Skip to comments.Sunday Morning Talk Show Thread 27 January 2013
Posted on 01/27/2013 5:02:48 AM PST by Alas Babylon!
The Talk Shows
January 27th, 2013
Guests to be interviewed today on major television talk shows:
FOX NEWS SUNDAY (Fox Network): Sens. Dick Durbin, D-IL., and Bob Corker, R-TN.; retired Air Force Col. Martha McSally; retired Army Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin, executive vice president of the Family Research Council.
MEET THE PRESS (NBC): Rep. Paul Ryan, R-WI.; Jim DeMint, president-elect of the Heritage Foundation; Ben Jealous, president and CEO of the NAACP.
FACE THE NATION (CBS): Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-CA; New York City Police Commissioner Ray Kelly; Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-TN; former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.
THIS WEEK (ABC): Sens. Robert Menendez, D-NJ, and John McCain, R-AZ.
STATE OF THE UNION (CNN): Retired Gen. Stanley McChrystal; former CIA Director Michael Hayden; Govs. Bob McDonnell, R-VA, and Scott Walker, R-WI; Mia Love, mayor of Saratoga Springs, Utah; former Commerce Secretary Carlos Guttierez.
12:00 PM - 1:00 PM NBC's "Meet the Press"
1:00 PM - 2:00 PM ABC's "This Week"
2:00 PM - 3:00 PM "Fox News Sunday"
3:00 PM - 4:30 PM CNN's "State of the Union"
4:30 PM - 5:00 PM CBS's "Face The Nation"
Listen at the link above WHILE you FReep!
Meet the Press Meet the Press mailbox (web page for comments)
Face the Nation email@example.com
Fox News Sunday FNS@foxnews.com
ABC This Week firstname.lastname@example.org
CNN State of the Union CNN State of the Union (web page for comments)
The Sunday Morning Bray, by Bray!
Were you a slave when you were called? Dont let it trouble youalthough if you can gain your Freedom, do so. 1 Cor 7:21
Why do we assume scientists are always right? It seems we are being scammed by some of the shiftiest salesmen on the planet beginning with their most questionable foundation of evolution. While they are intimidating and ridiculing Christians for their belief in an all powerful God, they are promoting a theory that has not made any progress in over a hundred and fifty years. This failure happened in spite of every scientist on the planet attempting to discover the holy grail of science, that elusive missing link between monkey and man.
Darwin invented this theory by the logical observations that every animal and plant seems to have a similarity and connection making an obvious chain from one animal to the next. His theory as everyone knows has life beginning randomly in a primordial soup forming the first life forms billions of years ago. Never mind this huge hole in the theory of how life could be formed in a soup that was previously sterilized at over a thousand degrees, you just accept it without explanation or even the slightest bit of logic. This crater is so big that the Darwinists eliminated it from their discussion and saying how it occurred is no longer part of evolution which is like saying starting the car has nothing to do with your destination?
In 1859 Darwin questioned his own theory in his book Origin of Species when he wrote, ...as this process of extermination [survival of the fittest] has acted on an enormous scale, so must the number of intermediate varieties, which have formerly existed on the earth, be truly enormous. Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory. The explanation lies, as I believe, in the extreme imperfection of the geological record.
If he asked that question in todays scientific community he would be called a denier and would be tossed out of the scientific community. After a century and a half it should be time for the scientific community to answer that basic question. Shouldnt these archeologists be swimming in transitory species fossils yet they have not found any which can be confirmed.
Now if you simply ask the question of where life began you will soon be vilified and called a Bible thumping Neanderthal or as they would call it, the missing link. From the magic of life appearing forward evolutionists are very comfortable, since life forms have a continuity they can observe and theorize. First there were bacteria which formed into amoebas which evolved into plankton and then fish since they all occur in the ocean and live as well as adapt similarly to each other. There are no explanations of how or why they simply changed from single cells into fish other than you simply need to have faith in random defects turning into superior species rather than inferior or that it can be repeated, you just accept it.
The next step of evolution is moving from the ocean and onto the land which of course was the evolution of whales and whale type creatures which eventually became reptiles. The reptiles ruled the earth as dinosaurs for millions and millions of years until a random ice age happened which wiped them out instantly. This is where it becomes dicey since they are not sure the mammals developed while the dinosaurs were eating them and vice versa since the evolution from reptile to mammal is such a giant leap. Once again we have no transitory species or fossils of those species which makes you have to wonder why no examples of these defective reptiles becoming pure land creatures. You simply take another scientific leap of faith.
The other problem the Darwinists have is where is the missing link? During the early 20th century there was something the scientists called the evolutionary ladder that led to modern man. It began with Nebraska man (fraud) to Peking man (fraud) to Piltdown man (fraud) to Neanderthal (fraud) and then man began walking fully upright. Once that happened then they used their scientific brilliance and made the Black man into one of the lower man evolutions followed by Asian through Slavic, Gypsy, Jew, and then Aryan being the highest form of man which they then attempted to make a super race leading to gas chambers and ovens to purify the race. Good thing science has given up on that evolutionary idea.
Once again science was wrong as it moved away from simple curiosity and investigation and into an agenda driven science and has not moved from there since that time. For any scientist there would have to be millions and millions of transitory species moving from Ape to man, yet not one scientist has found a credible fossil. The evolutions from the ape to man has to have as many separate species as from reptile to ape, yet nothing. Every scientist knows if she finds this fossil she will have instant immortality as they have finally proved God a fake er evolution is true. Even the most basic logic has to tell you if they know where modern man first began in Iran on the Euphrates in the simplest of digging areas there should be a sea of those transitional ape/man species and yet they have not found any. Why? There is only one logical answer and that is that man did not evolve from the Great Apes but came from somewhere else. If there were millions of evolutions between Ape and Man which would take more evolutions than moving from amoeba to ape, it is statistically impossible for scientists to not find at least one! The odds have to be billions and billions to one not to find one of these missing links, yet that is exactly what has happened in over a hundred and fifty years of searching.
It really makes you wonder when science began losing its curiosity of the unknown. There had to be a time when science was as eager to disprove their theories as they are now to perpetuate their frauds? If they have not come up with a credible missing link by this time then what stops them from discarding the entire theory. Sure it is easy to say an amoeba looks like a fish and a lizard walking out of the water looks like a mammal. Then of course the Disney movie continues as a dog looks like a horse and when they go up on two legs the can go from monkey to ape to man, but did that actually happen? There is no proof that is what happened which is the giant hole in the theory they have to fill with consensus, intimidation and purging rather than evidence.
The giant question that is not allowed to be asked is, was life formed by a chain of events making them look similar and have continuity or did that similarity occur at creation? Did science actually invent a theory of our creation or are they simply observing the miraculous continuity of a perfect creator? These are questions science does not want to ask and are beginning to fear the answers. Why wont todays scientists ask the same logical question Darwin asked, why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links?
Pray for America
Note: The above opinion is not necessarily my own, but FReeper Brays. If you wish to discuss this, please ping Bray.
Absolutely NOT true, FRiend Bray!
Every scientist is NOT an atheist. Very many of us are Christian and believe in God.
WE also understand that God created us in His image, and that includes intelligence. Fossils are real, and the age of the Earth is in billions of years. Yet we still believe God made it.
The Bible isn't a science book.
I can’t wait to hear Jim DeMint. I plan on joining Heritage when business picks up this Spring.
Thanks for thread A.B.
Will we have a national registry of women getting abortions? Limit them to one?
Well, no, because abortion is a “constitutional” right.
So is right to keep and bear arms, express not implied or
Understanding our origins, God, and how everything began is well above my pay grade.
I simply believe in God through faith.
I know he is there.
How did he get there? How did everything begin? What are all the details? Once again waaaay beyond my pay grade.
o yeah Durbin McCain Gingrich Feinstein.
I am waiting with ‘bait’ed breath.
[I took a fish oil capsule this morning and it is repeating on me — tastes kind of like an uncooked chad or goldfish smells.]
Chris Wallace on F&F comments on the court rejection of Obama’s recess appointments.
Conclusion: the 300 or so regulations/decisions of the NLRB since the appointments are now in question as to their validity/enforcement.
Decision brings up the question: Who has the right/authority to determine whether the Senate/Congress is in session — the Congress or the President?
[Duh! Based on previous court rulings one branch cannot usurp the rules of another branch. The real question will be to see whether Obama continues to overtly obstruct The Constitution and whether the Congress allows him to continue to do so.]
Martha is on?!
I wonder why? She is a great American - smart, dedicated, and a warrior herself. She was a fighter pilot. She also told the Muslims to go toss off when ordered by the DoD to wear the Muslim garb (as an AF Officer) while deployed to Saudi.
She also sued the DoD because they tried to force her to wear the Abaya.
I loved her response. She said something like: "I am not wearing that. I am a Christian, not a Muslim."
Great post Bray. I have often pondered the same points. The “science” of paleontology is like the global “warming” bunch whereby a strict dogma must be adhered to or they cast you out.
Stephen Jay Gould has written bravely about the inconsistencies of this dogma and how huge chunks of science are discarded in order to make all the puzzle pieces fit.
"That's right folks! One solid hour of Gun Control propaganda. Lap it up, right here, on See BS!"
I cannot believe Menendez is going on television! The guy should be arrested for pedophilia and soliciting prostitution- now.
If it wasn’t for this thread, the posters here, and the weekly bray, I’m not sure I’d even remember that there ARE Sunday morning talk shows.
And on a somewhat related note, here’s one paleocon who is ECSTATIC that Sarah Palin is now disconnected from that increasingly dull and irrelevant FOX News thing.
Also: I note here that the mind-numbing set of lies, half truths and evasions that IS Hillary Clinton (and dominated her “testimony” this past week), ho hum, doesn’t seem to have merited a follow-up panel session on this week’s lineup of guests and whatnots.
So, just for the record., let’s all remember one more time that this woman stood in a hanger in Delaware in the presence of flag-drapped caskets and the relevant family members and repeated yet again the preposterous lie that a video made in Hollywood was why there were 4 Americans killed in Benghazi.
Just because the media and most Republicans can’t focus on why Rodham will burn enternally in Hell, doesn’t mean we can’t.
Yet, whenever it touches on scientific matters (empirical descriptions or narratives regarding creation) it is infallible.
A big question is whether O will obey the court’s edicts.
He claims he was a constitutional law professor (lie) and implies he is as good a constitutional arbiter and interpreter as the court.
He may say Marbury v Madison was crap, handed down by old white guys, and to H with it.
The NLRB petulantly announced it would keep on operatiing because it was “just one court”. Yea, the U S Court of Appeals for DC circuit. The administration is in contempt of court and the law (and always has been)
Once again, we accept the Big Lie the media (not scientists) like to present: That all scientists are friends of Algore, accept Global Warming, are Left Wingers, etc. A lot of this is perpetuated because scientists are often found in academia, which are often centers of Left Wing spew.
1. Most of the Leftist in Academia are in the so-called social sciences and other garbage studies. True scientists takes YEARS of learning and hard study. Generally speaking, and imho, the more intelligent the human, the more likely they'll reject Leftism as nonsense and unpractical.
2. There is a letter that is almost unknown, as the media suppresses even its existence, signed by over 10,000 real scientists (in meteorology, geology, astronomy) that strongly disputes man-made global warming.
3. I teach at Auburn University in Alabama. Lots and lots of Christian scientists and professors going to church HERE. Not every university is a hotbed of communism. Certainly not Auburn or the University of Alabama.
4. I agree that we cannot "know". But God does not ask us to give up our curiosity and not investigate. That is what science is all about. If we do not do so, we are no different from the Muslims.
5. I am not a member of the fundamentalist American Protestant church. I don't know what their opinion of science is, but for those I do know, many are against science, and believe scientists are anti-God. I don't know why this is so.