to books and computers at home were considered.



Study Finds Worst Performance in Conservative Christian Schools

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0715-01.htm

The federal Education Department reported Friday that, in reading and math, children attending public schools generally do as well as or better than comparable children in private schools. The exception was in eighth-grade reading, where the private-school children did better.

The report, which compared fourth- and eighth-grade reading and math scores from nearly 7,000 public schools and more than 530 private schools in 2003, also found that conservative Christian schools lagged significantly behind public schools when it came to eighth-grade math.

The study, carrying the imprimatur of the National Center for Education Statistics, part of the Education Department, was contracted to the Educational Testing Service and delivered to the department last year.

It went through a lengthy peer review and includes an extended section of caveats about its limitations, calling such a comparison of public and private schools "of modest utility."

Its release, on a summer Friday, was made without a news conference or comment from Education Secretary Margaret Spellings.

Date: 2006/07/17 08:53:01, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Ask him about the lies the Creationists told on the stand, and how does it feel to be supporting a bunch of liars and perjurers  :D

Date: 2006/07/17 11:24:07, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (k.e @ July 17 2006,14:53)
Now here is someone who can write, apologies to anyone who has read this already
Greetings From Idiot America

 
Quote
This is how Idiot America engages the great issues of the day. It decides, en masse, with a thousand keystrokes and clicks of the remote control, that because there are two sides to every question, they both must be right, or at least not wrong. And the poor biologist's words carry no more weight than the thunderations of some turkey-neck preacher out of the Church of Christ's Own Parking Facility in DeLand, Florida. Less weight, in fact, because our scientist is an "expert" and, therefore, an "elitist." Nobody buys his books. Nobody puts him on cable. He's brilliant, surely, but his Gut's the same as ours. He just ignores it, poor fool.

Read it from end to end.  Brilliant, hilarious and very, very frightening

Date: 2006/07/18 07:02:27, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ July 17 2006,19:41)
Good news! The Study That Dare Not Speak Its Name is finally available for close scrutiny.

New Century Foundation
From SourceWatch
The New Century Foundation, founded November 1990 and based in Oakton, Virginia, is a "self-styled think tank that publishes a monthly journal and a Web site called American Renaissance (http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/amren.asp?xpicked=5&item=amren). Also hosts biannual conferences. The Foundation promotes pseudoscientific and questionably researched and argued studies to validate the superiority of whites."[1] (http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/amren.asp?xpicked=5&item=amren)

The Foundation is headed by Samuel Jared Taylor, "author of Paved With Good Intentions: The Failure of Race Relations in Contemporary America, a 1991 book that documented fundamental problems with U.S. policies on civil rights, crime and welfare. ... But Mr. Taylor was criticized as an advocate of 'the new white racism' by conservative author Dinesh D'Souza, whose 1995 book The End of Racism reported many of the same racial problems Mr. Taylor had examined in his earlier book."[2] (http://www.amren.com/crime.htm)

"Presenters at conferences have included Samuel Francis and Gordon Lee Baum of the Council of Conservative Citizens. Attendees have included Don Black, operator of the white supremacist Web site Stormfront (http://www.stormfront.org/), and National Alliance leader Kevin Alfred Strom. Taylor has been a board member of the Council of Conservative Citizens, and is on the advisory board and has contributed to the racist journal Occidental Quarterly."[3] (http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/amren.asp?xpicked=5&item=amren)

http://www.nc-f.org/index.htm

New Century Foundation is a 501©(3) organization founded in 1994 to study immigration and race relations so as to better understand the consequences of America’s increasing diversity.

Date: 2006/07/18 07:07:37, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Our children are our future.  Lets not try and turn them into dangerous idiots.

:D

Date: 2006/07/18 07:13:37, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ July 17 2006,21:27)
Yes, everything bad that has ever happened in the world was the fault of Liberals. Hitler was a liberal. Mussolini was a liberal. Stalin was a liberal. Mao. Pol Pot? You guessed it. A liberal. Odin and Satan too. What's more, it's been just proven that liberals crucified Jesus.

Don't forget, Jesus was a Liberl Jew.  :D

Date: 2006/07/18 10:55:22, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Can we have a separate thread for in jokes about blogs I don't have time to read?  :D

I have enough trouble keeping up with this one!!!

Date: 2006/07/18 11:02:11, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Jared Taylor, a Racist in the Guise of 'Expert'

Published on Sunday, January 23, 2005 by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (Pennsylvania)

On Martin Luther King Jr. Day last week, when much of the nation took a holiday, "race-relations expert" Jared Taylor was hard at work. He began at 6:45 a.m. with an interview with a Columbus radio station. At 7:05 he was on the air in Orlando. An hour later his voice greeted morning commuters in Huntingdon, W.Va.

At 10:10 a.m., he was introduced no fewer than four times as "race relations expert Jared Taylor" on Fred Honsberger's call-in show on the Pittsburgh Cable News Channel. Four hours later, he was back on the air with Honsberger on KDKA radio, where he repeated the message he'd been thumping all day: Martin Luther King Jr. was a philanderer, a plagiarist and a drinker who left a legacy of division and resentment, and was unworthy of a national holiday.

What Taylor did not say, and what Honsberger didn't seem to know until I picked up the phone and called in myself, was that Jared Taylor believes black people are genetically predisposed to lower IQs that whites, are sexually promiscuous because of hyperactive sex drives. Race-relations expert Jared Taylor keeps company with a collection of racists, racial "separatists" and far-right extremists.

Taylor heads the Virginia-based New Century Foundation. Its board of directors has included a leader of the Council of Conservative Citizens, successor to the White Citizens Councils of the 1960s. A former board member represented the American Friends of the British National Party, a neo-fascist and anti-Semitic far-right group in England. Another board member is an anti-immigration author who has also reviewed books for a Holocaust denial journal.

Race-relations expert Jared Taylor publishes American Renaissance magazine, which features an array of pseudoscientific studies that purport to show the folly of multiculturalism and the inherent failure of the races to live together. Or, as Taylor once wrote, "If whites permit themselves to be displaced, it is not just the high culture of the West that could disappear but such things as representative government, rule of law and freedom of speech, which whites usually get right and everyone else usually gets wrong."

What Taylor represents and how he got himself on no fewer than a half-dozen radio and television stations in large markets to denounce Martin Luther King illustrates the new tactics of white supremacy. Employing the dispassionate language of sociological and genetic studies, and under the veneer of academic inquiry, an assortment of highly educated people now push the theory that everything from unwed motherhood in Atlanta to economic collapse in Gambia can be explained by the genetic code imprinted on the races.

Date: 2006/07/18 11:08:23, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=255

Taylor uses an incredibly simplistic analytical method that flatly ignores the fundamental conclusion of decades of serious criminology: Crime is intimately related to poverty. In fact, when multivariate statistical methods such as regression analysis are used, study after study has shown that race has little, if any, predictive power.

This basic fact is so well understood among scholars of criminal justice that the preface to Minnesota's official crime data reports carries this caveat: "Racial and ethnic data must be treated with caution. ... Existing research on crime has generally shown that racial or ethnic identity is not predictive of criminal behavior with data which has been controlled for social and economic factors."

When more sophisticated methodology is employed, socioeconomic factors including poverty, education, social status and urban residence account far better for criminal behavior than race. Above all, income counts.

It is precisely because being black in America is closely correlated with being poor, suffering from high unemployment and having low levels of education that the black community has relatively high crime rates.

In 1994, the same year that Taylor's data comes from, the poverty rate among blacks was three times that of whites. In addition, nearly 40 percent of black children grew up in poverty.

So while it is true, for instance, that blacks rob whites far more than vice versa, that is hardly a surprise — whites, after all, own nearly 10 times the wealth that blacks do on average. They also own far more businesses. Thus, it is only natural that any rational robber would select whites over blacks as victims.

It would truly have been a "startling conclusion" if the facts had shown that whites attacked blacks more than the other way around. That poor people are more prone to criminality at the expense of the wealthy is utterly unsurprising.

Date: 2006/07/18 11:13:00, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
And finally:

http://www.lipmagazine.org/~timwise/colorofdeception.html

First, as for the disproportionate rate of violent crime committed by blacks, economic conditions explain the difference with white crime rates. According to several studies, when community and personal economic status is comparable between whites and blacks, there are no significant racial crime differences (1). In other words, the implicit message of Taylor's report -- that blacks are dangerous because they are black -- is insupportable....

Next, Taylor claims that most victims of black violent crime are white, and thus, that blacks are violently targeting whites. Furthermore, since only a small share of the victims of white criminals are black (only 4.4 percent in 2002, for example), this means that blacks are far more of a threat to whites than vice-versa. But there are several problems with these claims.

To begin with, the white victim totals in the Justice Department's victimization data include those termed Hispanic by the Census, since nine in ten Latino/as are considered racially white by government record-keepers. Since Latinos and Latinas tend to live closer to blacks than non-Hispanic whites, this means that many "white" victims of "black crime" are Latino or Latina, and that in any given year, the majority of black crime victims would be people of color, not whites.

But even if we compute the white totals as Taylor does, without breaking out Hispanic victims of "black crime," his position is without merit. In 2002, whites, including Latinos, were about 81.5 percent of the population (3). That same year, whites (including Latinos) were 51 percent of the victims of violent crimes committed by blacks, meaning that whites were victimized by blacks less often than would have been expected by random chance, given the extent to which whites were available to be victimized (4).

As for the claim that blacks victimize whites at rates that are far higher than the reverse, though true, this statistic is meaningless, for a few obvious but overlooked reasons, first among them the simple truth that if whites are more available as potential victims, we would naturally expect black criminals to victimize whites more often than white criminals would victimize blacks. Examining data from 2002, there were indeed 4.5 times more black-on-white violent crimes than the reverse (5). While this may seem to support Taylor's position, it actually destroys it, because the interracial crime gap, though seemingly large, is smaller than random chance would have predicted. The critical factor ignored by Taylor is the extent to which whites and blacks encounter each other in the first place. Because of ongoing racial isolation and de facto segregation, the two group's members do not encounter one another at rates commensurate with their shares of the population: a fact that literally torpedoes the claims in The Color of Crime.

As sociologist Robert O'Brian has noted (using Census data), the odds of a given white person (or white criminal for that matter) encountering a black person are only about three percent. On the other hand, the odds of a given black person (or black criminal) encountering a white person are nineteen times greater, or fifty-seven percent (6), meaning the actual interracial victimization gap between black-on-white and white-on-black crime is smaller than one would expect. In 2002, blacks committed a little more than 1.2 million violent crimes, while whites committed a little more than three million violent crimes (7). If each black criminal had a 57 percent chance of encountering (and thus potentially victimizing) a white person, this means that over the course of 2002, blacks should have been expected to victimize roughly 690,000 whites. But in truth, blacks victimized whites only 614,176 times that year (8). Conversely, if each white criminal had only a three percent chance of encountering and thus victimizing a black person, this means that over the course of 2002, whites would have been expected to victimize roughly 93,000 blacks. But in truth, whites victimized blacks 135,931 times: almost 50 percent more often than would be expected by random chance (9).

Indeed, given relative crime rates as well as rates of interracial encounter, random chance would have predicted the ratio of black-on-white to white-on-black victimization at roughly 7.4 to one. Yet, as the data makes clear, there were only 4.5 times more black-on-white crimes than white-on-black crimes in 2002. In other words, given encounter ratios, black criminals victimize whites less often than could be expected, while white criminals victimize blacks more often than could be expected.

There is plenty more.  Excuse me for saving time by posting someone else's reasoned analysis - it was quicker than writing my own

Date: 2006/07/18 13:01:02, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Occam's Aftershave @ July 18 2006,17:43)
Noah must have shit himself when he saw all the mass of Asia coming towards him at 100 MPH and growing at 1000' per hour!  Maybe God put a force field around the Ark to protect it from getting vaporized or being smashed into toothpicks. ;)

Ok, so how the #### do I get that image out of my head  :D

Date: 2006/07/20 03:59:31, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (k.e @ July 20 2006,08:12)
Narcissistic Personality Disorder

I worked for someone who was diagnosed with that.  Really, really nasty experince.

Date: 2006/07/20 08:16:21, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (deadman_932 @ July 20 2006,13:00)
Quote
Since evolutionists deny the reality of consciousness in order to deny moral responsibility, they completely erase the distinction between the animate and inanimate.


I suppose you can give an example of this claim? Specifically, I'd like to see anyone denying that conciousness exists while saying that rocks and man are exactly alike in cognitive processes. Or will this be another of your multiple claims that you can't support directly, GoP?

I just want to ensure this question is repeated enough times so that GoP has to answer it.

Date: 2006/07/20 10:47:49, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (deadman_932 @ July 20 2006,15:07)
His claim of " the immigrants don't assimilate, enrich, or even work - and thus new problems join the old" has been supported by what?

Well, all the members of the current administration were originally immigrants.  :D

Date: 2006/07/20 14:45:14, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (MidnightVoice @ July 20 2006,13:16)
Quote (deadman_932 @ July 20 2006,13:00)
Quote
Since evolutionists deny the reality of consciousness in order to deny moral responsibility, they completely erase the distinction between the animate and inanimate.


I suppose you can give an example of this claim? Specifically, I'd like to see anyone denying that conciousness exists while saying that rocks and man are exactly alike in cognitive processes. Or will this be another of your multiple claims that you can't support directly, GoP?

I just want to ensure this question is repeated enough times so that GoP has to answer it.

Still waiting........

Date: 2006/07/22 10:21:07, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ July 22 2006,14:59)
the truth is there are still real men in the world, and almost all of them are conservative.

OMG - an all time classic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Date: 2006/07/26 10:52:28, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ July 25 2006,13:05)
Arlo wrote:
 
Quote
So, given CoP exhibits signs of being a creationist, do you reckon this one incident disproves his entire thesis?

How old was this lady? Did she grow up before, or after, the hippies took over?

Did you try looking at the link?

She was 85

Date: 2006/08/13 11:17:43, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19025455.400.html

One can't read the whole thing without a subscription, but it starts:

There appears to be an increasing tendency among scientists to come up with wild explanations when asked by the press to comment on unusual, novel phenomena. A good example is provided by comments about the recent Indian red rain phenomenon (4 March, p 34).

Red rain is morphologically similar to fungal spores or algae, as I have recently been able to confirm by microscope analysis of samples. There is no evidence that I am aware of to support suggestions that red rain is dust, sand, fat globules or blood.

From Gareth Jones

So Godfrey Louis rules out all possibilities apart from an extraterrestrial source for the red rain over India. Most meteorologists would be surprised to hear that over the course of two months, particles settling out of the upper atmosphere from a meteor airburst would be confined to such a small area.

For the upper atmosphere winds to not ...

Date: 2006/08/14 02:26:18, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I think the church will find Richard Leakey and the family a pretty hard nut to crack.

Date: 2006/08/14 10:49:32, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Do we have a "yawn" smiley?

Date: 2006/08/15 04:05:24, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
To maintain a belief in a 6,000-year-old earth requires a denial of essentially all the results of modern physics, chemistry, astronomy, biology and geology. It is to imply that airplanes and automobiles work by divine magic, rather than by empirically testable laws.

Date: 2006/08/15 04:19:48, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (afdave @ Aug. 15 2006,09:09)
Well good morning everyone ... Blah, blah, blah..... I'm not that dumb)

Can we go back to your evidence for point A Please?

Science starts at the begining, and until we clear up point A there is no point moving on.

Date: 2006/08/16 05:00:38, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote ("Rev Dr" Lenny Flank @ Aug. 13 2006,18:45)
 He's just a pit yorkie.  Yap yap yap.

Please don't insult Yorkshire terriers.  I have one  :D

Date: 2006/08/18 05:42:05, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyng....h_e.php

Their grandiose self-conceptions to the contrary, the cult [the "evolution cult"] members are rarely scientists at all.

They're almost always biologists—the "science" with the greatest preponderance of women. The distaff MIT "scientist" who fled the room in response to Larry Summers's remarks was, of course, a biologist. While I'm sure there have been groundbreaking discoveries about the internal digestive system of the earthworm, biologists are barely even scientists anymore. They're classifiers, list-makers, like librarians with their Dewey decimal system.

Date: 2006/08/18 05:54:09, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Sorry - it cut my title short!

Should have read "and probably a woman too".  Great compliment, being mistaken for a woman.

:D

Date: 2006/08/18 06:47:13, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
And they obviously don't think much of modern medicine, modern drugs and modern agriculture.

Reminds me of the Doonesbury where a patient had TB, and the doctor asked if he was a creationist and wanted the old useless drugs.  :D

Date: 2006/08/18 11:27:30, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Louis @ Aug. 18 2006,12:04)
No BR, it's not from a movie (as far as I remember! ). It's from my exceedingly naughty undergrad days. Thanks though!

Louis

Sounds awfully familiar.  Just like the Union bar  :D

Date: 2006/08/19 12:43:41, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (afdave @ Aug. 19 2006,17:33)
I like the gardening analogy ... a garden is a human creation.  But the gardener does not interact constantly with the garden to make it grow.  He interacts briefly to till, then plant, then weed, then water, etc.  But the rest of the time, he let's natural laws do their thing.  See?  Why should it be different with God?

Ah Ha!!   A Kipling fan.

Date: 2006/08/19 14:21:53, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Is it time to ask us to pay money to support a new server?  Tis done on other boards - after all, someone has to pay for us to have fun

Date: 2006/08/20 04:41:48, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
On another board I used to send a fixed (small but double digit) amount every month directly to the guy who owned the server

Date: 2006/08/20 08:30:15, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I wonder if any of these characters have ever heard of Gregor Mendel?  Or plant and animal breeding?

Date: 2006/08/20 08:36:05, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Done. Sent 10 months worth.

Remind me again in 10 months please!!

Date: 2006/08/21 05:21:18, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
So if I am really a gay woman, does that mean my marriage to another woman is unconstitutional?

Date: 2006/08/21 09:02:17, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I aologise if we have had this before

http://www.newscientist.com/article....on.html

Human beings, as we know them, developed from earlier species of animals: true or false? This simple question is splitting America apart, with a growing proportion thinking that we did not descend from an ancestral ape. A survey of 32 European countries, the US and Japan has revealed that only Turkey is less willing than the US to accept evolution as fact.

Religious fundamentalism, bitter partisan politics and poor science education have all contributed to this denial of evolution in the US, says Jon Miller of Michigan State University in East Lansing, who conducted the survey with his colleagues. "The US is the only country in which [the teaching of evolution] has been politicised," he says. "Republicans have clearly adopted this as one of their wedge issues. In most of the world, this is a non-issue

Date: 2006/08/21 09:06:29, Link
Author: MidnightVoice


I hope this works

Date: 2006/08/21 09:27:11, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ Aug. 21 2006,14:11)
And thanks to thin-skinned litigious types like you, our freedoms are rapidly dwindling.

Well, I have heard George Bush called many things (moron comes first to mind), but never a "thin-skinned litigious type"

Date: 2006/08/21 12:29:10, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Dave:

I notice you still have not presented any evidence.

Are you going to?

Date: 2006/08/22 02:16:55, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Aug. 20 2006,10:28)
The TalkOrigins Archive Foundation is considering buying a new machine for hosting PT, AE, and TD. (We're just waiting to hear from Wilkins.) To donate to the TOA Foundation, visit this page.

And for those of us in the US of A, I understand it is tax deductible.  I know that, given the salaries of scientists, that is not a biggie, but every little helps.  :D

“The wages of Sin are death:
The wages of scientists are worse”

Date: 2006/08/22 05:02:01, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Having worked for a NPD type, I particularly liked this comment:

Individuals with NPD believe that their presumption of superiority is sufficient proof of its existence

A counselor once told me another side of their character was to be able to change reality (in their minds) to fit their perceptions.  AKA they lie a lot

Date: 2006/08/23 12:39:29, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
As a raging Liberal, my gut reaction is that Paley is wrong.  But certainly in Europe, the massive Muslim immigration since WW II is not going well.  Obviously part of the cause is racism and discrimination by the host country, and lack of economic advancement (compare it to the African American population post Civil War to now – integration comes only when BOTH sides want it).

But there is also the problem of religion.  Muslims are probably much closer to comfortable in an authoritarian theocratic country like the States than they are in very liberal and secular Europe.  That very liberalism can be seen as threatening their core beliefs.  And, again in Europe with its high density Muslim areas, everything has worsened since 9/11.  There have been very significant signs of lack of integration, and WHATEVER THE CAUSE, it is something that needs to be thought about and dealt with.

So while I don’t like the idea, I am willing to consider it.  I am not going to reject it out of hand.  Unlike Bush I don’t believe in truthiness – I need to try and look at this seriously.

Date: 2006/08/23 12:49:12, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Bing @ Aug. 23 2006,17:13)
Given a few of the fundies I have met, I'd be willing to bet that Dave would categorically state that Roman Catholics are not True Christians™ as defined by his church.  Rather, they are blasphemers, idolators, Pope-and-Mary worshippers who deny the supremacy of scripture and instead substitute heretical sacraments.

See:

http://www.landoverbaptist.org/

and

http://www.landoverbaptist.org/sermons/dangcatholics.html


:D

Date: 2006/08/27 07:23:11, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (stevestory @ Aug. 26 2006,14:39)
 Sometimes comments are made which introduce a big meaty topic which isn't relevant to the thread, and those I might move to the Bathroom Wall at times, if there isn't a thread fit for it. People put effort into their comments and it's usually very rude to just delete their work.

On some boards (vBull) the Mods have a "split thread" option for exactly these circumstanves.

Date: 2006/08/27 07:29:52, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Within the K-12 sytem (with which I am only vicariously familiar) I would opt for actualy teaching comparative religion, whcih is where I would put ID.

Failing that, I would also possibly support teaching ID in a class element entitled "What is, and is not, science, and why".

Date: 2006/08/27 07:49:40, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (stevestory @ Aug. 26 2006,18:45)
while drinking mango-flavored vodka

I my experience evolution has produced two types of people - those that eat mangoes and those that think they taste like badly aged turpentine.  :D

Date: 2006/08/27 10:41:57, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (stevestory @ Aug. 27 2006,14:21)
Yeah, we've got stuff like that here, too, but I'm not familiar with it. I don't want to hit the wrong button, and, say, delete all 5000 AFDave Thread comments.

But that would be a service to the whole community  :D

Date: 2006/09/01 10:57:20, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Ichthyic @ Aug. 31 2006,15:29)
[creation science] -  [illegal bits] * (irrational CSI) / (subjective irreducibility) + redefine science= ID

...

[creation science] -  [illegal bits] * (irrational CSI) / (subjective irreducibility) + redefine science + redefine the English Language= ID

Date: 2006/09/03 11:16:30, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Fifth Amendment

Date: 2006/09/04 07:39:10, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ Sep. 03 2006,17:03)
FRANCE has failed miserably to integrate the millions of Arab and African immigrants who have settled in the country since the 1960s, according to two reports this week.

Hmm very first quote he uses blames the country not the immingrants   :D

Date: 2006/09/04 08:19:39, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Very sad.  He was a conservationist as well as a star

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060904/ap_on_en_tv/obit_irwin

Stingrays have a serrated, toxin-loaded barb, or spine, on the top of their tail. The barb, which can be up to 10 inches long, flexes if a ray is frightened. Stings usually occur to people when they step on or swim too close to a ray and can be excruciatingly painful but are rarely fatal, said University of Queensland marine neuroscientist Shaun Collin.

Collin said he suspected Irwin died because the barb pierced under his ribcage and directly into his heart.

"It was extraordinarily bad luck. It's not easy to get spined by a stingray and to be killed by one is very rare," Collin said.

Date: 2006/09/10 05:50:42, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Well, I must admit that the phrase "jawbone of an ass" has taken on new meaning since I started reading this board.  :D

Date: 2006/09/11 05:12:52, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I would add that if we teach ID in science classes, we need to teach Astrology, as it has more scientific support than ID.  :D

Date: 2006/09/11 09:01:39, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
When lizard brains emerged several things appeared on the planet for the first time: lust, anger, and aggression. Lizard brains are small and simple. They control breathing, vision, bodily movement. They also allow fierce territorial fights, lusty bouts of mating, and displays of anger.

Date: 2006/09/13 02:18:53, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (stevestory @ Sep. 12 2006,22:01)
And as far as being moderator, I knew what I was getting into. I just wanted to help in cleaning up some annoying problems. Think of it like, Wesley is the tireless building supervisor, you guys are the tenents, and I'm the part-time janitor.

Been there, done that, never again.  :D

Date: 2006/09/15 09:45:54, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (carlsonjok @ Sep. 15 2006,12:44)
[quote=Stephen Elliott,Sep. 15 2006,12:23]
Well, the answer is complicated.  But, I can offer a quick response with respect to the Founders that were slaveholders, such as Washington, Jefferson and Madison.  These men recognized, and to some extent agonized over, the contradiction between their personal slaveholdings and the human rights they espoused.  The problem they faced was that the southern economy, and their personal finances, were built on the back of slave labor.  They acknowledged the problem, but didn't have any solution beyond the abolition of slave trading and gradual emancipation to move away from slavery.  Jefferson in particular, as a lifelong spendthrift and debtor, was particularly bound by the Gordian knot.  

Slavery was, of course, a point of contention at the Constitutional Convention. But, it was essentially deferred into the future in order because it was a non-starter for the southern states and the establishment of a Union was considered paramount to resolving slavery. So, it was punted on down the road.

And by making slaves 3/5 of a person so they could be taxed  :D

Art. I, §2.


Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.

Date: 2006/09/15 10:43:05, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Altabin @ Sep. 15 2006,15:27)
Putting it like that, it does make me wonder why I can't just stop visiting such a wretched intellectual train-wreck in the first place... ???

Internet message boards are wickedly addictive, I am afraid.  I know, I helped run a couple :D

Date: 2006/09/18 02:55:15, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Mike PSS @ Sep. 18 2006,04:58)
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZZZT!!!!!!!!

It's taken a while but AFDave has finally blown my cloaking device.  I invested heavily in time and money to protect my lurker status but all previous protections are now null and void.

As a long time lurker since page 1 of this thread (and the previous related topics in April06) I've laughed (and almost cried) at the antics to prove the present Hypothesis under question.  The latest Isochron set-up by AFDave went over the top for me.

Welcome!   :D

And I am glad Dear Dave does serve a useful purpose here   :D

Date: 2006/09/18 10:38:49, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Stephen Elliott @ Sep. 18 2006,14:28)
I am starting to think that nobody should enjoy the rights of citizenship untill they have contributed something to society.

Not sure how to work that idea yet. But being granted rights for zero input is begining to sound ridiculous.

Naturalized citizens should get more votes. They have to pass a test on the constitution, and obviously know it better than Bush, and they have to pass a test in English, and obviously speak it better than Bush.  :D

Date: 2006/09/18 10:44:13, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (GCT @ Sep. 18 2006,14:45)
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.

Buffalo Bills Buffalo Bills Buffalo Bills Buffalo Bills.

Date: 2006/09/19 08:12:38, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ Sep. 19 2006,12:14)
Once again, you're confusing a nation with its geography. I'm not saying that textbooks shouldn't discuss Indian societies and cultures; I'm just asserting that Indian History is not equal to American history. Logic and reality are not PC, sorry.

So are you asserting that America does not exist geographically?

Or are you confusing a racist eurocetric view and reality?

Date: 2006/09/20 12:18:21, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ Sep. 20 2006,16:31)
Quote
3-The almost silence and unwillingness to criticise fellow muslims by moderates.


This is the biggie. If a culture can't control its extremism, then the extremists control the culture. And if you don't try to fix a problem, then you are part of the problem IMHO. I don't see a way around this dilemma.

And to think - this is how Bush thinks we should behave in America.  Disgusting, is it not?

Date: 2006/09/21 01:33:36, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ Sep. 20 2006,17:39)
Eh?????? I don't understand. If this is meant as a criticism, then I'm doubly confused, since as an Irishman you'd understand better than anyone the danger in enabling/tolerating terrorist violence (and this is coming from someone who loves Irish culture). As an Amurican from the Christian Right

Hmm.  I am hardly surprised at you lack of understanding, it is what I would expect from an Amurican from the Christian Right.

And bilingual I am, but Irish I am not. But thanks for the compliment.  Next you will really compliment me and think I am a woman  :D

Date: 2006/09/21 03:48:20, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Russell @ Sep. 21 2006,08:34)
My work involves "germs". I admit I'm fascinated by viruses, bacteria and the like; can't get enough of them. Does that tell you something?

Mine involves getting rid of them  :D

Date: 2006/09/21 09:04:00, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ Sep. 21 2006,09:32)
OK, wiseguy, if you're from the UK but not "British" or "Irish", then are you a Scotsman or Welshman? Or from a former colony? And please explain my "lack of understanding".

American

I assume it lack of mental ability

Date: 2006/09/22 01:58:45, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (stevestory @ Sep. 21 2006,19:37)
. But there are downsides to having the same conversation split into two parts. Any thoughts from you guys?

Try locking the old thread and leaving a link to the new one as the last post.

Date: 2006/09/24 11:40:21, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (ericmurphy @ Sep. 24 2006,16:21)
So far, 24 messages, and not a speck of evidence that Christianity has in any way, shape, or form been of any benefit whatsoever to the West.

Well, if you read "How the Irish Saved Civilization", and believe it, there is a start.  :D

Date: 2006/09/25 02:01:05, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (breakerslion @ Sep. 24 2006,17:11)
Quote
This thread might fizzle out in the next couple days at this rate.


Oh my! Quick! Everyone who believes in Faries, Leprechauns, Angels, or Supreme Beings (not including Diana Ross and Co.) clap your hands! Thanks to the arbitrary nature of cause and effect in the Cartoon Universe, you will save this thread!

(I'm new. Too sarcastic?)

Not sarcastic enough?  :D

Date: 2006/10/14 10:07:59, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Russell @ Oct. 13 2006,16:32)
In light of "Ghost of Paley"'s coming clean, I'm reluctant to waste more time on the likes of AFDave, perhaps only to learn months from now it was all just a drawn-out joke.

OK, I have been away, and have had no luck searching  :D

Link?

Date: 2006/10/14 10:53:20, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (someotherguy @ Oct. 14 2006,15:20)
Quote (MidnightVoice @ Oct. 14 2006,15:07)
 
Quote (Russell @ Oct. 13 2006,16:32)
In light of "Ghost of Paley"'s coming clean, I'm reluctant to waste more time on the likes of AFDave, perhaps only to learn months from now it was all just a drawn-out joke.

OK, I have been away, and have had no luck searching  :D

Link?

See this post from the "LUCA" thread.

Thankee, kind sir.  I didn't want to plough through everything in sight  :D

Date: 2006/10/14 11:00:20, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Muslims in Britain:

I no longer live in the UK, but I was born and rasied there, and am nearly as old as dirt.  In my youth it was the Caribean immigrants that were not integrating and hated Britain as an ex-Imperial power. And I remember riots over several decades (and I used to live near the "front line" at one time - anyone remember the Brixton Riots and the bus burning?). Nowadays, whilst they have many justifiable complaints, I don't think they all hate Britain, and I think they are on the way to integration to a degree.

I also used to live in Wandsworth, and just down the road was a Hugenot cemetry.  Those darned people took forever to integrate  :D

Date: 2006/10/18 16:27:13, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6064364.stm

http://darwin-online.org.uk/

The complete works of one of history's greatest scientists, Charles Darwin, are being published online.
The project run by Cambridge University has digitised some 50,000 pages of text and 40,000 images of original publications - all of it searchable.

Surfers with MP3 players can even access downloadable audio files.

The resource is aimed at serious scholars, but can be used by anyone with an interest in Darwin and his theory on the evolution of life.

"The idea is to make these important works as accessible as possible; some people can only get at Darwin that way," said Dr John van Wyhe, the project's director.

Dr van Wyhe has spent the past four years searching the globe for copies of Darwin's own materials, and works written about the naturalist and his breakthrough ideas on natural selection.

The historian said he was inspired to build the library at darwin-online.org.uk when his own efforts to study Darwin while at university in Asia were frustrated.

Date: 2006/10/23 02:57:07, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (stevestory @ Oct. 19 2006,20:43)
so in conclusion, even though most of us probably won't like your ideas, you'll get a fairer hearing here than there.

And some of us have come back after some time away and have absolutely no idea what those ideas are  :D

Date: 2006/10/24 12:34:31, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Richardthughes @ Oct. 23 2006,23:54)
Er... hows abouts it. Converge on Chicago?

Chicago in the summer is driveable.  :D

How about when the Rugby World Cup is on and we can watch it  :D

Date: 2006/10/24 13:14:42, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard....64.html

Excellent read, even if you don't agree

Date: 2006/10/28 10:55:23, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (stevestory @ Oct. 27 2006,20:57)
Quantity:
Saying something bad once, and saying it 500 times, are two different things. Saying "I bet you put firecrackers up your cat's butt." is bad, and probably will get moved to the Bathroom Wall. Saying, every day for two months, "So, how many firecrackers you put up your cat's butt today, huh? 50? 100? Killed it yet?" will get more than the Bathroom Wall.

Hey, Hey, LBJ
How many babises have you killed today  

:D

Date: 2006/10/29 09:10:55, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
The words excluded byf the filter can usually be set by the board admin.  I loved it on one board where "saltwater" used to get censored when discussing fish.  :D

An unintended consequence of censorship.

Date: 2006/10/29 10:56:09, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
No.

Next question

Date: 2006/10/30 02:20:37, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I'd like to take you now on wings of song, as it were, and try and help you forget perhaps for a while your drab, wretched lives. Here's a song all about spring-time in general, and in particular, about one of the many delightful pastimes the coming of spring affords us all.

Spring is here, a-suh-puh-ring is here.
Life is skittles and life is beer.
I think the loveliest time of the year is the spring.
I do, don't you? 'Course you do.
But there's one thing that makes spring complete for me,
And makes ev'ry Sunday a treat for me.

All the world seems in tune
On a spring afternoon,
When we're poisoning pigeons in the park.
Ev'ry Sunday you'll see
My sweetheart and me,
As we poison the pigeons in the park.

When they see us coming, the birdies all try an' hide,
But they still go for peanuts when coated with cyanide.
The sun's shining bright,
Ev'rything seems all right,
When we're poisoning pigeons in the park.

Lalaalaalalaladoodiedieedoodoodoo

We've gained notoriety,
And caused much anxiety
In the Audubon Society
With our games.
They call it impiety,
And lack of propriety,
And quite a variety
Of unpleasant names.
But it's not against any religion
To want to dispose of a pigeon.

So if Sunday you're free,
Why don't you come with me,
And we'll poison the pigeons in the park.
And maybe we'll do
In a squirrel or two,
While we're poisoning pigeons in the park.

We'll murder them all amid laughter and merriment.
Except for the few we take home to experiment.
My pulse will be quickenin'
With each drop of strychnine
We feed to a pigeon.
It just takes a smidgin!
To poison a pigeon in the park.

Date: 2006/10/30 05:28:38, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Louis @ Oct. 30 2006,07:47)
Semper in stercum solus profundus variat. Always in the shit except the depth varies.

Our Latin was not as good as yours.  We used
Semper in excremento, sed alto variat.  :D

Not to mention Nil illegitimus carborundum

and

Carpe noctem

Date: 2006/10/30 09:53:28, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Ichthyic @ Oct. 30 2006,15:32)
so my question is:

should you believe everything you read?

Are you suggesting that the Bible might not be absolutely correct?  :D

Date: 2006/10/31 10:49:29, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I rather like:

William Dembski's Uncommon Descent blog has, since the Dover decision, been turned over to a small group of bathrobed basement activists whose writing indicates they are increasingly disassociated from reality. Dembski himself has made a series of bizarre charges against a range of scientists which he has later had to retract, but the lesson, it seems, is never learned.

Like zombies, this small cadre of intelligent design activists will live on, but the opportunity to win others to their ranks has now passed, and nowhere is that fact clearer than in the inward-looking writing of the ID activists themselves.

Date: 2006/10/31 10:53:46, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (stevestory @ Oct. 31 2006,16:48)
I am curious about how my experiences are matching others'. Has today been the absolute worst for anyone else? I'd say 90% of my attempts to load a page have timed out today.

100% success on page loading so far today.

But the computer's version of 25 seconds between posts differes from that of my watch  :(

I think the problems might be restricted to those who have not donated enough money  :D

Date: 2006/11/26 16:17:31, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Richardthughes @ Nov. 20 2006,01:22)
Just sent a little something.

Its a tough call with regard to visability. You want it to be an option, but not to feel like begging. A subtle 'contribute' link or somesuch?

What I do is keep bringing up the subject  :D

Date: 2006/12/04 07:48:00, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Signed it

Date: 2006/12/13 14:39:55, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ Dec. 13 2006,11:43)
Dave's not violating any rules

Hmmm.  I am breaking the rules by reminding you of the rules, but what the ####  :D

"Be sure to pick the *most appropriate* forum for your message. That could be at a different board."

"Each user is requested to consider the quantity and quality of his/her messages. One specific item to be aware of is that repetition of the same quoted material at a frequency greater than once per month is considered annoying."

"Excessively annoying: The state of being a hindrance to harmonious, or even interesting, discussion to such a degree that immediate termination of access is warranted or demanded."

Date: 2006/12/14 12:55:18, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory?id=2725958

Climate change could be disastrous for some animals, but male gray seals are probably not complaining — it has improved their sex lives.

Weaker males would not normally have a chance with the females, who usually go for the more dominant types.

But lower rainfall levels have forced female seals on the remote Scottish island of North Rona to travel further from their partners to find fresh water, giving the weaker males more opportunity to mate with them...............

Twiss and scientists from the University of St Andrews in Scotland recorded a 61 percent increase in the number of males contributing to the genetic pool.

"These findings show that climate change, whilst endangering many species, could also help to increase the genetic diversity of some species," Twiss said.

Date: 2006/12/16 15:24:05, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
One other small comment on public transport in the States.  I certain areas of the states, I would happily take Public Transport for 9 months a year if it were available.  But there are times when it is so cold here it can actually be dangerous waiting for a bus to arrive.  When you have a week where the highs are never above -20 (C or F, take you pick) hanging around waiting for a bus can be an unpleasant experince.  :D

Date: 2006/12/21 08:54:49, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
On another board I met a teenager who said that his last science education was in 10th grade, and he knew enough science to know that evolution was wrong and creationism right.  Made me wonder why I bothered to get all those pointless degrees in biology :D

Date: 2006/12/21 09:42:22, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Studying is overrated.  Education is not  :D

And I had a lot of fun at college, but then I was young, and it was London in the sixties and seventies........

Date: 2006/12/21 09:53:49, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
It has been very clunky for a couple of days, but today it is fast.  New server of a lot of people giving up for a while?

Date: 2006/12/21 12:52:09, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Do we have a whoopee, jumping up and down smilie?

:D

Great news.  I am a happy camper

Date: 2006/12/21 13:09:08, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I am not sure he was educated at all :D

Date: 2006/12/21 16:49:10, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (stevestory @ Dec. 21 2006,16:34)
Us Americans being very America-centric

Not all of us Americans are Americentric.  This one isn't, but maybe that is because this one was born and raised in UK and used to live in Africa, and isn't a real American because he was naturalized.  :D

But now I am in Iowa for a while, via Cornell (and in case there any Iowans here, I mean the other Cornell, the one in upstate NY   :)

Date: 2006/12/22 10:29:28, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (carlsonjok @ Dec. 21 2006,20:21)
Born and raised in Rochester NY.  I have been in Norman, OK for 10 years now after short stints in Boynton Beach, FL and Reading, PA and a longer stop in Columbus OH.

I know Rochester well.  Go Bills!!

Date: 2006/12/22 10:31:53, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
It really has been a delight this couple of days.

Thankee muchly.

Date: 2006/12/22 15:31:28, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
It seems a lot of us have lived in Upstate NY. Must be some sort of correlation here....  :D

Date: 2006/12/22 16:46:55, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Have a great holiday season, if appropriate.

If not, have fun anyway  :D

Date: 2006/12/22 18:00:59, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (deadman_932 @ Dec. 22 2006,16:54)
Happy Solstice/Giftmas/holiday or astronomical event of your choice. And best wishes for the upcoming solar circumnavigation.

Don't forget Festivus  :D

Date: 2006/12/27 11:22:28, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Roland Anderson @ Dec. 26 2006,16:51)
Jumping in late - I'm in Vauxhall in London. Would be nice to see more Londoners here - though I guess I'm a bit of an impostor as actually I'm from Birmingham. Totally not a scientist but v interested in everything evolutionary.

One thing that interests me is how old people are. Through the anonymity of the net everyone seems to me to be the same age as me (34) but Russell's post reminded me that that's not the case. (Kudos to Russell and many others incidentally for their contributions to the afdave thread)

Born in Handsworth, and lived in S. Ken, West Ken, Clapham Junction, Putney, Herne Hill, Dulwich, Wandsworth and Balham over the course of 20 years  :D

And I am a bichemist working on nutrition (sort of), and am rapidly approaching 60.  Which probably makes me one of the oldest farts you will meet on message boards.  :D

Date: 2006/12/27 11:26:09, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (skeptic @ Dec. 26 2006,21:19)
One thing I would change though is withholding.  It appears that more than convenience it's purpose is to lull the taxpayer into a complacent attitude.  People pay less and less attention to tax policy because it's taken care-of for them and government gains more and more opportunities to raise taxes because no one is minding the store.

I can assure you that I (via an accountant) take great care to ensure that I only pay the taxes that I have to pay!  :D

Date: 2006/12/27 16:13:13, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (ericmurphy @ Dec. 27 2006,15:55)
Other than that, according to Dave, it is in principle impossible to date anything.

I often felt that way during my slumps when I was a young man  :D

Date: 2006/12/29 11:09:01, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Dec. 28 2006,22:48)
 
Quote (Steviepinhead @ Dec. 28 2006,20:54)
It sure is a pretty gee-tar.

But they're out of 'em at that price, and probably at any price.  It was a mfg's close-out.   And they do be closed out!

Dang, 'cause it sure was a pretty gee-tar...

But it's not THE world's prettiest guitar. As I pointed out last summer, that title belongs to this:


As played by, oh, I dunno, THIS man:



or maybe THIS guy:

My musical tastes include someone of whom most of you have never heard, Pete Atkin, playing songs mainly written by Clive James (and for the Brits and Aussies, yes, THAT Clive James).

Two such songs, appropos guitars:

National Steel

Shining in the window a guitar that wasn't wood
It was looking like a silver coin from when they still were good
The man who kept the music shop was pleased to let me play
Although the price was twenty times what I could ever pay

    Pick it up and feel the weight and weigh the feel
    That thing is an authentic National Steel

A lacy grille across the front and etchings on the back
But the welding sealed a box not even Bukka White could crack
I tuned it to an open chord, picked up the nickel slide
And bottlenecked a blues that sounded cold yet seemed to glide

    The National Steel weaves a singing shroud
    Just as sure as men in winter breathe a cloud

Scrapper Blackwell, Blind Boy Fuller and Blind Blake
Son House or any name you care to take
And from many a sad railroad, mine or mill
Lonnie Johnson's bitter tears are in there still

    Be certain, said the man, of who you are
    There are dead men still alive in that guitar

Back there the next morning half demented by desire
For that storybook assemblage of heavy plate and wire
I sold half the things I valued but I'll never count the cost
While I can pick a note like broken bracken in the frost

    And I hear those fabled names becoming real
    Every time I feel the weight or weigh the feel
    Of the vanished years inside my National Steel




Thief In The Night

A guitar is a thief in the night
That robs you of sleep through the wall
A guitar is a thin box of light
Throwing reflections that rise and fall
It reminds you of Memphis or maybe Majorca
Big Bill Broonzy or Garcia Lorca
A truck going north or a cab to the Festival Hall

And the man who plays the guitar for life
Tests his thumbs on a slender knife
Forever caresses a frigid wife
His fingers travel on strings and frets
Like a gambler's moving to cover bets
Remembering what his brain forgets
While his brain remembers the fears and debts

  Long fingernails that tap a brittle rhythm on a glass
  Around his neck a ribbon with a little silver hook
  Like some military order second class
  You can read him like an open book
  From the hands that spend their lives creating tension
  From the wrists that have a lean and hungry
  Eyes that have a mean and angry look

A guitar is a thief in the night
That robs you of sleep through the wall
A guitar is a thin box of light
Throwing reflections that rise and fall
A guitar reminds you of death and taxes
Charlie Christian outplaying the saxes
The beginners' call and the very last call of all

Date: 2006/12/31 12:44:44, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (stevestory @ Dec. 31 2006,11:52)
[quote=Louis,Dec. 31 2006,12:24] So this thread is going to end. we're not going to Cut and Run, we're going to do a Phased Withdrawal. The previous AFDave thread got 6,047 responses. This one's currently on 4725. So make the next 275 posts count, because at 5,000 the AFDave train comes to an end. After that, I'm sure AFDave will be welcome at Alan Fox's blog or he can continue this on his own blog, or wherever else.

Ok, so maybe it is time I posted every few minutes so we can bring this farce to an end.

Date: 2006/12/31 15:24:25, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Russell @ Dec. 31 2006,14:21)
I think one of the best uses that the remaining 250 or so posts would be for the long time lurkers (are there any?) to weigh in.

Nice theory, but it might take a rather long time to get 250 lurkers to post something.  :D

But we could lock the thread and then stick it, so it remains as a monument and warning for all to see.  You know, like putting an executed felon's head on a pike.  :D

Date: 2007/01/01 13:55:47, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I knew it - there had to be a reason I enjoyed my youth so much - it is because I am a LIBERAL

the liberal model, which is defined by sin and perversion

Date: 2007/01/02 08:08:25, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (afdave @ Jan. 02 2007,07:49)
Aren't scientists supposed to be open minded?  Are they not supposed to be critical thinkers?  Why would you be unwilling to critically examine the historical and scientific claims of the Book of Genesis, a book which has been foundational to Western Civilization?  Who cares if it's also a religious book?  You don't have to talk about the religion part.  Just examine the claims as they touch upon historical geology and biology.  To exclude such an influential book which touches on many aspects of science and history from science dialog seems to me the ultimate in intellectual insecurity and closed-mindedness.

Yes

Yes

Because it is not science, it is philosophy/religion, and that is the type of class in which it should be studied.

Scientists teaching science - they use books about science not philosophy/religion.

Have you NO understanding of science?  Actually, I guess that is a pretty stupid question.  I guess it is a demonstration of your intellectual insecurity and closed-mindedness.

Date: 2007/01/02 16:12:07, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
http://www.salon.com/books/int/2007/01/02/numbers/index.html

Interesting

Date: 2007/01/02 16:56:15, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Are we there yet?


:D


:D


:D

Date: 2007/01/03 07:00:52, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Did that remind you of anyone?  :D ;)

Date: 2007/01/03 17:27:59, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
From memory. Time seems to more or less agree with the scientific consensus on Darwin and Global Warming.

But here is a long article

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1090909,00.html

The Evolution Wars - cover story

Date: 2007/01/04 07:09:39, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Russell @ Jan. 03 2007,17:49)
Oh, I don't doubt that overall Time "agrees" with the scientific consensus.

My beef is that too much of the reporting on the issue tends to be way too deferential to the crackpots.  Way too much "on the one hand James Watson says... on the other, Michael Behe says..."  

Again, I'd have to go back and read the articles in question, but I don't think they drove home the point that there is absolutely no support in the scientific literature for the IDCreationists. Now that I think of it, I really should go back and read it. Did they, for instance, devote due scrutiny to the Wedge Document, or Wells's Pledge of Allegiance to Rev. Moon?

I would have to go read all 7 pages of it again!  But I think they come out on the side of the angels, just not a stridently as I would like.

And I agree this idea of "looking at both sides" now gives a disproportionate amount of ink to the extreme crackpots.

Date: 2007/01/04 07:21:12, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (ScaryFacts @ Jan. 04 2007,06:09)
Quote (skeptic @ Jan. 03 2007,22:39)
As for myself, I don't see or accept the conflict between science and religion so I have no trouble in my faith.


Based on what I have seen among Christian boards as well as my own experience, there is a tremendous tension between Christianity and science.

In the US a brand of evangelical Christianity is the norm.  As such there is a ton of popular media directed toward Christians.  On a regular basis this media puts out comforting words to sincere Christians saying things like:  “You know the things you’ve been hearing about evolution?  Well it turns out real scientists aren’t even sure about it.  Plus it can be mathematically proven that we were designed.”

Most Christians—even educated ones—are ignorant of the real biological sciences so this type of thing is easy to accept.  In addition they are often taught a false dichotomy of “if evolution is true there is no God.”

But in some cases (like mine) people decide to look just a little deeper.

When they do they see the lies being propagated in the name of Christ, it does provide a challenge to one’s Christian faith.  Those without a basis for their faith outside of literalism and popularism truly struggle.

I’m hoping a thread like this one will genuinely discuss how to resolve some of those issues (and acknowledge some are never going to be resolved.)

 
Quote (deadman_932 @ Jan. 04 2007,01:09)

This depth and breadth and all-encompassing power can only ALSO be approached only by one other cognitive construct: Science. This is why I keep the two separate and don't let them touch...to me, they're matter and anti-matter, but that's just MY view.


At some point for me the cognitive dissonance between the two was just too loud to ignore.  I had based my entire life since I was 17 on the truth of Christianity.  Gave up a full ride to Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology to pay my way through Bible college, took my family to live in the poverty of Appalachia.  (I don’t mean to make it sound like these were awful things—we’ve had a great life—but the stakes were pretty high for me.

 
Quote (deadman_932 @ Jan. 04 2007,01:09)
I'll add that I have yet to find any reason to make my "religious" views known to ANYONE, save myself. This has the tendency to disassociate it from the innate human drive towards power -- the desire to get other beings to think and do what you want them to -- and I think this is an acceptable position for me to hold.


This is pretty much my stance.  One of the things I hated about ministry was being the morals instructor/enforcer.  The way evangelicals practice their faith today the minister is trying to impose Christian behavior from the outside.

I always had the opinion if you are a Christian you ought to know not to treat your wife like crap—you shouldn’t need someone to tell you.

Now that I am out of ministry I enjoy being responsible for my own faith and not everyone else’s.  I’m OK with God whether someone else agrees, disagrees or doesn’t even think about me.

And power—even in small congregations—is a real issue in Christianity.  I’ve often said if you’re a nobody in life you can always find fame as a pastor.  It’s the easiest gig to get.

 
Quote (Louis @ Jan. 04 2007,04:05)
If you really see no conflict between religion and science then you deliberately ain't looking, to be blunt. Granted the science/religion clash is not the whole deal, rather one sliver of a larger epistemological conflict between different human mechanisms of acquiring knowledge about the universe. The TRAGIC thing is that thus far, the only mechanism humans have discovered that in any reliable sense does allow us to acquire even only provisional knowledge of the universe is that which is best typified by what we call science.


If God exists—and I believe He does (note the caps)—then His existence is consistent with accurate science, at least in my view.  I don’t believe He set up a lying universe.

I don’t expect to ever understand all of God nor of science, but denial is not an alternative.  I am willing to say I have my own reasons for maintaining my faith, but I do try to integrate scientific reality with it as well.  Denial is intellectually lazy and cannot, by its very nature, lead to deeper “faith.”

Heddle:

As I was about to post I caught you comment.  Yes, it is possible this will end up being about insults.  But what I have found on this board is that, in the main, if you treat people with respect they give it back.

I think the title of this thread is somewhat unfortunate--I don't think we need to debate whether there are intellectually honest anybodys, of course there are.  If we approach this thread from the idea of "we don't know everything about our faith but are trying to see how we can combine faith and science into a consistent whole"  I believe it will be helpful to everyone.

Sure maybe Louis, Lenny et al will put in some jibes, but then again, maybe sometimes we deserve them.

You have to admit framing the debate as "are there intellectually honest Christians" maybe wasn't the smartest way to label this thread.

I am not a Christian, or religous.  But I am not a Dawkinist either.  I know and have worked with many Christians who are scientists, and they are just like the rest of us - some good and some bad.  I think that someone can be a good scientist and have "Faith" in the religous sense, and still believe in his or her own version of a superior being.

And I have seen some of the good that religion can do when I lived in Africa.  I have seen the doctor's in a mission hospital working for days to save lives after an accident when the local hospital had given up.  I have seen missions trying to help the local populations generate income and food (works before faith).  So there is a lot of good out there, as well as bad.

Please don't judge all religions by what you see in the United States.  The US is different to most other western countries.

Date: 2007/01/04 10:24:36, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (ScaryFacts @ Jan. 04 2007,09:30)
Diploma mill, honorary doctorates do not create expertise.  Doctorates in philosophy or theology do not qualify one to speak as an expert in biology.  Yet, because many of the "leaders" in the creationist movement have a Dr. before their name and claim to be Christians, the church, in general, treats them as well meaning, qualified experts.

And also when it comes to scientists, you get people like me with doctorates in biochemistry, who quite happily admit they are not experts in evolution.  :D

Interesting, isn't it?

Date: 2007/01/04 10:29:57, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Is Theaxton's Old Peculiar still available?  :D

Or Brains SA?  (Supposed to be Special Ale, but known locally as Skull Attack)

Date: 2007/01/05 08:08:08, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote ("Rev Dr" Lenny Flank @ Jan. 05 2007,07:09)
OK, now we're getting somewhere . . . .   Since neither you nor your family (in both cases) was born with ethics and morals in their genes, then where did they come from?

Indeed, does it make any DIFFERENCE where they come from?

There is a vast amount of research on where "moral" and co-operation come from, and it could well have a genetic and social and practical biological component.

To me, it makes no difference where they all come from.

Date: 2007/01/05 08:28:38, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Well, the thread can be locked, stuck to the top of the message board and renamed.

Or it could be archived and linked in a second thread that could also be created, with a significant number of less relevant posts removed  :)

Date: 2007/01/05 09:04:17, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
http://www.the-scientist.com/news/home/38440/


A recently released Congressional report accuses senior officials at the Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of Natural History (NMNH) of having harassed, discriminated against, and retaliated against research associate and journal editor Richard Sternberg for allowing publication of a scientific paper supporting intelligent design (ID) in 2004.

According to the report, NMNH officials sought to discredit Sternberg and force him out of his unpaid RA position after he allowed an article by Stephen C. Meyer, director of the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture, to be published in the August 2004 Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, a peer-reviewed journal of which he was managing editor at the time. While legally separate from the NMNH, Proceedings is governed by a council that includes NMNH scientists and receives public funds from the museum.

Meyer's article, which used information theory to support the argument for intelligent design in biological complexity, sparked controversy. It was the first pro-ID article to be published in a refereed publication, raising concern among some scientists that it might be used to enhance the academic argument for intelligent design.

The Congressional report, prepared by the staff of Rep. Mark Souder (R-IN), chairman of the Government Reform subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human Resources and released Dec. 11, supports Sternberg's claims that NMNH supervisors investigated his political and religious beliefs, sought to discredit him, and aimed to force his removal as an RA by creating a "hostile work environment" after the article was published.

The report suggests legislation is needed to protect the free speech of scientists at the Smithsonian and other federally funded institutions.

"While the majority of scientists embrace Darwinian theory, it is important that neither Federal funds nor Federal power be used to punish or retaliate against otherwise qualified scientists merely because they dissent from the majority view," the report states.

Sternberg, who is also a staff taxonomist at NIH's National Center for Biotechnology Information, said he is "thinking hard" about whether to file a discrimination lawsuit. "I do not think any Federal government employee should be discriminated against on the basis of their outside activities or their intellectual views, concerning theories of evolution or any other subject," Sternberg told The Scientist in an email.

The report says NMNH officials and scientists discussed among themselves in emails whether Sternberg "was a Republican," "was a fundamentalist" or "was a conservative."

It also references an Aug. 26, 2004, email from Hans Sues, NMNH associate director for research and collections, to the National Center for Science Education (NCSE) seeking help in trying to determine whether Sternberg had misrepresented himself as a Smithsonian employee, as opposed to an RA, because doing so would have constituted grounds for his dismissal.

Date: 2007/01/05 09:35:39, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Russell @ Jan. 05 2007,09:18)
The imprimatur of "Congressional Report", considering which Congress we're talking about - the 109th, the most disgraceful, irresponsible, corrupt, internationally embarrassing, wing-nut dominated Congress in my memory - fails to impress me, at least in any positive way.

Do we have a ROFL smiley?

:D

Date: 2007/01/08 13:48:20, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Secular fundamentalists are the new totalitarians

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,1984003,00.html

There's an aspiring totalitarianism in Britain which is brilliantly disguised. It's disguised because the would-be dictators - and there are many of them - all pretend to be more tolerant than thou. They hide alongside the anti-racists, the anti-homophobes and anti-sexists. But what they are really against is something very different. They - call them secular fundamentalists - are anti-God, and what they really want is the eradication of religion, and all believers, from the face of the earth.

Date: 2007/01/09 07:13:18, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Renier @ Jan. 09 2007,04:59)
Yeah, Durban is a good distance from civilisation, aka, Cape Town :-)

David, if you are ever here again, drop me a PM a week or so before your visit. We can go and hit some pubs. Bring your calculator with, we will need to predict how long it will take to crawl to the next pub :-p

I should be in Cape Town later this year - got to go visit a few prisons  :D

Date: 2007/01/09 07:18:07, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Grauniad?  I have not heard that term for decades!!  Is it still called that, or are you nearly as old as I am?  :D

Date: 2007/01/09 12:09:29, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Renier @ Jan. 09 2007,07:59)
Quote (MidnightVoice @ Jan. 09 2007,07:13)
Quote (Renier @ Jan. 09 2007,04:59)
Yeah, Durban is a good distance from civilisation, aka, Cape Town :-)

David, if you are ever here again, drop me a PM a week or so before your visit. We can go and hit some pubs. Bring your calculator with, we will need to predict how long it will take to crawl to the next pub :-p

I should be in Cape Town later this year - got to go visit a few prisons  :D

Visit a few prisons?

What time of the year are you coming down here?

I am trying to make it while the Tri-Nations is on  :D

(and all the #### Yanks will wondering WTF I am talking about.  He said, being a #### Yank himslf now).  :D

Date: 2007/01/09 12:25:02, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (k.e @ Jan. 09 2007,12:16)
Go the Blacks*

*NZ's the All Blacks ...the world's best rugby team. :)

At the moment.

And when I was young.

But, need I mention the last World Cup?  :D  (and I have the tie to prove that we did actually win, and I wear it whenever any Australiuans come to town.)

Date: 2007/01/09 17:35:00, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Any of you Sothies old enough to remember Jeremy Taylor, od children's and adults songs fame?

Date: 2007/01/10 10:16:14, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (CloneBoySA @ Jan. 10 2007,02:36)
PS This thread seems to have turned into a bit of a Southern Hemisphere party place...

Well, I have not yet been to South Africa, but I have lived in Africa south of the Equator...

Date: 2007/01/11 17:30:22, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I have been trying to design a placebo-controlled double-blind creationist experiment, but have not come up with one yet  :D

Date: 2007/01/16 09:04:50, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
[b\"This is not quite true because avian and mammalian are flawed taxonomical concepts. So there are no mammals or avis in the sense that evolutionists define those groups. Consequently there is no such thing as mammalian or avian DNA."[/b]

OMG - I just can't stand it  :D

Date: 2007/01/16 12:07:33, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
http://opa.faseb.org/pages/PolicyIssues/evolutionresources.htm

This is a useful site if you need to get involved in local anti-evolution wars:

Scientists, educators, and informed citizens can play a critical role in ensuring that students receive a high quality science education. The resources presented here provide background information and talking points to help you argue for the importance of teaching evolution and to oppose the introduction of non-scientific beliefs, such as intelligent design, in science classes. The site also provides tips and resources for communicating about these issues with policy makers and the public. This is not meant to be an all-inclusive resource. There is a wealth of information on the web (links are provided throughout) that you are encouraged to explore on your own.

Date: 2007/01/17 06:35:18, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
What we need is an "ignore" function, that allows you not to see the posts of certain people.  It can be very useful  :D

This sort of thing comes up quite often on message boards.  Taking a break from the whole thing is often useful, or just ignoring the poster, if that can be managed.

Date: 2007/01/17 11:59:43, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I just don't bother to read the threads with peculiar titles ("toilet", "luca the mafioso"  and "thick as two short planks".  I tried a year or so ago and had absolutely no idea what they were about.

Hence I was surprised to see GOP was still here when he surfaced.

How about locking those threads and sending to the great message board in the sky?

Date: 2007/01/20 14:27:50, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote ("Rev Dr" Lenny Flank @ Jan. 20 2007,11:44)
From what I hear, certain classes of prisoners, like rapists or child molestors, generally have a, uh, tough time in prison (from the other inmates).

Does anyone know where "tax-evading religious frauds" fit in the prison hierarchy . . . .?

Depends how young and pretty they are  :D

Date: 2007/01/22 11:54:50, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Jan. 22 2007,11:48)
Better be deep thought.

HHGG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Date: 2007/01/22 17:14:58, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Louis @ Jan. 22 2007,16:24)
Personally I curious as to why when one troll disappears we get another right on its heels. I really am suspicious!

Maybe you need to ask a knowledgeable person who runs the board to track some IPs  :D

Date: 2007/01/23 07:32:53, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
In a move that is likely to spark controversy, the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority has for the first time recommended that pupils be taught about atheism and creationism in RE classes.

To put it mildly!!

But I think it is a good idea to be honest.  RI (as it was then) never hurt me as a child at school.

Date: 2007/01/23 16:51:48, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Scrumpy is not really scrumpy unless there is more than 50% of one dead rat in the barrel  :D

Date: 2007/01/23 16:58:06, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
And the real Irish rugby team is still (I think) the only sports team that represents both NI and Eire, no artificial political divisions!

And hence the British Lions represent the British Isles - geographical, not political.

Date: 2007/01/23 17:13:52, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Can some kind admin cut out all Avo's posts and put them in the right thread?  I only visit this one every 6 months or so because I don't know what it is about

Date: 2007/01/24 07:26:56, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
The whole thing sounds rather like "The Art of Coarse Rugby" to me.

Definition of a Coarse Rugby Club - when they get a grant from the National Playing Fields Association they use it to extend the bar.  :D

Date: 2007/01/24 07:31:41, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote ("Rev Dr" Lenny Flank @ Jan. 23 2007,22:27)
 Why the heck the rest of the world trusts us with weapons of mass destruction, I have no idea at all.

They don't

Date: 2007/01/24 17:45:36, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Actually, an Ebolafest needs to be held in Africa, surely?  :D

I get to London(ish) most years, but recently it has been Heathrow and Guilford (Surrey University, of for the very, very old academic cognoscenti, Battersea CAT  :D

And there is not a lot in Iowa.

Date: 2007/01/31 18:40:08, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Message boards always get like this, especially when is discussing srtongly held opinions.

Date: 2007/02/02 21:55:32, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
http://www.faithworksonline.com/search/isbn/1878859374

The discovery of tiny fossil fragments in the deserts of Africa by two leading anthropologists has amazed the scientific world. Early man may not have only used primitive tools and a primordial language to communicate with each other, but they may also have amused themselves with what is equivalent to a modern board game. The tiny fossilized fragments of the “game” were found on the outskirts of a cave in Uganda and are estimated to be 1.3 million years old.

That’s one way we could have publicized “Intelligent Design Versus Evolution,” and many evolutionists would no doubt believe that it then evolved to its present state. But the truth is that this game was deliberately and intelligently designed to help fight against the brainwashing of an entire generation. It clearly shows that the modern Darwinian theory of evolution is arguably the greatest hoax of modern times.

“Intelligent Design versus Evolution” is unique in that the playing-pieces are small rubber brains, and each team plays for “brain” cards. Each player uses his or her brains to get more brains, and the team with the most brains wins. It has been designed to make people think . . . and that’s exactly what it does. It is evangelistic, educational, entertaining and comes with a free copy of the award-winning DVD “The Science of Evolution.”  

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Endorsements

“Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron are doing much more than revealing the bankruptcy of molecules-to-man evolution. They have a greater purpose: proclaiming biblical authority and reaching the lost with the precious gospel message. Enjoy this wonderful family game as you also become better equipped to defend our precious Christian faith.”
– Ken Ham, President, Answers in Genesis  


http://www.newscientist.com/blog/shortsharpscience/

We are very excited about this game because it presents both sides of the creation-evolution argument, and in doing so, shows that the contemporary theory of evolution is perhaps the greatest hoax of modern times," said creator Kirk Cameron in a statement. Cameron was also the star of the 1980s sitcom "Growing Pains" and more recently the creator of an evangelical ministry. “The co-hosts said they hope the game will help fight against what they maintain is the brainwashing of an entire generation,” according to the Christian Examiner.

http://scientianatura.blogspot.com/2006....rd.html

is certainly a game to play if you are a sucker for creationist-style entertainment. Be prepared to use the famous phrase 'GODDIDIT!' for the answers.

On second thought, are those rubber brains models of the creationist brains----drawn to scale?

Date: 2007/02/08 14:23:02, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I like it a lot   :D  :D

Date: 2007/02/13 10:18:54, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Reminds me of Asimov's short story  :D

Date: 2007/02/14 07:28:02, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
http://today.reuters.com/news....SAS.xml

The Kansas Board of Education on Tuesday threw out science standards deemed hostile to evolution, undoing the work of Christian conservatives in the ongoing battle over what to teach U.S. public school students about the origins of life.

The board in the central U.S. state voted 6-4 to replace them with teaching standards that mirror the mainstream in science education and eliminate criticisms of evolutionary theory.

"I'm glad we've taken this step. If we are going to have a well-educated populace, this is important," said board member Sue Gamble.

Date: 2007/02/14 16:48:58, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
"It is the fourth time in eight years that science standards have been rewritten in Kansas"

Date: 2007/02/14 16:54:27, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Steviepinhead @ Feb. 08 2007,14:24)
Maybe there's something about pickin' a gee-tar that provides a little insulation against IDiocy...?

Country and Western Music.

Need I sau more?   :D

Date: 2007/02/14 17:20:03, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
The article says:

"But Kansas has been in the forefront of the debate since 1999, when the board voted to sharply reduce the emphasis of evolution in science instruction. A public backlash ultimately led to a reversal of that revision."

In 1999, the board eliminated most references to evolution, a move Harvard paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould said was akin to teaching "American history without Lincoln."

Two years later, after voters replaced three members, the board reverted to evolution-friendly standards. Elections in 2002 and 2004 changed the board's composition again, making it more conservative.

Date: 2007/02/17 16:16:53, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (argystokes @ Feb. 16 2007,21:32)
She did teach a very short evolution unit about a month ago, which was unfortunately massively disrupted due to snow-related school cancellations. The good news: no complaints from parents, and the thing that the students wanted to learn most about that they didn't was human evolution.

The old man in the sky did it  :D

Date: 2007/02/23 15:46:04, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
..and the earth is NOT moving

http://fixedearth.com/

And this is all true according to Texas

http://www.nytimes.com/2007....=slogin



A leader of the Texas House of Representatives apologized Friday for circulating an appeal to ban the teaching of evolution as derived from “Rabbinic writings” and other Jewish texts.

“I had no intention to offend anyone,” said the lawmaker, Warren Chisum, a Republican from the Panhandle who is chairman of the House Appropriations Committee.

Mr. Chisum said he had received the information from Ben Bridges, a Georgia legislator, and “I never took it very seriously.”

On Feb. 9, Mr. Chisum, 68, an 18-year veteran of the House and second in power only to the speaker, Tom Craddick, sent a memorandum to all 149 other state representatives in Texas.

The one-page memorandum, marked “From: Representative Ben Bridges,” declared that “tax-supported evolution science” was based on religion and therefore unlawful under the United States Constitution.

It continued, “Indisputable evidence — long hidden but now available to everyone — demonstrates conclusively that so-called secular evolution science is the Big Bang 15-billion-year alternate ‘creation scenario’ of the Pharisee Religion.”

“This scenario,” the memorandum stated, “is derived concept-for-concept from Rabbinic writings on the mystic ‘holy book’ kabbala dating back at least two millennia.”

The memorandum said that inquiries could be directed to the Fair Education Foundation, a group in Georgia, and gave its Web address, fixedearth.com. The site features items belittling the Holocaust and portraying Earth as stationary as depicted in the Bible, with Jewish thinkers like “Kabbalist physicist Albert Einstein” responsible for contrary scientific theories.

Date: 2007/02/27 22:10:09, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Feb. 27 2007,16:03)
What if they passed a resolution like this in, I dunno, California, and the answer was totally different? How would we decide between these competing realities?

Fist fight between Arnold and .....

Date: 2007/03/05 07:41:11, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Do we need to develop a new field - culinary evolution?   :p

Date: 2007/03/06 08:05:23, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Actually is is great news.  They can still support evolution, as it is a scientific issue.  But they cannot support ID because it is "social, political or cultural"

So No ID in Arizona!!

Date: 2007/03/06 10:56:05, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
According to the origins model used by creation scientists, modern kangaroos, like all modern animals, originated in the Middle East[1] and are the descendants of the two founding members of the modern kangaroo baramin that were taken aboard Noah's Ark prior to the Great Flood. It has not yet been determined by baraminologists whether kangaroos form a holobaramin with the wallaby, tree-kangaroo, wallaroo, pademelon and quokka, or if all these species are in fact apobaraminic or polybaraminic.

Also according to creation science, after the Flood, kangaroos bred from the Ark passengers migrated to Australia. There is debate whether this migration happened over land[2] -- as Australia was still for a time connected to the Middle East before the supercontinent of Pangea broke apart[3] -- or if they rafted on mats of vegetation torn up by the receding flood waters[2].

Footnotes
1)"Kangaroos, Dinosaurs, and Eden", Ken Ham.
2) "How did animals get from the Ark to isolated places, such as Australia?", ChristianAnswers.net.
3)"What about continental drift?", Answers In Genesis


Retrieved from  "http://www.conservapedia.com/Kangaroo"

Date: 2007/03/28 10:02:58, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ Mar. 25 2007,13:50)
By the way Faid, I'm not saying that the Nazis were the first society to practice a brutal form of Eugenics.

The US was pretty good at it as well:

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines/021500-02.htm

U.S. doctors who once believed that sterilization could help rid society of mental illness and crime launched a 20th century eugenics movement that in some ways paralleled the policies of Nazi Germany, researchers said on Monday.

A Yale study tracing a once-popular movement aimed at improving society through selective breeding, indicates that state-authorized sterilizations were carried out longer and on a larger scale in the United States than previously believed, beginning with the first state eugenics law in Indiana in 1907.

Despite modern assumptions that American interest in eugenics waned during the 1920s, researchers said sterilization laws had authorized the neutering of more than 40,000 people classed as insane or ``feebleminded'' in 30 states by 1944.

Another 22,000 underwent sterilization from the mid-1940s to 1963, despite weakening public support and revelations of Nazi atrocities, according to the study, funded by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum and the Merck Co. Foundation.

Forced sterilization was legal in 18 U.S. states, and most states with eugenics laws allowed people to be sterilized without their consent by leaving the decision to a third party.

``The comparative histories of the eugenical sterilization campaigns in the United States and Nazi Germany reveal important similarities of motivation, intent and strategy,'' the study's authors wrote in the Annals of Internal Medicine, a journal published by the American College of Physicians-American Society of Internal Medicine.

Date: 2007/03/29 10:03:09, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/james_r....ad.html

Religion belongs to "the abject childhood of our species", Christopher Hitchens told an audience at Westminster Hall in London last night. The author and journalist condemned the "medieval barbarism" of religious conflicts the world over and urged those listening to oppose the religious impulse whenever it shows itself. "It shows very well that religion is created ... by a species half a chromosome away from a chimpanzee," he spat.

He was defending the motion that "This house believes we'd be better off without religion", and he had some formidable artillery on his side - the philosopher Professor AC Grayling and the evolutionary biologist Professor Richard Dawkins, to whom Mr Hitchens referred tongue-in-cheekly as a "spokesman for the moderate wing" of the atheist movement.

First to pick up the gauntlet was Dr Nigel Spivey who teaches classical art and archaeology at Cambridge University. "When I'm asked to imagine a world without religion is ends up looking like the suburbs of Swindon," he lamented, after painting a picture of a grey and featureless world lacking religious inspiration. Erase King's College chapel, the Parthenon, the Sistine Chapel, the Taj Mahal and you get the picture..............

The real question is whether the best of humanity is already inside us or whether it needs faith to bring it out. For Mr Hitchens it is possible to have the good without the faith (and hence also without the interfaith wars in Northern Ireland, Bosnia, Iraq and the rest). "It's called culture."

Date: 2007/04/09 14:35:40, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
http://www.livescience.com/othernews/070407_coulter_hoax.html

In the summer of 2006, I heard that a new book called Godless presented an insightful and devastating criticism of the theory of evolution. Although I learned that its author, Ann Coulter, is not a scientist but a lawyer turned author and TV pundit, she nevertheless appeared to be an intelligent and well-educated person, so I started reading.

At first I was puzzled. There did not seem to be anything new; only tired and outdated antievolution arguments involving moths, finches, and fruit flies. But it wasn’t until Coulter dusted off the old Piltdown man story that I suddenly realized: it was a hoax! And it was brilliant.

Coulter has very cleverly written a fake criticism of evolution, much like the way NYU physicist Alan Sokal in 1996 published a fake physics article in a literary journal, an affair that has become known as the “Sokal hoax.” A self-proclaimed “old unabashed leftist,” Sokal was disturbed by the sloppily antiscientific, postmodernistic mentality that had started to replace reason and rationality within the academic left and ingeniously made his point by managing to get his nonsense article published by the very people he wished to expose.

Coulter’s aim at antiscience is at the other end of the political spectrum. An equally unabashed rightist, she is apparently disturbed by how factions within the political right abandon their normally rational standards when it comes to the issue of evolution. However, whereas Sokal revealed his hoax in a separate article, Coulter challenges her readers to find out the truth for themselves. Without claiming to do justice to Coulter’s multifaceted and sometimes subtle satire, I will attempt to outline some of her most amusing and salient points.

Date: 2007/04/09 15:44:12, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Arden:

"....the most inspiring thought I bumped into last year was the concept of JUBILEE 2000 a call to cancel third world debts going into the next millennium and to give crippled nations a chance to get up off their knees and walk again. ...Without a real commitment to do something about the dire circumstances of a third of the population of the planet, all new year's eve 99 will amount to is an up drawbridge scenario, a fancy dress ball at the castle where we all play louis 14 pissing across a moat of champagne on the poor."

Bono, lead singer of U2
??

Date: 2007/04/11 08:58:46, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Kristine @ April 10 2007,23:42)
It's Peter Olofsson who is writing a satirical "postmodernist" piece. (He e-mailed me to comment on my dig at men at PT and confessed that the satire was his.)

I know.  I just like anything that points out how stupid Anne is.  :D

Date: 2007/04/12 09:30:29, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18061154/site/newsweek/

Intersting article

“Does Carbon-14 disprove the Bible?” The answer: “When a scientist’s interpretation of data does not match the clear meaning of the text in the Bible, we should never reinterpret the Bible. God knows just what he meant to say, and His understanding of science is infallible, whereas ours is fallible.”

Date: 2007/04/13 08:45:15, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
http://www.clivejames.com/poetry/james/natural-selection

Natural Selection

Clive James


The gradual but inexorable magic
That turned the dinosaurs into the birds
Had no overt, only a hidden, logic.
To start the squadrons climbing from the herds
No wand was ever waved, but afterwards
Those who believed there must have been a wizard
Said the whole show looked too well-planned for hazard.

And so it does, in retrospect. Such clever
Transitions, intricate beyond belief!
The little lobsters, in their mating fever,
Assaulted from the sea, stormed up the cliff,
And swept inland as scorpions. But if
Some weapons freak equipped their tails for murder
He must have thought sheer anguish all in order.

Source of all good and hence of evil, pleasure
And hence of pain, he is, or else they are,
Without a moral sense that we can measure,
And thus without a mind. Better by far
To stand in awe of blind chance than to fear
A conscious mechanism of mutation
Bringing its fine intentions to fruition

Without a qualm about collateral horror.
The peacock and the tapeworm both make sense.
Nobody calls the ugly one an error.
But when a child is born to pain intense
Enough to drive its family all at once
To weep blood, an intelligent designer
Looks like a torture garden's beaming owner.

No, give it up. The world demands our wonder
Solely because no feeling brain conceived
The thumb that holds the bamboo for the panda.
Creation, if the thing's to be believed —
And only through belief can life be loved —
Must do without that helping hand from Heaven.
Forget it, lest it never be forgiven.

(Poetry (Chicago), November 2006)

Date: 2007/04/13 14:37:57, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Ftk @ April 13 2007,14:13)
Jesus stated that the two most important commandments were to love the Lord your God with all your heart, and love your neighbor as yourself.  

Well, I have no God and so that is out.  How about my neighbour's daughter?  She is cute.  :D

Date: 2007/04/17 07:24:48, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Long, long ago, and far, far away (several decades and 4,500 miles, in London) I got a couple of degrees in biochemistry and became a scientist.  Then fate intruded and I ended up in America, where I was startled to find that people were very religious and Creationism was rampant.  As both of them tended to be associated with political parties slightly to the right of Attila the Hun, and as I had a daughter in school, I became interested and eventually wound up here.  It is fun and educational.

I rarely have enough expertise to post anything cogent on topic, but I like posting things that amuse or interest me.  And now Anne, Mollie and Kurt are all gone, we need a few intelligent voices around.

Date: 2007/04/17 12:09:01, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
http://www.newscientist.com/article....ns.html

Well, certainly more so than creatioists.  :D

It is time to stop thinking we are the pinnacle of evolutionary success – chimpanzees are the more highly evolved species, according to new research.

Evolutionary geneticist Jianzhi Zhang and colleagues at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, US, compared DNA sequences for 13,888 genes shared by human, chimp and rhesus macaques.

For each DNA letter at which the human or chimp genes differ from our shared ancestral form – inferred from the corresponding gene in macaques – researchers noted whether the change led to an altered protein. Genes that have been transformed by natural selection show an unusually high proportion of mutations leading to altered proteins.

Zhang's team found that 233 chimp genes, compared with only 154 human ones, have been changed by selection since chimps and humans split from their common ancestor about 6 million years ago.

This contradicts what most evolutionary biologists had assumed. "We tend to see the differences between us and our common ancestor more easily than the differences between chimps and the common ancestor," observes Zhang.

The result makes sense, he says, because until relatively recently the human population has been smaller than that of chimps, leaving us more vulnerable to random fluctuations in gene frequencies. This prevents natural selection from having as strong an effect overall.

Date: 2007/04/18 07:50:57, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I really think the poll should distinguish between real degrees and ones from degree mills  :D

Date: 2007/04/18 07:58:11, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Something similar

http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climate....00.html

The denial industry


For years, a network of fake citizens' groups and bogus scientific bodies has been claiming that science of global warming is inconclusive. They set back action on climate change by a decade. But who funded them? Exxon's involvement is well known, but not the strange role of Big Tobacco. In the first of three extracts from his new book, George Monbiot tells a bizarre and shocking new story

Date: 2007/04/25 07:37:02, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (mikiebob @ April 24 2007,16:29)
I answered "I Done Readed a Lot on the Internets" but I also have a Juris Doctor, which means I are a lawyer. :D

Are you a source of free legal advice?  :D

And welcome.

Date: 2007/05/04 08:05:51, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007....olution


Brownback, Tancredo and Huckabee

Date: 2007/05/04 09:53:57, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (phonon @ May 04 2007,09:27)
Isn't it freaking ridiculous?

Absolutely and totally.  

And it scares me

Date: 2007/05/05 15:06:01, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote
Side note to evolutionists who are offended by what is said here: Out of all the evolution sites, forums, and blogs I have read. I have yet to see one evolutionist condemn what I have put up on these pages from one of their own sites. Which means one of two things. 1) Either all evolutionists condone what is written on these websites. 2) They are to afraid to speak out about these sites because they know they will be rejected by their peers for doing so. And this is why you will see what you see here. You refuse to speak up about what was going on, on sites like this (FSTDT.com). So now you will see it listed on a creationist site


Hee hee

Or 3 - the author of the site is a liar and scumbag.  :D

Date: 2007/05/08 21:48:55, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I went to Imperial, and you could get an ARCS (silent c) and a DIC.

:D

Date: 2007/05/16 17:33:06, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote
P.S. For those of an unfortunately foreign disposition (you have my pity for losing life's great lottery and not being born an Englishman) [snip, snip, blahbiddy blah]We are the best club in the UK and if all goes well this weekend, the best club in Europe.

Quote
Ahem. In Europe, yes, maybe.


And in the Southern Hemisphere it will be a South African Team  :D

Back to tenure:

From the local paper

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps....0514050

Supporters of Gonzalez said they think the university denied him tenure, because he was promoting an unpopular idea on college campuses, the theory that some features of life are best explained as products of an intelligent cause, rather than natural selection or random mutation.

“I think if looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it likely is a duck,” said John West, a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute, a Seattle-based organization that supports discussing intelligent design in science classes.

“There are two issues here: academic freedom and the First Amendment. Gonzalez has gained attention for his advocacy of intelligent design as legitimate science in his book, "The Privileged Planet."

More than 400 faculty members at the three public universities have signed petitions since Gonzalez’s book was published that rejected attempts to represent intelligent design as science. None of the statements mention Gonzalez by name.

http://desmoinesregister.com/apps....004

prof appeals denial of tenure

About 12 people have applied for tenure in the past 10 years in the physics and astronomy department, and four of those were denied, said Eli Rosenberg, the chairman of the ISU department of physics and astronomy.

John McCarroll, an ISU spokesman, said tenure is achieved through approval from the candidate's department, the department chairman, a committee within the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, the dean of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, the executive vice president and provost, and the university president.

Gonzalez was denied a favorable vote on each of those levels, he said.

The decision on whether to award tenure is also based on the quality of the faculty member's work, the "impact in the community, how you are being received in the community," Rosenberg said.

Date: 2007/05/16 17:45:41, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote
Many of the antibodies produced by an organism’s immune system are currently redundant, they have evolved for antigens that they will never now encounter
 Specifc antibodies are produced in response to specific attacks, and "remembered" by the body for later use.  Hence vaccination works.  I don't think there are specific antibodies flaoting around from prehistoric time, but I maybe wrong.  So I am not sure if your statement is entirely accurate.

And one of my favorite molecule names is "Vomitoxin"  :D

Date: 2007/05/17 07:14:31, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
http://www.chm.bris.ac.uk/sillymolecules/sillymols.htm

Molecules with Silly or Unusual Names

Believe it or not, some chemists do have a sense of humour, and this page is a testament to that. Here we'll show you some real molecules that have unusual, ridiculous or downright silly names. If you know of any other potential candidates for this page, please let me know. People from all over the world have sent me so many contributions to this page, that I've now had to split it into three smaller pages


Molecules include:

Cummingtonite
This mineral must have the silliest name of them all! Its official name is magnesium iron silicate hydroxide, and it has the formula (Mg,Fe)7Si8O22(OH)2. It got its name from the locality where it was first found, Cummington, Massachusetts, USA.


Dickite
Dickite, Al2Si2O5(OH)4, is a (kaolin) clay-like mineral which exhibits mica-like layers with silicate sheets of 6-membered rings bonded to aluminium oxide/hydroxide layers. Dickite is used in ceramics, as paint filler, rubber, plastics and glossy paper. It got its name from the geologist that discovered it around the 1890s, Dr. W. Thomas Dick, of Lanarkshire, Scotland.

and many others  :D

(And I apologize for the thread title - something got screwed up there  :D)

Date: 2007/05/17 08:11:34, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Louis @ May 17 2007,07:27)
LOL

I was wondering who'd find this first! Nice one.

Louis

I have had it bookmarked for years - probably close to 10!  It just seemed an appropriate time to post it for those who had never seen it  :D

Date: 2007/05/21 10:24:06, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Louis @ May 17 2007,04:57)
I think the paper quoted (it's one of the Brown ones IIRC) refers not only to the antibodies we inherit via the placenta but (as Skeptic alludes to) the capabilities of our immune system to produce antibodies to threats we as individuals haven't encountered (perhaps yet) but we as an organism in a long chain of evolved organisms have. Meh, it probably needs rewording, cheers for pointing it out!



Louis

But the capability of our immunes system to produce antibodies that are specific is inherent in the DNA, and can provide an (estimated) 10 to the 11th different antibodies.  But these are nor specific to anything before they are made - the body ends up producing more of the ones that work.

Date: 2007/05/21 10:27:14, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
An oldie......

The heaviest element known to science was recently discovered by physicians at Whatsamata U.  The element, tentatively named Administratium, has no protons or electrons and thus has an atomic number of 0.  However, it does have 1 neutron, 125 assistant neutrons, 75 vice neutrons, and 111 assistant vice-neutrons.  This gives it an atomic mass number of 312.  These 312 particles are held together in the nucleus by meson-like particles called memos.  Since it has no electrons, Administratium is inert. However, it can be detected chemically as it impedes every reaction it comes in contact with.

According to the discoverers, a minute amount of Administratum caused one reaction to take 4 days to complete when it would normally take 1 second.  Administratum has a normal half life of approximately 3 years, at which time it does not actively decay, but instead undergoes a reorganization in which assistant neutrons, vice-neutrons, and assistant vice-neutrons exchange places.  Some studies have shown that atomic mass number actually increases after reorganization.

Research at other laboratories indicates that Administratum occurs naturally in the atmosphere.  It tends to condense and concentrate at certain points such as governmental agencies and universities, and can usually be found in the newest, best-appointed, and best-maintained buildings.

Scientists point out that Administratum is known to be toxic at any level of concentration, and can easily destroy any productive reaction where it is allowed to accumulate.  Attempts are being made to determine how Administratum can be controlled to prevent irreversible damage, but results to date are not promising.

Date: 2007/05/21 15:10:33, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Henry J @ May 21 2007,10:55)
I vaguely recall something called the Peter Principle, that might be relevant here. ;)

Henry

Wasn't that being promoted from jobs one could do until one reached one's "Level of Incompetance"?  :)

Date: 2007/05/25 09:03:21, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Louis @ May 24 2007,03:56)
The cost of some of these metabolites' production is not small and some of them are made in significant quantities, this breaks the analogy with the immune system used in hypothesis 2.  
Louis

And the immune system responds mainly when it is needed (if it is working correctly), hence presumably saving energy.  I don't think that is the case with all secondary metabolites, but I am willing to be corrected  :)

Date: 2007/05/27 13:53:52, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Next time I am in Kentucky I will see if I can slit my journey, use some hotel points and visit the place.

Gotta be a riot if you take the right attitude  :D

Date: 2007/05/27 13:58:58, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Quote (Ichthyic @ May 26 2007,19:47)
http://www.kids-write.com/

don't forget to vote in her online poll!

79% don't believe in God, according to the poll   :D

I hope they find that disturbing!!

Date: 2007/06/29 12:41:00, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
Science, Bloom and Weisberg, 316, pp996-7

Childhood Origins of Adult Resistance to Science

Resistance to certain scientific ideas derives in large part from assumptions and biases that can be demonstrated experimentally in young children and that may persist into adulthood. In particular, both adults and children resist acquiring scientific information that clashes with common-sense intuitions about the physical and psychological domains. Additionally, when learning information from other people, both adults and children are sensitive to the trustworthiness of the source of that information. Resistance to science, then, is particularly exaggerated in societies where nonscientific ideologies have the advantages of being both grounded in common sense and transmitted by trustworthy sources.

Final paragraph:


These developmental data suggest that resistance to science will arise in children when scientific claims clash with early emerging, intuitive expectations. This resistance will persist through adulthood if the scientific claims are contested within a society, and it will be especially strong if there is a nonscientific alternative that is rooted in common sense and championed by people who are thought of as reliable and trustworthy. This is the current situation in the United States, with regard to the central tenets of neuroscience and evolutionary biology. These concepts clash with intuitive beliefs about the immaterial nature of the soul and the purposeful design of humans and other animals, and (in the United States) these beliefs are particularly likely to be endorsed and transmitted by trusted religious and political authorities (24). Hence, these fields are among the domains where Americans' resistance to science is the strongest.

Date: 2007/07/05 07:40:48, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
The two words required for a happy marriage:

Yes Dear

:D

Date: 2007/07/08 15:43:35, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
And don't forget, the Eagles play Munster on the 26th at Toyota Field, you might want to work that one in

Date: 2010/11/22 11:11:40, Link
Author: MidnightVoice
I think many evolutionists and others would say that Theism is dead - it will thrash aroundd for a while, causing misery and death, and delaying human progress, but it is dead.

Deism is probably not yet dead - but not required either

 

 

 

=====