Darwin’s Jews

Jewish Week ^ | 23 Feb 06 | David Klinghoffer

[gobucks]

And your reply confirms mine....

[RightWingAtheist]

What I'd like to see next is a list of Conservatives Confronting Creationism, a list of both scientists and non-scientists on the right side of the political aisle, making a bold statement against what is potentially the most destructive thing to happen to conservaitsm since the John Birch Society.

[DallasMike]

If the best you anti-evolution folks can scrape up from the bottom of the barrel is 400 people who will sign a *very* mild statement of open-mindedness about evolution, equivalent to a "well, I'm not *completely* convinced it explains *everything*...", clearly you don't have much of a case when you try to claim that evolutionary biology is somehow undergoing some kind of crisis of confidence among scientists.

Do you really expect to make headway with such hilariously lame material?

The hilariously lame part is that you apparently did not even read my post. I'm not anti-evolutionary: I just happen to agree with other scientists in that I'm "skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life." That's it.

You're obviously pretty scared of those who express a little healthy skepticism that might shatter your world view. I have no idea what you do for a living but you sound very much a tenured professor. Am I right?

I couldn't care less about Project Steve.

[PatrickHenry]

Thanks for the ping, but I want no part of this thread.

[S0122017]

I have seen them.

[S0122017]

Voila! One Arian Jezus. Add a german accent and the picture is complete

Should i remained people long hair was not very populair among men in those days? And scholars tended to have long beards.

In fact, as far as i remember, the oldest paintings known of Jezus show him having A LONG BEARD. But hey, truth never stood in the way for a good cliche.

[S0122017]

And once again apologies for my english. Im not an american.

[JCEccles]

Many Darwinists know well what is at stake. Their leading biologist, Richard Dawkins of Oxford, forthrightly states that religious “faith is one of the world’s great evils, comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to eradicate.”

The implacable materialist and atheist Richard Dawkins once hatched a brilliant scheme to prove that random unguided means acting through a sort of "natural" selection could produce something complex and meaningful, a metaphor for intelligent life arising from inert unintelligent matter without assistance.

So the intrepid Dr. Dawkins used his intellectual powers to carefully design a computer program and algorithm. He thought about it further and selected a particular set of symbols, the western alphabet of 28 characters of specific design and meaning. Then to be extra clever, he selected an obscure line of Shakespearean prose and designed the program and algorithm so that with each successive iteration the program would retain letters that lines up in the place that he had preconceived in his mind that they MUST end up to make an intelligible line of prose. He designed the program to reject the remaining letters.

After allowing the program to locomote over several hundred interations--surprise, surprise--the program produced the exact line of Shakespearean prose he had DESIGNED it to produce! And how did he now that it had? Because it made sense within the context of the same intelligence that he had employed in designing and running the experiment.

Thus did the dear Dr. Dawkins prove to his complete and smug self-satisfaction there is no need to invoke the action of intelligence to produce a meaningful result, that intelligent "guided" design is a crock.

[Right Wing Professor]

I have no idea why you think I would like to be pinged with your rants, but I don't. All your posts are intemperate; when I feel they need to be countered I will do so; but in the mean time, I don't need my attention drawn to them. Thanks.

[zeeba neighba]

Crotchety placemarky

[Californiajones]

Doll, EvoThink is anarchistic. It says we are animals. It doesn't account for morality or conscience or doing unto others as we would have them do unto us.
It is survival of the fittest -- NOT help the poor, the sick and the shunned of society.

Evolutionary thought, EvoThink, is anarchy.

Christianity is the soul of conservatism.

[Right Wing Professor]

Wow, the average IQ 'round here just dropped 50 points. What did that?

[Californiajones]

Christianity is the soul of conservatism.

And fake Christianity is the soul of liberalism, because liberals make the State their God.

[zeeba neighba]

You came online?

[Right Wing Professor]

It is survival of the fittest -- NOT help the poor, the sick and the shunned of society.... Christianity is the soul of conservatism.

Right on, sister! From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs.

[Right Wing Professor]

You came online?

Good lord, keep your kinky fetishes to yourself.

[zeeba neighba]

Such witty repartee, not unexpected.

[Californiajones]

And as the John Birch Society pointed out so long ago,
Communism is pseudo-Christianity because it takes the Christian idea of "sharing all things in common, as each man had need" (as the first century Christians did) -- and twisted it -- as Marx, Lenin, etc., wanted all that sharing done at the point of a gun.

That's why your "according to his abilities" Commie quote sounds like it's altruistic and Christian, but it is not.

Christianity is the soul of conservatism -- Lincoln's conservatism, that is.

[Alouette]

Maimonides wrote that combating the Darwinism equivalent of his day was the highest calling of a Jew

This is specious. Rambam wrote nothing about Darwinism, no such thing as "Darwinism" existed during his time. He did discuss Aristotle and the Aristotelian view that the Universe was not created; but that it had always existed. That is not the same as Darwinism.

[Right Wing Professor]

Communism is pseudo-Christianity because it takes the Christian idea of "sharing all things in common, as each man had need" (as the first century Christians did) -- and twisted it -- as Marx, Lenin, etc., wanted all that sharing done at the point of a gun.

Or at the penalty of being stuck down, as in Acts 5?