Take it easy IG, and realise that 'we' allow people who 'disassociate' themselves to come back.
Wannie wannie no havie, havie havie no wantie, as a dear Caribbean lady of my acquaintence used to say.
Abaddon
JoinedPosts by Abaddon
-
55
My time on this board has now come to an end
by IronGland ini'll miss some of you.
i curse others.
it's been an interesting 3 years.
-
-
-
23
Intelligent Design and Real World Nastiness
by TD inthe concept of intelligent design in every form that ive run across contains as a basic premise, the benevolence of the "intelligence" behind the design.
please dont misunderstand; i'm not faulting proponents of id for this.
any other id scenario involving a supreme being is frankly too depressing to contemplate.
-
-
Abaddon
Spectrum
How horrid! I hate it when that happens - word to the wise, write long posts in Notepad (not Word, it screws-up the formatting), C&P into the browser. Thanks for letting me know; I look forward to your reply.
Enigma sweetie, Spectrum is seething cause he lost a long post when his bowser crashed, get a grip man!
heathen
Evolution does not show creatures evolving on a molecular scale . At first they claimed it was small changes in species then when they couldn't find evidence of that targeted big changes , so a whale could now in all possibility give birth to a kangeroo . How wonderful science is .......
I really don't know why you bother.
Anyone trying to assemble a credible argument for ID et. al. is at this point hiding their face in their hands and wishing you'd shut the copulate up, as you're doing their argument no favours what-so-ever, just volubly illustrating a long established truth that no matter how sincere and well intentioned the godidit side of the argument is, they do tend towards the clueless.
Evolution does not show creatures evolving on a molecular scale
Actually, molecular evidence DOES show evolution on a molecular scale, so much so that it usually confirms the relationship between living animals as previously claimed using cladistics, so much so we can see new genetic matter enter into a bacterium or be altered within a bacterium and thus speciate it. The same molecular evidence again usually validates the linkages, previously predicted using cladistics, that have been claimed for extinct species and macroevolutionary events.
You totally and utterly have no idea what you are talking about. Or you are lying and know it. Which is it?
so a whale could now in all possibility give birth to a kangeroo
Nah. But whales with legs are occasionally born, and the kinship between the animals can be demonstrated at a molecular level and confirms previous estomates of when palcental mammals and marsupials split from one another.
. How wonderful science is .......
Omne ignotum pro magnifico est
metatron
Your assement of the book doesn't surprise me. ID IS used, arguably one can even say it was 'intelligently designed' as a Trojan Horse for faith-based teaching, although it doesn't logically require to be linked with any existing faith system.
-
97
Does the King Kong movie have racist overtones?
by enlightenedcynic inhey everybody,.
was having a discussion with a co-worker about the new kk movie.
he asked if i saw it already.
-
-
Abaddon
avi
As my great great great great great great great great great grandfather was the first European to run the Middle Passage, I obviously agree with you.
However, talking about the reaction of an American to a Hollywood movie made mention of the many other examples superfluous.
Merry Christmas, by the way.
-
-
-
Abaddon
Double Edge
"That which is"... so now you're saying what? "that which is" according to whom? ... because again, you can find credentialed people taking opposing views.
By saying 'that which is' I am merely pointing out two people in a room could have a different opinion about what is on the table in the middle of the room, but there is only one accurate definiton of what is on the table.
An opinion is WORTHLESS for determining fact unless it is defensable. Einstein's opinion in this is not defensable; there is no proof of it, it is only an assertion.
Oh really? thanks.... I never said that Einstein was a biologist.
No, but you assert he believed in ID, which requires he have an opinion about evolution, a biological process. As a mathematician and physicist he would not claim to be qualified as a biologist.
But before you can discuss the beginnings of 'life forms' on this planet, you need to discuss the beginnings of the planet and universe themselves, and that is where the opinions of Einstein, the mathematician, seem to hold more weight than I dare say most any poster on this board.
On this I agree with you, but believing god put the bang in the big bang and detrmined the rules which theerafter resulted in what we see now is NOT the same as Intelligent Design.
Intelligent Design ALSO normally insists that intelligent design of organisms is also neccesary. I see nowhere that Einstein claims organisms were designed, which is why funky is rightfully critical of you asserting he believed in ID. Unfortunately the sloppiness of your assertion is redolent of the sloppiness that typifies Creationist and ID-movement thinking and literature.
I don't know. But are you saying that there are no well-known biologists who don't consider I.D. a possibility? hmmmmm
Well known : Credible = Different
Geology & the History and Philosophy of Science : Biology = Different
Hmmmmm.... yourself - you've not even quoted a biologist!
Meyer originally graduated with a degree in geology in 1980 from Whitworth College and worked in the oil industry. After attending a creationist conference however, he became increasingly interested in origins and rejected the evolutionary creationism in which he had previously believed.
Meyer won a scholarship to Cambridge University in the United Kingdom to study the history and philosophy of science. Meyer earned his Ph.D. in the History and Philosophy of Science from Cambridge University in 1991. His dissertation was on the history of the origin of life and the biology and the methodology of the historical sciences.
Meyer formerly worked as a geophysicist for the Atlantic Richfield Company and is now a Professor of the Conceptual Foundations of Science at Palm Beach Atlantic University, a Christian University, where he teaches a course on Christian apologetics in its School of Ministry. He was previously on the faculty of Whitworth College (which has links to the Presbyterian Church (USA) in Spokane, Washington for twelve years.
In 1990, Meyer, Bruce Chapman and George Gilder, formed the Discovery Institute as a non-profit educational foundation and think tank based upon the Christian apologetics of C.S. Lewis and opposed to materialism. It was founded as a branch of the Hudson Institute, an Indianapolis-based, conservative think tank and named for the HMS Discovery, which explored Puget Sound in 1792.
In 1993, Chapman secured seed money in the form of a grant from Howard Ahmanson, Jr. and $450,000 from the MacLellan Foundation which underwrote the earliest nucleus of intelligent design authors who titled themselves "The Wedge" [1]. Meyer had previously tutored Ahmanson's son in science and Meyer recalls being asked by Ahmanson "What could you do if you had some financial backing?" It is from these beginnings that the intelligent design movement grew.
Meyer has recently co-written or edited two books: Darwinism, Design, and Public Education with Michigan State University Press and Science and Evidence of Design in the Universe (Ignatius 2000). He has published over 70 articles and papers.
Meyer has been described as "the person who brought ID (intelligent design) to DI (Discovery Institute)" by historian Edward Larson, who was a fellow at the Discovery Institute prior to it becoming the center of the intelligent design movement.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_C._Meyer
Again, showing the sloppiness of the ID and associated movements, and the unprepared nature of its supporters, you cite an article that was subsequently repudiated by the journal it appeared in;
On 7 September, the publisher of the journal, the Council of the Biological Society of Washington, released a statement repudiating the article as not meeting its scientific standards and not peer reviewed. [3] The same statement vowed that proper review procedures would be followed in the future and endorsed a resolution published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science, which observes that there is no credible scientific evidence supporting ID. [4] The journal's reasons for disavowing the article were denied by Richard Sternberg, the managing editor at the time the article was submitted and who subsequently left after its publication. [5] Critics of Meyer's paper believe that Sternberg himself was biased in the matter, since he is a member of the editorial board of the Baraminology Study Group, an organization with a creationist agenda. The Baraminology Study Group's official position is that Sternberg is not a creationist and acts primarily as a skeptical reviewer. [6] A critical review of the article is available on the Panda's Thumb website. [7]
(same source as first quotation)
Not mentioning this either means the source you got this from decieved you, or you were intentionally trying to decieve us. From experience I say you were the one that was fooled, not the one that was doing the fooling.
Sorry to be critical and skeptical, but this is what happens ANYTIME there is a discussion of ID or Creationism. The 'professional' ID-ers and Creationists end up being shown to be partial, selective, unethical, misrepresenters, omitters of critical evidence that damages their claims, and frequently operate well outside of their specialism (and as people don't normally have plumbers do their teeth you'll understand why the equivalent in science is a red flag for bad science).
Their supporters typically compound these errors.
By all means prove me wrong...
-
97
Does the King Kong movie have racist overtones?
by enlightenedcynic inhey everybody,.
was having a discussion with a co-worker about the new kk movie.
he asked if i saw it already.
-
-
Abaddon
mkr
Chimps were the primates I was refering too
I realise, and whilst subject to variation in skin tone, they ain't white if you shave them;
trevor
Your comments on this thread are racially motivated
Yes but no but yes.
Is he racist towards white people in everyday life? Nope. So NOT racially motivated.
Is he from a race that has been subject to racism? Hell yes. Is it possible that sterotypical racist attitudes directed against his race in the past will cause him to see racism in a film where there isn't racism? Yes, reasonably so.
So his comments are motivated by racism, but that of OTHERS.
and do a great disservice to black people.
And YOUR service to white people is what exactly?
The gorilla belonged in the jungle on a deserted island away from civilisation - so do people who share your racist views!
My my. Well, nice for you to allow us to assign a value to your opinions.
Billygoat
It's kinda like those people that look at the pictures in the WTS art depictions that try to find Satan's face. Some people are just wired to play victim.
No Billygoat. The pictures seen in pictures are a result of the brain's wiring. People seeing what they see as racial imagary in a film about a massive ape terrorising a white woman is because there are people alive today who will remember a time where one could characterise a black man as an ape who was a risk to white women in polite company and not hear one disagreement. Whether you like to admit it or not, American society has made it's black citizens victims of decades of racism, and a few laws in the sixties don't wipe away decades of bigotry.
Spectrum
Blacks portrayed as violent gun toting rapists of white women. Usual social setting poor, destitute, aggressive.
Last time I looked Will Smith had saved the world at least three times in movies. That makes him a bigger hero than Bruce Wilis, who has only saved the world once. So what does their respect skin hue show?
Before you complain about how unrepresentative the portrayal of the living conditions of an average black American is in movies, do you know what the real-life difference is between average white living conditions and average black living conditions? Please quote references.
Anyhow, super villens are ususally English. Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha! I might live in Holland, but I'm English. I have to ask, is stroking a white pussy racist?
Hispanic's reputation is now going through the same racist hollywood meat grinder.
No, not to the extent black people were in the past, nor will it ever, as attitudes have moved on. There might be sterotyping, but then crack gangs run by a group of Harvard graduates who pimp Ivy League hookers would not be particulary believeable.
Films about the criminal underworld tend to represent sterotypes, be they Britsh Gangster movies or American ones. The sterotypes are a result of demographics; most members of the Bloods and the Crips are black or Hispanic, for example.
A society where the criminals tend to be disproportionately of a certain race or races is where the racism is. The movies portraying that society are not nessarily racist by representing that society.
American Indians savages ready to scalp virtuous innocent white rose. Sometimes though saved by the heroic strong white man unless he gets scalped himself.
Yeah, old Westerns sucked. I prefer the newer ones where the white man is portrayed as heartless and barbaric.
South Americans - drug lords.
And if we made a movie about drug lords in 1870, they would be British - read up on the Opium War. At the moment drug lords ARE often South American.
Africans need a stupid white man to show them how to survive in their own natural environment. Ridiculous.
Hell, you watch really bad movies. The ones set in Africa with Macaws and Cockatoos sitting in the trees...
I've seen two programs in a week which describe how two seperate indigenous populations (Thai Sea Gypsies and Andaman Islanders) escaped the tsunami last year without loss of life as they were so primative they remembered the stories about a big wave coming if the sea went back too far and ran for it.
Jews are portrayed as the virtue of the world - Brain surgeons, musician, clever lawyers, upright business men, distinctly jewish names not associated with villains.
Yeah, well at the 3rd International Artistic Convention in 1908, it was decided for the next hundred years Jews would be given all the good parts as they were bored with Fagin, Shylock, and all the other fun fun roles that had been written for them in the past millenia. Get over it, the agreement lapses in 2008. I think gypsies are up for the next hundred years of good parts, or is it the gays (remember only gay Jews could already get good parts)?
The question about rizzo stems from a nazi apologist by that name who was utterly obsessed with Jews and how they controlled the world and how unfair every one was to poor Adolf, who only killed a few by accident. He benefitted us with his 'wisdom' and got his bigotted ass banned from here.
I don't think you are anything like that, but due to idiots like rizzo there is a certain enui and distain towards people who moan about Jews. The 'virtue of the world' comment sounded a bit... odd...
-
97
Does the King Kong movie have racist overtones?
by enlightenedcynic inhey everybody,.
was having a discussion with a co-worker about the new kk movie.
he asked if i saw it already.
-
-
Abaddon
Klu Kluk Kong?Okay, if KK is racist (it's an old story so I don't need to see this version), then what is Beauty and the Beast? Quasimodo? They are fundamentally the same stories.
Maybe YOU are picking up on racial stereotypes. B&theBeast or Quasimodo doesn't ring any bells (ha!), Monster : princess + castle. French chick : ugly guy + church. Nothing to take offense from there.
Massive gorilla : female explorer + Africa + New York
Okay, nothing racist in ANY of those terms.
But comparing black people to primates is racist... sadly it's done, but not in the movie.
A female explorer of the period the film is traditionally set in historically WOULD be white... so no racism there.
She is always a beautiful woman, but she's beautiful in the other architype stories. Black heroines in movies are always beautiful too... so no racism there.
Africa. Nothing racist about that. Of course black people originally come from Africa, but we know this already.
New York. Nothing racist about that, I assume. Of course black people live in New York, but we know this already. King Kong is implictly attracted to her as he has never seen a white female before - this is, I believe a plot device, not a racist statement. If he wasn't, there would be no movie. Of course, KK BEING attracted to her is not fun for her, but that's because he's a gorilla. A very large gorillia. This is not 'Gorillas in the Mist', even Diane Fossey would draw the line at that affectionate... Of course, if you live in a society where there are still the shadows of an age where male blacks were seen as bestial and primative, and a danger to white women, you can take SHED LOADS of offense. Please don't commit the same error as racists and assume race excludes sympathy 8-)
But offense isn't actually there, not really, it's just YOUR perspective that makes it so. A non-racist fim is seen by you as racist because of the history of your country.
Besides you shave a monkeys hair off and underneath their skin is white!
Which species of monkey, and what has that got to do with primate skin colour?
-
-
-
Abaddon
Equally ironic that the first response repeats a typical ID-style argument from authority.
If Albert Einstein believed in ID, so what? It's not what people believe in, but that which is that determines whether some idea is right or not.
And also, why do people (I'm not saying you believe in either ID or big-C-reationism Double Edge) from the godidit side of the argument always use quotations by physicists supposedly saying they believe in god?
Evolution. Physics. Different.
Where are the quotes by biologists about the implications of the first x pico seconds of existence? Would they have a fully informed opinion oif cosmology? Hmmmm...
Anyway, for the record;
Einstein
"I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony in
what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions
of human beings."Spinoza used the word "God" for some mystical cosmic unity. He was branded an atheist
for centuries.Einstein
"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religous convictions, a lie
which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal
God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something
is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration
for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."Einstein
"My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble mind."
So, Einstein may have believed in some 'rule maker'. But that the entity responsible was personalityless and unconcerned with man. And whether he would approve of teaching a hypothesis as an alternative to a theory... whether the advances made in cosmology would mean he would still believe in a 'rule maker'... we don't know, although I'd bet on the answer to the former being "no" (using common scientific definitons of theory and hypothesis).
But we don't know what he'd think now, and the opinion expressed cannot be proved, which is why arguements from authority are crap.
In Europe we think it's mad. It is SO not an issue. Religion : Church (if you go). Science : School (if you go). And the idea that anyone is fooled by the Trojan Horse of ID is baffling. Dig into most prominent ID-ers and you find a re-marketed Creationist. It's the same "change the name, make the presentation more credible" routine the ultra-right have done in Europe. The neo-facist National Front became the British National Party. Head honchos were unchanged.
Obviously it works; ID attracts those that Creationism is not credible enough for, just as anti-immigrant scape-goating of far-right parties attract those the more overtly racist attitudes of the old-style ultra right.
And it has NOTHING to do with belief in god. The fricking POPE believes in evolution - the RC church figured out the literalistic arguments were unwinable DECADES ago, but also that they weren't important, as you can just move god further back and make him bigger and smarter.
Ultra-Literal Biblical Creationism (YEC) treats god like a potter, and have to advance a bizare conspiracy theory about dating et. al and ignore mountains of evdience.
Contextually Literalistic Creationism (OEC) at least allows for conventional timescales, but still treats god like a potter.
ID-ers treat god like a draughtsmen.
If we go beyond purile humanised idea of god, we get closer to the truth, if there is one about god.
There is no job title like potter or draughtsmen for someone who can throw raw ingredients into a mix just the right way, with just the right spin, and make anything like all this around us. That is why I feel those who go beyond the anthropomorphic constraints of tradition are probably closer to the truth of god, if there is one, than those whose imaginations fail at god being anything clever than a cosmic daughtsman.
-
43
Describe A Watctower Infiltrator In A Kingdom Hall
by minimus ini believe that a number of witnesses are leadind double lives.
they go to meetings.
they might even be elders and ministerial servants.
-
-
Abaddon
Oh, an 'agent in deep cover'. Okay.
Well, some are, no doubt, not able to extricate themselves in the manner of their chosing and willing to bide their time.
I suppose one, if out, could do the prodigal son; fast track to Elder (if male) and head for Bethel dragging an 18 year-old pioneer sister you can corrupt along with you. Jump through all the hoops be a super-fine little bastard Elder and explode like an anurism ten years later as deep in the brainb of the bloated, stinking mass of corruption... sorry, got carried away there. Not my scene, but a great idea.
Maybe someone like that is in deep today. Not that I'd know...
Think about that Bethel lurkers... wanna know what Bethel he's in... ?
-
66
The 144,000 and the Great Crowd of Revelation
by Leolaia in8-11; ch.
as in ch.
like the "great crowd", they are "of every race, language, people, and nation (cf.
-
-
Abaddon
This was interesting to read.
I confess this is far from my field of expertise, but admire the scholarly presentation. It also make very clear how a simple presentation can be made of the contradiction between Dubbie doctrine and textual analysis of Revelation. Acually, it is the first time I've revisted that scripture for a decade and a half, and I'm amazed I didn't... ANYONE didn't notice it. It's not so much textual analysis than it is reading the bloddy text.
Woof woof, ding ding, drool drool.
-
43
Describe A Watctower Infiltrator In A Kingdom Hall
by minimus ini believe that a number of witnesses are leadind double lives.
they go to meetings.
they might even be elders and ministerial servants.
-
-
Abaddon
I've got it - the ones on the fade say "Shiboleth", the true-blues say "Siboleth".
