Skip to comments.Asian Darwinist Profs Call Creationists Barbarians
Posted on 10/24/2009 4:02:17 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Oct 22, 2009 We have kept the creationist barbarians from the gate, announced a professor at Hong Kong University triumphantly. A news article in Science this week described tensions in the city over the teaching of evolution. The Darwinists won a vote over a change in wording in the science curriculum that would have opened the door to teaching creationism and intelligent design in secondary schools. The door must be shut tight, apparently. Even the possibility of this happening created a furore.
Reporter Richard Stone said, As a year of honoring Charles Darwin and his theory of evolution draws to a close, scientists in Hong Kong are celebrating a partial victory in what is likely to be an ongoing war against proponents of teaching creationism and intelligent design in secondary schools. He called the partial victory bittersweet because it did not revise the guidelines, nor did it rein in the few dozen schools in Hong Kong that openly espouse creationism.
Stone said that most schools in Hong Kong, though publicly funded, are run independently and many are affiliated with churches. The author of the barbarians comment, David Dudgeon (faculty board chair at U of HK) complained...
(Excerpt) Read more at creationsafaris.com ...
Barbarians, I don’t know. Sounds a little extreme. “Stupid people” is more like it.
Wow, that Hong Kong University professor sounds an awful lot like this guy:
“Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.”
Lewontin, Richard C. [Professor of Zoology and Biology, Harvard University], “Billions and Billions of Demons”, Review of “The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark,” by Carl Sagan, New York Review, January 9, 1997. (Emphasis in original)
That would make sense if he were talking about the Temple of Darwin drones. Were you perchance looking in the mirror when you blurted that out?
Kinda sensitive aren't they? LOL!
“Stupid people” is a little off the mark. FR Trolls is what I had in mind.
Your inability to understand the alliteration is not unexpected.
You sound like obama, doing a baby’s “whah whah” when people say mean things about your ignorance.
>>That would make sense if he were talking about the Temple of Darwin drones. Were you perchance looking in the mirror when you blurted that out?<<
Ah, the ever-present and devastating “I am rubber, you are glue” retort!
You are the best example of creationist “debate” we can hope for!
He should have called them willfully ignorant instead.
"Who would not deny the name of human being to a man who, on seeing the regular motions of the heaven and the fixed order of the stars and the accurate interconnexion and interrelation of all things, can deny that these things possess any rational design, and can maintain that phenomena, the wisdom of whose ordering transcends the capacity of our wisdom to understand it, take place by chance? When we see something moved by machinery, like an orrery or clock or many other such things, we do not doubt that these contrivances are the work of reason; when therefore we behold the whole compass of the heaven moving with revolutions of marvelous velocity and executing with perfect regularity the annual changes of the seasons with absolute safety and security for all things, how can we doubt that all this is effected not merely by reason, but by a reason that is transcendent and divine?
Can any sane person believe that all this array of stars and this vast celestial adornment could have been created out of atoms rushing to and fro fortuitously and at random? or could any other being devoid of intelligence and reason have created them? Not merely did their creation postulate intelligence, but it is impossible to understand their nature without intelligence of a high order
To come now from things celestial to things terrestrial, which is there among these latter which does not clearly display the rational design of an intelligent being? In the first place, with the vegetation that springs from the earth, the stocks both give stability to the parts which they sustain and draw from the ground the sap to nourish the parts upheld by the roots; and the trunks are covered with bark or rind, the better to protect them against cold and heat. Again the vines cling to their props with their tendrils as with hands, and thus raise themselves erect like animals. Nay more, it is said that if planted near cabbages they shun them like pestilential and noxious things, and will not touch them at any point. Again what a variety there is of animals, and what capacity they possess of persisting true to their various kinds! Some of them are protected by hides, others are clothed with fleeces, others bristle with spines; some we see covered with feathers, some with scales, some armed with horns, some equipped with wings to escape their foes. Nature, however, has provided with bounteous plenty for each species of animal that food which is suited for it. I might show in detail what provision has been made in the forms of the animals for appropriating and assimilating this food, how skilful and exact is the disposition of the various parts, how marvelous the structure of the limbs. For all the organs, at least those contained within the body, are so formed and so placed that none of them is superfluous or not necessary for the preservation of life."
--Ciceros, On the Nature of the Gods, 45 BC
>>of the real struggle between science and the supernatural<<
Well, that is pretty honest. Now, tell us all how we put the supernatural into science.
“After this step, chant ‘zooga zooga’ 3 times to put the spirit of Xogni into the material.”
That’s the most revealing evolutionist quote ever. Thanks.
It’s a lot like mixed martial arts. When you know your opposition can’t take you down, it gives you complete freedom in your stand-up game.
>>He should have called them willfully ignorant instead.<<
1) You are an evil atheist if you understand science
2) Understanding TToE=”Darwinist”=”religion of Darwin” (science be damned)
3) Any possible hole in TToE removes the entire Theory
4) TToE research is like AGW “research”
You can make a drinking game out of the depth of ignorance on these threads. It doesn’t matter how many times people who understand science post the reality, they just keep attempting to show the world there is a small lunatic fringe of Luddites who throw poop at things they don’t understand.
>>When you know your opposition cant take you down, it gives you complete freedom in your stand-up game.<<
And yet, you keep trying.
What an attention-ho.
Try this one for size:
“I had motive for not wanting the world to have a meaning; consequently assumed that it had none, and was able without any difficulty to find satisfying reasons for this assumption. The philosopher who finds no meaning in the world is not concerned exclusively with a problem in pure metaphysics, he is also concerned to prove that there is no valid reason why he personally should not do as he wants to do, or why his friends should not seize political power and govern in the way that they find most advantageous to themselves. For myself, the philosophy of meaninglessness was essentially an instrument of liberation, sexual and political.”
Aldous Huxley: Ends and Means, pp. 270 ff.
You sound like a perfect candidate for the HMS Creation ping list. Drop me a FReepmail if you’d like to join the crew. If not, you can always type in keyword “creation.” All the best—GGG
“An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: “argument to the person” or “argument against the person”) is an argument which links the validity of a premise to a characteristic or belief of a person advocating the premise.”
More awesome quotes! I pity the fool (even FR fools) who challenge you to a battle of wits. And it never fails, the evolutionists always retort with insults; never with counter-points.
...he manages to gurgle out as they carry him off the mat...lol!