Skip to comments.A Return to Triangulation (libertarion vs social right)
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 Roves 2006 campaign strategy.
(Excerpt) Read more at article.nationalreview.com ...
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.
And FYI....I am an "old timer" and lurked almost a full year before I joined.
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.
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 : )
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)
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.
(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
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".
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.
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.
You are thinking with the appendage at the wrong end of the spinal column...
The only reason some of them are here is to bash the Christians and that is all they have.
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...
I would agree with you on spending... all the more reason to get evolution off of educational welfare...
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..."
HA Ha ha!!
I'll bet the writer doesn't even KNOW any of these kinds of folks!!!
Hard to disagree with this... 8-<
"But those pesky CREATIONISTS will DESTROY the Conservative Movement as well as all of the West's achievements in the last 200 years!!!"
(A systematic investigation of nature does not negotiate with crackpots.)
(You'd think E would've weeded 'em all out by now!)
I jump from #50 to #550 and this thread has been fully highjacked to a C vs E foodfight! ;^)
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.
You completely missed or ducked my point. No matter. I know your game.
Been clicking on all the pages. Only zots were some newbs so far. Good thing reason seems to prevail a bit.
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.
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?
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.
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?
I didn't duck the point.
Then you just ignored it, preferring instead to lecture and scold me about my turn of phrase.
So, what is it you *meant* when you called it a "game" ...?
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.
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...
If this were a Muslim nation, the queers might find themselves crushed, by rocks.
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.
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.
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.
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.
LOL! Outstanding! I knew I would be close, but it appears I hit a bullseye!
You are most welcome!!!
Some here seem to not care about our troops and military.
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.
"You can't blame social conservatives for big government conservatism."
I dunno, I think they deserve some blame, how much is debatable:
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.
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.
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.