Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A Return to Triangulation (libertarion vs social right)
National Review Online ^ | 10/25/06 | David Boaz & David Kirby

Posted on 10/25/2006 11:10:46 AM PDT by Blackirish

As the Republican base fragments and Christian conservatives consider a “fast” from politics, the polling data point to a mid-term Republican thumping. Less than two weeks from now, Republicans will begin their post-mortem soul searching. And as the corpses of their House and Senate majorities grow cold, so should Karl Rove’s 2006 campaign strategy.

(Excerpt) Read more at article.nationalreview.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: besthijack; bestthread; blackirish; braad; creation; darwin; darwincentral; darwinhomebase; doublehijacked; evolution; frhero; frlegend; hero; hijack; hijacked; hijackedthread; legend; libertian; minifreepathon; monthlydonorthon; rehijacked; religion; science; socialright; threadjacked; threadjacking
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 501-550551-600601-650 ... 1,651-1,665 next last
To: nopardons

I'm not an old timer, but neither am I wet behind the ears. I don't post under false pretenses, or crash freeper funerals just to gain credibility among the posters here.


551 posted on 10/26/2006 12:13:48 AM PDT by Liberal Classic (No better friend, no worse enemy. Semper Fi.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 548 | View Replies]

To: Liberal Classic
Okay, okay, okaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay.....you're beating the dust of the dust of that dead horse. You're now getting to the point of protesting far too much.

And FYI....I am an "old timer" and lurked almost a full year before I joined.

552 posted on 10/26/2006 12:17:50 AM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 551 | View Replies]

To: nopardons

Well, ok. It's late, and I'm punchy. Maybe that's why we got off to a bad start. I am making less sense than usual, which could be bad as maybe I don't much to begin with.

I can sense your frustration about the crevo wars. I do think they might be at the cusp of the issue touched on by the article. Sometimes, I am a guilty party to them, other times I stay away. It is an issue that is dear to me, though. It may not figure highly into this upcoming election, or even in '08, but I feel it could become an issue in the future. I've long been an advocate of patching up relations between libertarians and Republicans, especially since 911. I've said before that religious and secular conservatives need each other, and I still believe that is true and will remain so.


553 posted on 10/26/2006 12:26:09 AM PDT by Liberal Classic (No better friend, no worse enemy. Semper Fi.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 552 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson; All
I hope you were being sarcastic...

FreeRepublic as far as I know, was founded as a conservative forum. It was NOT, to my mind, intended only for Christian Socialist nannystaters. Let lefties deal with social engineering through legislation. That ain't conservatism in my book.

BTW, conservatism also doesn't mean blindly worshipping the ground the Republicans or for that matter, President Bush, walk on, either. The GOP has shot itself in the foot in so many ways no orthopedic surgeon would touch them. Insanity is the definition of doing the same thing, repeatedly. On Iraq, on spending, on pandering to a small but vocal minority who think gays and evolution are a bigger threat to our way of life than nutjobs who want to chop our heads off or thug midgits with nukes, the GOP have turned stupidity into an art form.

My priority, and I think that of most people, including Freepers, is winning the damn war. All these other "Issues" are straw man arguments or diversions being put forth by politicians who know they aren't convincing people when it comes to the way they've (mis)handled the war in Iraq.

As for the crevo flame wars, they are asinine.

Sorry for the rant but I wanted to get that off my chest : )

554 posted on 10/26/2006 12:28:04 AM PDT by WestVirginiaRebel (Common sense will do to liberalism what the atomic bomb did to Nagasaki-Rush Limbaugh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever; Coyoteman
If you are an educator how would you handle a creationist student? Would you just write him/her off as a lost cause as you have done in your post?

I am not an educator, I am a (old) student. I would hope that I would handle it as my present archaeology professor did. He was going over the breaching of the straights of Gibralter, and the subsequent flooding of the Mediterranean, when a creationist blurted out that the flooding was caused by Noah's flood, not a change in sea level.

My professor handled it in stride. He discussed numerous flood myths, and even the lack of flood myths in areas (like China) which have undergone a tremendous amount of flooding over the years. He went into the time frame, and how there were several pre-flood civilizations that continued straight through the alleged flood. He then tied it into cultural archaeology, and how local legends and myths can help with the location of archaeological sites (as site survey was the topic that day).

It was a class act. Best I've seen. Nevertheless, that one disruptor cost me 1/2 hour of class time, in a class that I am paying $1,200 a semester for. I learned something though, so I guess it wasn't all bad. I doubt very seriously that that guy learned anything at all.

So, to answer your question, I would hope that I would be knowledgeable enough to handle it like my professor did. He didn't miss a beat. Totally a class act.

(pinging coyoteman because he is an archaeologist, and may enjoy the story)

555 posted on 10/26/2006 12:37:10 AM PDT by wyattearp (Study! Study! Study! Or BONK, BONK, on the head!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 531 | View Replies]

To: Liberal Classic
Yes, it is getting late and yes, again, you haven't made a lot of sense, until now.

I NEVER go on the crevo threads, because they are just as damned loopy and the internecine religious wars, in FR's religion section are and no, I don't go there either; unless a thread I'm on suddenly gets moved to that section.

If you are correct ( and I hope that you are not and I don't think that you are ) that at some future point in time, all of this crevo/evo garbage ( and yes, I do think of it as garbage! ) comes to some kind of a head within the GOP...SOON, then we are all doomed and the sky REALLY is falling!

N. Korea has set off a nuke and has a few more besides. Iran wants nukes. The IslamoNazis want a world wide Caliphate, the damned Dems want complete MRAXIST rule in America, and all some people here really, really, REALLY care about fighting over is creationism V. evolution. HOW STUPID! And no, this is NOT what it's like out in the real world; most people don't even think about this at all.

Please don't even go there ( Libertarians ) with me. Been in that fight and YOU don't want to take me on, re that topic. Please, let's just leave that one alone.

556 posted on 10/26/2006 12:40:24 AM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 553 | View Replies]

To: nopardons
You want to talk RUDE is Liberal Classic being oh so polite and trying to apologize for something that he didn't do, and YOU just keep shouting him down, and being more and more arrogant and abusive. Drink a beer, take a valium (preferably both at the same time) and chill out.

(see, I can do the font thing and shout like an a$$hole too, if I have to)

Do everybody a favor and GROW UP

557 posted on 10/26/2006 12:43:46 AM PDT by wyattearp (Study! Study! Study! Or BONK, BONK, on the head!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 543 | View Replies]

To: Fiddlstix; Jim Robinson
..Therein are the key words: The theory of evolution.

That's what it is

True science has "Laws". Such as the law of gravity, ohms law, etc, etc.

And these laws are explained and put into a wider context with theories. The law of gravity is described by the theory of general relativity; Ohm's law is explained by the theory of electromagnetism, the atomic theory of matter, the quantum theory that describes how conductors and insulators work, etc.

Boyles' Law is a consequence of the atomic theory of matter and the kinetic theory of gases. The Ideal Gas Law goes further, and is not exact; but the theory explains it and accounts for the fact that it isn't ever exact.

Evolution is no different. The "Law of Faunal Succession" was an empirical observation made in the late 1700s - early 1800s. It describes the way that fossils are arranged in strata of rock, and how the more recent ones more closely resemble living plants and animals. Cuvier, Lamarck, Buffon, et al came up with theories of evolution to explain this law. The theory of Darwin and Wallace is the only one to withstand repeated tests.

It seems certain people want the "theory of evolution" changed to the "law of evolution".

See above.

Somehow I think some of these same people would throw a hissy fit should it be proposed that Einstein's "theory of relativity" be changed to the "law of relativity

Obviously. Einstein's theory is a theory. It is not a law. A theory is an explanatory framework. Laws are observed regularities.

558 posted on 10/26/2006 12:51:15 AM PDT by Virginia-American (Don't bring a comic book to an encyclopedia fight)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 328 | View Replies]

To: wyattearp
It is YOU and YOU alone ( between we two ), who needs to grow up. Your petulant, adolescent reply, is both bogus and completely merit less; not to mention a personal attack containing spurious, quite specious, and dubious suggestions, of which it is possible you, yourself are guilty of doing.
559 posted on 10/26/2006 12:52:36 AM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 557 | View Replies]

To: Jaguarbhzrd; Mom MD
In order to have evolution, you need adequate energy sources,

Energy is necessary for life, not just evo.

... as evolution flies in the face of the second law of thermodynamics.

You really need to explain this in detail. What is the difference in entropy between an Earth with Eohippus, and an Earth with horses, donkeys, and zebras etc? How much energy came from the Sun in the meantime? What was the entropy involved?

Remember, entropy is a precisely-defined quantity; it's not a synonym for "disorder" the Second Law of Thermo is a differential equation.

560 posted on 10/26/2006 1:10:45 AM PDT by Virginia-American (Don't bring a comic book to an encyclopedia fight)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 433 | View Replies]

To: Liberal Classic
I'm not a psychiatrist trained in Freudian methods,...

You are thinking with the appendage at the wrong end of the spinal column...

561 posted on 10/26/2006 3:16:04 AM PDT by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 291 | View Replies]

To: metmom
Sir Francis Dashwood denies being a "creationist", but he's automatically labeled as one. Why? I wonder?

The only reason some of them are here is to bash the Christians and that is all they have.

562 posted on 10/26/2006 3:19:13 AM PDT by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 396 | View Replies]

To: WestVirginiaRebel
On Iraq, on spending, on pandering to a small but vocal minority who think gays and evolution are a bigger threat...

The state initiatives on homosexual monogamy passed with huge majorities... President Bush was re-elected with the largest number of total votes than any other president in U.S. history and Iraq was a major issue... Christians pay the biggest share of taxes in this country that support education...

Who is a small minority, again? Tell me...

563 posted on 10/26/2006 3:36:13 AM PDT by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 554 | View Replies]

To: WestVirginiaRebel

I would agree with you on spending... all the more reason to get evolution off of educational welfare...


564 posted on 10/26/2006 3:40:44 AM PDT by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 554 | View Replies]

To: nopardons
I am not a "conservative" and never said I was...

The only way the Left can win is to destroy the Republican Party from within. They have lost the public argument and cannot win on the issues, they have to have despotic judges do it for them and they have to undermine conservatives in the Republican primary.

I think that a greater number of the people who bash the religious folks here are leftist trolls whose only purpose is to undermine the Republican party. I say this as an unapologetic atheist. I know how the leftist subterfuge works and the one thing they really hate, just like the Islamists do, is Mosaic Law.

Some of them are so myopic and have such a need to do anything contrary to the Christians that what they forget in their own blind, raging ignorance is that Moses wasn't a Christian (this is just one way I spot them).

Cultural Marxism has a goal to feminize males, making them docile and compliant. Marijuana is a chemical warfare agent. Homosexual monogamy is a psychological and biological warfare tactic.

No man may become a law unto himself under the guise of freedom of religion.

Some of these liberal-tarians forget, it is THEY who advocate “separation of church and state.” Let's cram it right back down their throats...

It was landmark U.S. Supreme Court precedent Reynolds v. United States in 1878 that made “separation of church and state” a dubiously legitimate point of case law, but more importantly; it confirmed the Constitutionality in statutory regulation of marriage practices.

Now, it ain't so palatable to them, is it? They are the ones here bashing the religious folks, now they want to claim some mercurial, ever changing definition of freedom of religion? I'm not going to live in their hell...

If I cannot yell “fire” in a crowded theater, I don't think someone should be able to light one with a U.S. flag and call it “free speech.”

Of course, a lot of these traitors to the United States would also whine if we wanted an Amendment to ban homosexual marriage or flag burning, wouldn't they?

There are doctrinaire, myopic cultural Marxists whose only purpose here on FreeRepublic is their polemic need to do anything contrary to the Christians. You will find most of them on the homosexual issue threads, the evolution threads, drug threads, genetic engineering threads or any other issue involving a perversion of, or attack on the Judaic book of Genesis.

Feminazi and Gaystapo are very close to the reality of the situation.

Some of the Bozos out there can't get past that word “God,” so they would just piss the entire country away and join the enemies of America; all because they have this polemic need to bash the Christians and do everything in contravention to them. I say screw them and the filthy practices they want to live by. My children are not going to inherit their squalor if I can help it.

Of course, what a lot of the leftists and misguided, myopic liberal-tarians don't want to admit is that Christianity (and they do hate Christians) is just their politically correct proxy for their war against what is written in the book of Genesis.

They will jump up and down and snivel about the Ten Commandments and Christians; but the reminders that Moses was not a Christian, that Genesis, Exodus and Deuteronomy are Jewish literature really sticks in their craw.

It is no coincidence Islamic pagans hate Israel, Jews, Christians and Western Civilization. The entire basis of Western Civilization is Mosaic Law, something both the Neo-Pagan Left and the pagan Islamic thugs cannot abide and wish to destroy.

The very idea that human beings have individual rights not subject to the whims of an earthly monarch, but subject to the laws of Yahweh, is directly from Moses.

Historically, this is proven over and over again with the successive conflicts between the forces of paganism and the Judaic culture. (This includes the idolatry of cultural Marxist paganism.)

A greater number of "atheists" and "pagans" adopt the same hackneyed tenets of a faux Judaic-Christian ideal (golden calf). They also subscribe to the Judaic fetishism of "sin," but will fight to their death in denial of it. Most of them are so wrapped up in their own polemics that they have become nothing more than pathetic anti-Christians with the same false hypocritical philosophy. They just slap a new label on it hoping nobody will notice - - they replace the idea of "avoiding sin" with "morals."

Morality and all of its associated ideals are rooted entirely in the presupposition some higher power defines what is correct for human behavior. Today, "morals" are a religious pagan philosophy of esoteric hobgoblins. Transfiguration is a pantheon of fantasies as the medium of infinitization. Others get derision for having an unwavering Judaic belief in Yahweh or Yeshua, although their critics and enemies will evangelize insertion of phantasmagoric fetishisms into secular law.

Mosaic Law (of which the Ten Commandments is just a part) is the foundation of Western Civilization. Genesis is the primary focus of the Declaration of Independence, from where our Constitutional rights are derived. The Ten Commandments are the foundation of our judicial system.

"...to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them... that all men are created... Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world... with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence..."

565 posted on 10/26/2006 4:09:44 AM PDT by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 556 | View Replies]

To: Blackirish
No doubt, triangulation is a delicate high-wire balancing act, requiring a high-wattage candidate like Bill Clinton.

Yeah...

Sure...

566 posted on 10/26/2006 4:33:18 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Blackirish
...Christian conservatives consider a “fast” from politics...

HA Ha ha!!

I'll bet the writer doesn't even KNOW any of these kinds of folks!!!

567 posted on 10/26/2006 4:34:16 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Ghost of FReepers Past

Hard to disagree with this... 8-<


568 posted on 10/26/2006 4:36:13 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: RockinRight
If Union thugs and enviroweenies can co-exist in the Democrap Party then the religious right can co-exist with the "small l" libertarians.

"But those pesky CREATIONISTS will DESTROY the Conservative Movement as well as all of the West's achievements in the last 200 years!!!"

--EvoDude

569 posted on 10/26/2006 4:39:12 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
Every science thread now is a snake pit, and it's the people who try to answer the freak show who seem to be on thin ice with the management.

Boo Hoo!


(A systematic investigation of nature does not negotiate with crackpots.)

(You'd think E would've weeded 'em all out by now!)

570 posted on 10/26/2006 4:41:48 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Liberal Classic

Yow!

I jump from #50 to #550 and this thread has been fully highjacked to a C vs E foodfight! ;^)

571 posted on 10/26/2006 4:44:30 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 553 | View Replies]

To: Blackirish
Blackirish, so many times even here on Free Republic, well known posters who call themselves libertarian will follow the lead of the ACLU, liberal judges and the nineteen sixties left when it comes to matters of the public schools.

It is well known and is easily verified if you have the time to research.

My suggestion is to keep your eyes open when public school threads arise.

You will find many professed libertarians who are overly and unusually interested in and preoccupied with making sure control of local schools is dictated from afar by interests who are dominated by liberals.

If I am logged in and notice such a thread, I will ping you and let you see for yourself.

572 posted on 10/26/2006 5:05:40 AM PDT by OriginalIntent (Undo the ACLU revision of the Constitution. If you agree with the ACLU revisions, you are a liberal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 321 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

You completely missed or ducked my point. No matter. I know your game.


573 posted on 10/26/2006 5:13:09 AM PDT by ml1954 (ID = Case closed....no further inquiry allowed...now move along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 377 | View Replies]

To: stands2reason

Been clicking on all the pages. Only zots were some newbs so far. Good thing reason seems to prevail a bit.


574 posted on 10/26/2006 5:31:38 AM PDT by satchmodog9 (Most people stand on the tracks and never even hear the train coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 285 | View Replies]

To: wyattearp
I can't speak for Dimensio, or Mom MD for that matter, but I do know that Mom MD just applied the 2nd law of thermodynamics to an open system to support her argument, and that is just plain wrong. It is freshman physics for crying out loud!

I learned of it as a junior in high school.
575 posted on 10/26/2006 5:53:24 AM PDT by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 485 | View Replies]

To: wyattearp

Name one: The computer you're sitting in front of, the house you live in, the car you drive, the clothes you wear.... Unless you think that it's possible for all thas stuff to assemble itself by the random action of molecules colliding with each other.


576 posted on 10/26/2006 5:53:55 AM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 505 | View Replies]

To: metmom
I would guess they will find that 'okay' because the will of man was involved there and no 'creator' can be apparent to them.

But life itself to them is nothing at its core but bio-chemical process that somehow bootstrapped and built them selves up as they descended from imagined primordial origins to more complex froms such as worms etc that somehow ended up as some sort of apelike ancestor in Africa that developed a human consciousness.

But bio chemical process have no consciousness, no life of their own

And man did not create anything per se, he designed things, refashioned existing materials (smelt iron out of ore, made and formed steel etc) to get to everything we see that is man-made.
577 posted on 10/26/2006 6:13:33 AM PDT by RunningWolf (2-1 Cav 1975)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 576 | View Replies]

To: wyattearp
"tell grey_whiskers from me that he's welcome to sit in on my second semester undergraduate p. chem next year, since he obviously needs a refresher. Tell him I'll let him audit, because the Chem Engineers would kick his ass down the wrong side of the curve if he tried taking it for credit."

Thanks, but he's completely wrong about that.

As it is, you didn't answer the question. By the first cells, I mean cell 1, 2, 3, and 4 alive on the face of the earth.

You know, the ones in the RNA world.

Did they engage in photosynthesis or not?

Cheers!

578 posted on 10/26/2006 6:14:08 AM PDT by grey_whiskers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 545 | View Replies]

To: ml1954
You completely missed or ducked my point. No matter. I know your game.

I didn't duck the point. I objected to your phraseology. The problem is that you *cannot* devise an experiment to tell the difference between that form of YEC and rigorous materialistic explanations of origins.

Some people prefer the former on faith-based grounds, some prefer the latter out of materialism, atheism, Occam's razor, or "style" ("why go out of your way to invoke a deity...?") It's not a game to me: although your lack of respect indicates it *is* just a game to you.

Cheers!

579 posted on 10/26/2006 6:19:03 AM PDT by grey_whiskers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 573 | View Replies]

To: wyattearp
"tell grey_whiskers from me that he's welcome to sit in on my second semester undergraduate p. chem next year, since he obviously needs a refresher."

BTW, what on *Earth* does 2nd semester undergrad p-chem have to do with when photosynthesis first appeared?

Unless you are referring to Prigogine and dissipative systems?

Cheers!

580 posted on 10/26/2006 6:21:56 AM PDT by grey_whiskers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 545 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

I didn't duck the point.

Then you just ignored it, preferring instead to lecture and scold me about my turn of phrase.

581 posted on 10/26/2006 6:25:39 AM PDT by ml1954 (ID = Case closed....no further inquiry allowed...now move along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 579 | View Replies]

To: ml1954
No, I already answered it in the original post, explaining why your turn of phrase (tho' condescending) revealed a lack of critical thought. I even supplied the "missing thought links" for you; and followed up with the post you just responded to.

So, what is it you *meant* when you called it a "game" ...?

Cheers!

582 posted on 10/26/2006 6:30:35 AM PDT by grey_whiskers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 581 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers
Here is my point ...."trying to claim the evidence shows the earth and the universe are 6000 years old is just plain nuts and inherently anti-science".

Throw out the 'just plain nuts' if you find it offensive. That shortens it to..."trying to claim the evidence shows the earth and the universe are 6000 years old is inherently anti-science."

Leading up to that I indicated that believing God just made it all look older by performing miracles at least accepts that science is correct in it's analysis and interpretation of the evidence and data.

Instead of addressing this you chose to lecture and scold me using phrases like "it looks like something between a sneer and propaganda" and "And if they *are* miracles, then science won't be able to explain them, by definition. Why you feel that means the word must be used as a perjorative is another matter..". And that is the game you are playing.
583 posted on 10/26/2006 6:51:31 AM PDT by ml1954 (ID = Case closed....no further inquiry allowed...now move along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 582 | View Replies]

To: Beagle8U
The RATS are much worse, but there is an alternative, work within the Republican party to make it more conservative.

I prefer to make an alternative, unfortunately the Republicrats have enacted so many laws to preserve their duopoly that it will be difficult.

Steal 15% of Republicans who are tired of big-government, and steal 5% of Democrats who might be Republican were it not for the religious-right aspect. This gives a Congress that's 45% Dim, 35% Republican and 20% spoiler party.

The Republicrats would have to temper their big-government, anti-liberty tendencies in order to pass anything, and would have to seriously gang-up (over 3/4 of each party) to stop a filibuster.

584 posted on 10/26/2006 7:12:44 AM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer
"Guess what. Evolution is one of the premier sciences out there and this anti evolution nonsense makes the republicans look just plain pig ignorant."

That's the problem with crevo threads right there. All that is ever focused on by a good 90% (at least) of your dwindling ilk is the fact that the "rest of us" are "pig-ignorant".

Since most of us are not ensconced away in academia or a biology lab, us "pig-ignorants" are focused on a lot of day-to-day issues that affect our lives, our culture, and conservatism in general. Issues like tax rates, parental rights, criminal vs victim's rights, the WOT, etc etc.

Meanwhile, the (thankfully) shrinking clique of Darwinists seemed ONLY to focus on their one pet issue: Here's another thread about "How-stupid-Christians-are-disguised-as-a-Science-thread".

Everybody be nice...

585 posted on 10/26/2006 7:14:38 AM PDT by Sam's Army (Imagine a world without car commercials.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: Beagle8U
If America wasn't a religious (Christian/Jewish) nation, queer marriage wouldn't have been crushed in every vote when it was on the ballot.

If this were a Muslim nation, the queers might find themselves crushed, by rocks.

586 posted on 10/26/2006 7:28:27 AM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: Liberal Classic; Jim Robinson
What do you think people are going to notice when they log on to your site? They are going to remember some nut who says dinosaurs walked with humans.

May I add a corollary? Having a high incidence of such posts also gives ammunition to those at DU and other places to defame this board as a bunch of "far-right religious nuts." It also lets people alter the Wikipedia entry with factual posts that make FR look bad.

587 posted on 10/26/2006 7:35:42 AM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

Comment #588 Removed by Moderator

To: dogbyte12
That is the rub with libertarianism. Yes, you shouldn't be forced to wear a helmet while you are on your "donorcycle" as the ER doctors call them, but if you are making me help foot the bills, you sure are going to wear one if I have something to say about it.

Then I say we ban skydiving, football, BMX, mountain climbing, swimming, bathing, motorcycle riding, and just plain driving a car, because we all foot the bill for it.

This "we all pay" mentality is just another way to justify expanded government power and regulation over the minutiae of our lives, making us slaves rather than free people.

589 posted on 10/26/2006 7:41:33 AM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer

Piss off you fucking moron. I have spent the better part of my adult life defending this nation.

Thank you for your service to our nation.

590 posted on 10/26/2006 8:00:36 AM PDT by ml1954 (ID = Case closed....no further inquiry allowed...now move along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 588 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Don't forget homosexuality and global warming. I'm sure the theory of evolution is a great boon to those Marxist theories as well.

I would think that evolution is absolutely anti-homosexual. From a natural perspective, a person being purely homosexual ends his line, period, do not pass go, do not collect $200. Homosexuality would be selected out. It's like the joke "Celibacy is hereditary."

We do have the rare aberrations in nature of homosexual activity, but mainly it's been found in humans who discard the natural order of things for their own pleasure and then try to get around evolution through artificial insemination.

"Global Warming" has a connection only in that we know the planet goes through warm and cold phases (whether humans are pumping out CO2 or not), and that affects evolution. Evolution doesn't have a connection with the True Believers who hate themselves and their species, and therefore want to blame us for everything.

591 posted on 10/26/2006 8:01:52 AM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer
"Piss off you fucking moron."

LOL! Outstanding! I knew I would be close, but it appears I hit a bullseye!

592 posted on 10/26/2006 8:05:37 AM PDT by Sam's Army (Imagine a world without car commercials.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ml1954

You are most welcome!!!

Some here seem to not care about our troops and military.


593 posted on 10/26/2006 8:09:56 AM PDT by RadioAstronomer (Senior member of Darwin Central)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 590 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers
Ok, here's a question just off the top of my head, just to cheese you off.

The classic picture of the extinction of the dinosaurs changed greatly upon the finding of a thin layer of Iridium at the K-T boundary.

Cool, we now have heavy metal contamination of the earth from an external source.

My question is, how external is external?

The validity of radiocarbon dating depends (in an ordinary, laboratory scale sense) on the homogeneity of the sample, and the uniformity of conditions. That is, we assume all of the initial amounts of radionuclei (in whichever decay series we are using) were all formed at the same time. This is important because the initial concentrations of daughter particles will be the same. (When the sample gets contaminated, you can get problems in dating, see the Shroud of Turin re-weave and sampling controversy for a non-evo example.)

OK, so were there any amounts of any radionuclei (wherever in the sequence) introduced at the K-T boundary or by any other impacts?

Secondly, if there were, do we know whether the radioisotopes in the comet were formed at the same time as the ones on Earth?

No problem, I am always happy to answer questions.

The problem with your question, though, is that you are confusing radiocarbon dating with radiometric dating. I do the former, not the latter.

Radiocarbon only extends back about 50,000 years, so it does not tell us anything about the K-T boundary.

Adapting your question to radiocarbon dating, we can determine initial conditions through the tree ring calibration. That curve goes back about 12,500 years and they are working on other materials that have extended past 20,000 years.

In plain language, by being able to count tree rings back, say 10,240 years into the past, and then directly dating that one ring you can see how closely the radiocarbon age matches the calendar age. By doing thousands of these tests you can establish a correction curve that accounts for atmospheric variation.

Hope this helps.

594 posted on 10/26/2006 8:25:18 AM PDT by Coyoteman (I love the sound of beta decay in the morning!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 406 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah

"You can't blame social conservatives for big government conservatism."

I dunno, I think they deserve some blame, how much is debatable:

http://www.neoperspectives.com/Social_Conservativsm.htm


595 posted on 10/26/2006 8:46:37 AM PDT by traviskicks (http://www.neoperspectives.com/Amnesty_From_Government.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Blackirish; Abram; albertp; AlexandriaDuke; Alexander Rubin; Allosaurs_r_us; Americanwolf; ...
Libertarian ping! To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here.
596 posted on 10/26/2006 8:47:33 AM PDT by traviskicks (http://www.neoperspectives.com/Amnesty_From_Government.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fiddlstix
Such as the law of gravity

Newton's laws of gravity have been superseded by Relativity on the macro scale and quantum physics on the micro scale. IOW, they have been proven false for many circumstances. That is the highest level of true science?

Even the beloved 2nd Law of Thermodynamics isn't the pinnacle, as it is part of the more general Theory of Heat (which supplanted Caloric Theory).

Somehow I think some of these same people would throw a hissy fit should it be proposed that Einstein's "theory of relativity" be changed to the "law of relativity".

There are many laws that support the theory of Special Relativity.

BTW, when trying to tell the difference between a law and a theory, it's helpful to remember that laws are normally expressed mathematically. For example the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is most basically stated:

Any language-based description is basically a rough approximation of that, subject to misinterpretation and other vagaries of language.

597 posted on 10/26/2006 8:51:37 AM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 328 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks

Ping!


598 posted on 10/26/2006 9:11:40 AM PDT by Blackirish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 596 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

The Whitehead thing is on hold until somebody actually reads some of Whitehead's books. All I have so far is that Quine thought Whitehead's math work was serious and that others thought Whitehead's Theory of Relativity is quite a bit different from Einstein's and just as good as well as eliminating the problem of bifurcation of nature. Since I view the problem of bifurcation of nature as the most serious issue facing us I am greatly impressed that Whitehead was able to get around it. Then, too, we have to decide if we will use the mathematician Whitehead or the philosopher Whitehead that he became about age 61 when most scientists are taking a good look at retirement.


599 posted on 10/26/2006 9:46:14 AM PDT by RightWhale (Repeal the law of the excluded middle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 386 | View Replies]

To: Sam's Army
re: Meanwhile, the (thankfully) shrinking clique of Darwinists seemed ONLY to focus on their one pet issue: Here's another thread about "How-stupid-Christians-are-disguised-as-a-Science-thread")))

Bump your post. Having watched the exchanges for years, the one-issue obsession of the evos is one of their striking features. They can post for months at a time, posting every day, and never post to any thread but a crevo one. And the many FR threads are so distracting and interesting! It speaks to an obsession of considerable intensity.

FR holds an attraction for them because they are like to find religious conservatives here who will dispute them--which is why they can't stay in the little "No Christians Allowed" fort that they built for themselves. They've excluded the very population that keeps dragging them back. Kinda creepy--rather like stalking.

And the "two-minute gangup" that's when an unsuspecting freeper would be dicussing the issue with an evo, only to suddenly find himself being posted and mocked from all directions by a whole gang who had fortuitously arrived in the space of a couple of minutes. Instant messaging to provide ground and air support.

Now that's an obsession!

Oh, and Those Who Must Not Be Spoken To. Taking advantage of traditions of courtesy on FR, numbers of evos would demand of particular posters that they not post to them. Say, what? You're in a discussion forum to tell people to shut up? It was a chore just to keep up with the ones who could not be spoken to.

All about Science. Their true love, science. Sure. A bunch of petty control freaks out for a jaunt, making conservative Christians their sport of choice.

600 posted on 10/26/2006 10:00:44 AM PDT by Mamzelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 585 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 501-550551-600601-650 ... 1,651-1,665 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson