Posted on 10/11/2002 9:02:01 PM PDT by gore3000
Hopefully not the self destruct canister! :-))
Madam; among refined company, it is referred to simply as "the Seventh Planet"....
Yes, Mr Distortion which(post 364) was in response to your veiled attack in post 301 --- Not a bad idea, but they wouldn't get it. By the way, have you ever noticed that the evolution side of the debate, being the rational and mature side, never says equally idiotic things, such as: "Creationism = kiddy porn". (I've been tempted, but hey, there's no sport in kicking cripples.)
I posted your entire response to whattajoke. Gore3000 responded to that trash of yours, listing only the part with the veiled attack. All of this caused by a reference to communism/ID posted by jennyp which I pointed out in post 304.
You can try to hide behind claims of context but if you think the link is innocuous then repost it.
Finally, don't blame the Moderator for your lack of civility.
So your post must be libel.
You are the one that brought up the use of those things. I merely pointed out for consistency that you would label yourself as libelous, if your original statement were true. I wouldn't know about New-Agers, but I note Darwininian paleontologists often use similar techniques to classify bones.
Gee, I must have missed those classes during my undergraduate...darned shame too, for I could have dispensed with my microscope and rock hammer. Goodness! I never would have had to do field work, if what you suggest is true. I think I'll trot right down to the university and get the student-version paleontologist crystal ball.
Yes, that would save a lot of wear and tear on the ole shin bones. From the nice comfort of your easy chair you too can select the mesonychus as the whale ancestor, and ignore DNA evidence until someone finds another bone. Then you can announce that the caldron stirrers were somewhat correct and reject the mesonychus as the whale ancestor and an also-ran in the game of Darwininian evolution. Using the same crystal ball cousin, or the real thing if you prefer, you can crown the Pakicetus as the whale ancestor, even though the DNA evidence shows the Hippo and the whale belong deep in the artiodactyl tree, and have the Paki lying outside the artiodactyl tree with the ambulocetus as a close parallel relative. But you wisely keep your mouth shut lest anyone point out that all the fossil layouts using these two fossil animals show them as Pakicetus leading to ambulocetus. Well anyway that is what the other channel on the Dawininian crystal ball shows.
That was one of the links, yes. As I said, you've seen it before. Isn't it just wonderful that one of the blues brothers was so vigilent, alerting the mods in order to protect you from being exposed to that information? These are the victories of the C side of things -- won by distorting reality and then using censorship. It's the only kind of victory they can ever have.
As long as we're foolish enough to have government-run schools, these people must never be given control over our children's minds.
Another funny coming from the person who has lately been waving "the shut this person up" flag on f.christian. In any case, Junior has just provided another data point to others about his "religiosity".
Please, if you are so concerned about getting the truth out post that link again. While you are at it, buzz the RCC community(Catholic_list).
And what data point would that be? That I tolerate the posting of a link about pedophile priests? What am I supposed to do, deny that such things go on? Being Catholic does not mean one turns a blind eye to the foibles of the church.
Of course not, but you are no Bob Dornan with the actions you have taken or failed to take.
I am sure that when some atheist writes in to an ad in the back of Rolling Stone and gets an ordination you'd understand the humor...
I mean...I do.
They say a good sense of humor is a sign of intelligence.
I also said that I don't agree with everything Hovind says/does, however I think his basic idea deserves more thorough examination, which will never happen, because it directly contradicts evolution. That attitude, to me, is patently unscientific.
Bob Dornan is a devout Roman Catholic, who by his actions demonstrates the depth and character of his core beliefs. He decries the problems indicated by the mentioned incidents, but he would never tolerate the way that link was used. It might be relevant in a discussion amongst those of the faith themselves, but not in a discussion covering evolution.
BTW, not all Catholics act alike or think alike. We are not some monolithic group mind marching lock step. The Catholic Church has hosted individuals with as diverse ideaologies as Torquemada and St. Francis, exhibiting a range of piety from the de Medicis to John Paul II. The only difference between Catholics and Protestants with regard to this is that when we have disagreements over something we don't run off and found a new denomination.
Why do you bother? We both know that the link in question was provided solely to demonstrate the weakness in the creationists' line of argumentation, by providing a counter-example of their own "guilt by association" style of propaganda -- and which was specifically labeled as such. That they don't see this is yet another demonstration of their intellectual failings. To ignore that context and to allow yourself to be dragged into a debate about the link's contents is to be diverted into wasting time on irrelevancies -- a well-developed specialty of a certain creationist.
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.