if this does turn out to be the case it could have very serious implications.... turkey hovers between western freedom and democracy and an islamic hell.
europe has been bending over backwards to keep turkey on-side and promising it fast-tracked entry to the eu in return for it's cooperation in controlling mass migration from the east.. the situation is unclear at the moment but there are tanks on the streets....
SBF,
I'd be surprised if Russia tried anything in Turkey as it would almost certainly trigger Article 5 of the NATO Collective Defense. Though, things do seem to be rapidly expanding out of control in that part of the globe so maybe Putin is just crazy enough to try it.
Ugh, all bad . . .
if this does turn out to be the case it could have very serious implications.... turkey hovers between western freedom and democracy and an islamic hell.
europe has been bending over backwards to keep turkey on-side and promising it fast-tracked entry to the eu in return for it's cooperation in controlling mass migration from the east.. the situation is unclear at the moment but there are tanks on the streets....
Kate,
I think the US should be launching attacks in Syria because Al Assad is a war criminal that has slaughtered unarmed protesters time and time again and has used chemical weapons against his own people.
His bad governance has also given an opening to one of the worst organizations in modern history. ISIS has committed genocide against the Kurds and has slaughtered whole sale Christians, Yazidis, Poly Theists, Shiites, and other Muslims who are not "loyal Muslims".
This alone demands an international response to stop the mass killings of innocent civilians. But ISIS has not been content to stop there. They have taken the war to the rest of the world launching and inspiring attacks in dozens of countries against civilian targets.
I don't think the US should be the world police responding to every crisis. But when it comes to genocidal maniacs seeking to conquer territory and reign death across the globe I think force is the only rational response.
if this does turn out to be the case it could have very serious implications.... turkey hovers between western freedom and democracy and an islamic hell.
europe has been bending over backwards to keep turkey on-side and promising it fast-tracked entry to the eu in return for it's cooperation in controlling mass migration from the east.. the situation is unclear at the moment but there are tanks on the streets....
This is a devastating blow to the West's fight against ISIS. Instability will produce an opening for ISIS to move into parts of Turkey and it will seriously curtail the US ability to launch attacks in Syria.
The immense ramifications of this coup are hard to overstate.
your qualifications are way above mine so i'd love to hear more about the specifics of what you have researched and how that supports the existence of a deity.
k99, i am not really convinced that you're interested in my conclusions.
in nature amino acids formed to then form dna.
Our conclusions should follow the evidence. Not try and lead the evidence.
If there is some aspect of biology or chemistry we don't understand than the answer is - we don't yet understand. Not, "hey, I can make up whatever I want now."
God of the gaps is logical fallacy that occurs when God is invoked to explain some natural phenomena that science cannot (at the time of the argument). "God of the gaps" is a bad argument not only on logical grounds, but on empirical grounds: there is a long history of "gaps" being filled and the gap for God thus getting smaller and smaller, suggesting "we don't know yet" as an alternative that works better in practice; naturalistic explanations for still-mysterious phenomena are always possible, especially in the future where more information may be uncovered.
wow, this just blew my mind.
it's an issue i've had with the claims people make about our supposed divine genesis but don't think i've ever seen anyone so precisely hit the nail on the head.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdumiut9m3m.
Wow, this just blew my mind. It's an issue I've had with the claims people make about our supposed "divine genesis" for a long time - but I don't think I've ever seen anyone so precisely hit the nail on the head.
i had a thought this morning and i am putting it out for discussion.. when a christian is a nutjob we call them fundamentalist but a nutjob muslim is "radical".. doesn't one detach the person from the religion while one puts them square at the root?
shouldn't we call radical muslim terrorists "fundamentalist"?
.
There are hundreds of thousands of radical Muslims living here in the US. For example, many of the men in the United States don't wear thobes and some even shave their beards (gasp) - against culture AND scripture (Quran 4:59), the women don't wear hijabs and some don't wear a headdress altogether - against culture AND scripture (Quran 24:30), the men don't beat their wives when they disobey and some of the women even have jobs!!! - WAY against culture and scripture (Quran 4:34), almost all the women go out for leisure and casual shopping - against culture and the al-Ahzaab (33:33), . . . etc.
In most Islamic countries around the world such radical behavior from Muslims would result in fines, jail, and even execution. THIS is the difference between a radical and a fundamentalist. Groups like al Quedia aren't radical by any means. They're hard core fundamentalists.
i just frightened a jehovah’s witness lady half out of her wits!.
i just frightened a sweet jehovah’s witness lady half out of her wits.... .
she took off like a sprinter at the sound of a starter pistol!.
I've honestly never understood the point of talking about theology with a JW. The Bible is demonstrably false in so many ways. Wouldn't it be more productive to show the failed prophecies, historical inaccuracies, and contradictions of the Bible?
your qualifications are way above mine so i'd love to hear more about the specifics of what you have researched and how that supports the existence of a deity.
k99, i am not really convinced that you're interested in my conclusions.
in nature amino acids formed to then form dna.
Why do we need to tell the difference? What we need to draw any conclusions is satisfying evidence. What satisfies one person, does not satisfy another.
-Kate
We need to be able to tell the difference because we have two competing explanations for our observations. One of the explanations has met its burden of proof - we know that mutation and natural selection operate perfectly well without any agency or a need for any outside guidance. The second explanation has NOT met it's burden of proof. It has not explained who was doing the guidance and how/when/where/why that guidance was done.
Conclusions shouldn't be based on what "satisfies" us. They should be based on what is most likely true.
Postulating that evolution was "guided" to satisfy something we don't understand isn't an explanation. It's an argument from ignorance. Because we can't solve one mystery with another mystery. We can't explain one unknown by postulating the existence of another unknown.
your qualifications are way above mine so i'd love to hear more about the specifics of what you have researched and how that supports the existence of a deity.
k99, i am not really convinced that you're interested in my conclusions.
in nature amino acids formed to then form dna.
It could be natural selection or a creator using the method of natural selection.
-Katie
How do we tell the difference between good old fashioned natural selection and guided natural selection? And wouldn't we need a mechanism to distinguish between the two before we could conclude our evolution was guided?
your qualifications are way above mine so i'd love to hear more about the specifics of what you have researched and how that supports the existence of a deity.
k99, i am not really convinced that you're interested in my conclusions.
in nature amino acids formed to then form dna.
Kate,
When you say evolution is "guided" do you mean by natural and sexual selection? Or are you talking about something else?
