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 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.