|
Re: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2010 12:17 PM
Re: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2010 12:22 PM
Re: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
Anyone who believes the Earth is only 6000 years old is a moron who cannot possibly be followed on any level much less be POTUS.
Anyone who believes dinosaurs and man walked the Earth together gives morons a bad name. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2010 12:31 PM
Re: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
rjkarl wrote:Anyone who believes the Earth is only 6000 years old is a moron who cannot possibly be followed on any level much less be POTUS.
Anyone who believes dinosaurs and man walked the Earth together gives morons a bad name. Raquel Welch walked the earth with dinosaurs and looked pretty hot while doing it. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2010 12:33 PM
RE: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
Shorty. /end thread.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2010 12:42 PM
Re: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
rjkarl wrote: Anyone who believes the Earth is only 6000 years old is a moron who cannot possibly be followed on any level much less be POTUS.
Anyone who believes dinosaurs and man walked the Earth together gives morons a bad name. If Palin believes that, she's been quiet about it as far as I can tell. We seem to have only the testimony of a (friendly or not?) music teacher as evidence for such a thing. Palin may well have grown up in and, for all I know, still belong to a church that embraces "young earth" creationism. I do suspect her apparent reluctance to discuss her beliefs about this publicly is likely an indication that she knows that whatever she says will alienate too many people. As I said earlier, I've not found her comments to be "anti-scientists" or even "anti-science". Just in certain instances ignorant and careless. Yes, those are not traits I'd prefer in a leader. But she does seem to generally, as the LA Times article suggests, actually appreciate the limits of what is politically plausible in these matters.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2010 1:17 PM
Re: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
Connor, why sdo you take her "being reasonable limits" as fact but don't consider the two different sources that said she believed the Earth is 6000 years old and that man and dinosaurs coexisted as fact?
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2010 1:39 PM
Re: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
ConnorEl2 wrote:
rjkarl wrote: Anyone who believes the Earth is only 6000 years old is a moron who cannot possibly be followed on any level much less be POTUS.
Anyone who believes dinosaurs and man walked the Earth together gives morons a bad name.
If Palin believes that, she's been quiet about it as far as I can tell. We seem to have only the testimony of a (friendly or not?) music teacher as evidence for such a thing. Palin may well have grown up in and, for all I know, still belong to a church that embraces "young earth" creationism. I do suspect her apparent reluctance to discuss her beliefs about this publicly is likely an indication that she knows that whatever she says will alienate too many people.
As I said earlier, I've not found her comments to be "anti-scientists" or even "anti-science". Just in certain instances ignorant and careless. Yes, those are not traits I'd prefer in a leader. But she does seem to generally, as the LA Times article suggests, actually appreciate the limits of what is politically plausible in these matters. I would have used "expediant" in place of "plausible," but ok. But perhaps as the mayor of Wasilla Alaska she hadn't yet come into her own. nevertheless, there is a world of influence outside of her own legislative hall where Sara Palin's belief in creationism = money and support for candidates who are willing, to obtain and hold a position of power in government, to eschew science in favor of religion - to the detriment of the science needed to gain more understanding of the very condition her own child suffers from. Her existence on the political scene is, in fact, anti-science and anti-scientist - whether she is cognizant of that fact or not.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2010 1:46 PM
Re: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
rjkarl wrote: Connor, why sdo you take her "being reasonable limits" as fact but don't consider the two different sources that said she believed the Earth is 6000 years old and that man and dinosaurs coexisted as fact? What? I accept as true that a music teacher has alleged the conversation. And I accept as verifiable the description the LAT article provides wrt Palin's public record.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2010 2:01 PM
Re: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
WakeandBake wrote:
...Her existence on the political scene is, in fact, anti-science and anti-scientist - whether she is cognizant of that fact or not. I don't think there's adequate evidence for this conclusion. She's not so bright, but ignorance does not enmity require.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2010 2:04 PM
Re: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
WakeandBake wrote:
I would have used "expediant" in place of "plausible," but ok. But perhaps as the mayor of Wasilla Alaska she hadn't yet come into her own...
I'd not quibble over that word choice. ConnorEl2 wrote: OK, after viewing the links (and a couple of more measured related ones), I take her comments to indicate a certain incaution and ignorance. Or a careless political expediency. But not necessarily a hateful disposition towards science or scientists (though I'm not denying she may possess this--I don't really know and suspect she'd deny such a thing).
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2010 2:11 PM
RE: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
my bad.
Connor, isn't the Creationist/Intelligent Design movement, by its very nature, anti-Science?
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2010 2:21 PM
RE: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
WakeandBake wrote: my bad.
Connor, isn't the Creationist/Intelligent Design movement, by its very nature, anti-Science? I think that's too broad a characterization. Plenty of very bright folks reasonably allow for some version of creationism or intelligent design (using the terms very broadly). Those who assiduously deny "evolution" or an old earth age do seem pretty much anti-science to me.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2010 2:43 PM
RE: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
Shorty wrote:
WakeandBake wrote: my bad.
Connor, isn't the Creationist/Intelligent Design movement, by its very nature, anti-Science? Actually, no it is not. The intelligent design crowd believes understanding the science is key to understanding God's creation. The intelligent design movement is basically modern creationism. It essentially goes like this: 1. We admit that creationism in the past was retarded. The world is obviously not 6000 years old. Scientists were right all along about the age of the universe and the age of the earth. 2. We still want to believe in our religion. We take God and the moral and spiritual truths of our religion as assumptions that cannot be questioned. 3. Therefore, let's look for gaps in our knowledge that science can't currently explain. Instead of use the scientific method and research these answers, let's claim they are unanswerable by any explanation other than God made it that way. We will fail to give any proof of this conclusion other than our current level of scientific thought cannot explain these phenomena. 4. When science does come up with answers to the above mentioned phenomena (has happened several times in the last 20 years), we will either go back to our creationists origins and lie and claim the scientists are wrong or simply mark that phenomena off our list. 5. As long as we have something on our list, God exists, God created the universe, and Christianity is right. It shouldn't be much of a challenge for any 120+ iq, educated person to rip this logic to shreds. And yet both George W Bush and Sarah Palin have endorsed intelligent design.
Last edited 10/26/2010 2:44 PM by OliveGardenDeac
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2010 2:57 PM
RE: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
ConnorEl2 wrote:
WakeandBake wrote: my bad.
Connor, isn't the Creationist/Intelligent Design movement, by its very nature, anti-Science?
I think that's too broad a characterization. Plenty of very bright folks reasonably allow for some version of creationism or intelligent design (using the terms very broadly). Those who assiduously deny "evolution" or an old earth age do seem pretty much anti-science to me. I respectfully disagree.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2010 3:14 PM
Re: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
rjkarl wrote:Anyone who believes the Earth is only 6000 years old is a moron who cannot possibly be followed on any level much less be POTUS.
Anyone who believes dinosaurs and man walked the Earth together gives morons a bad name. Isn't Obama a Christian? How do you and Bill Maher support a guy who takes his wife and kids to listen to crazy kooks in church all the time as he has done over the last few weeks? Every Sunday, these days, it seems he is carrying around that crazy book with the tilted X on it. Ever read any of the those nutjob stories in there? There is no way to water it down---anybody who professes to be a Christian is clearly delusional, ignorant, and unfit to be POTUS. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2010 3:42 PM
RE: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
As wacked out as Odonnel is, and believe me shes wacked out of her mind, she at least has conservative core principals. That is better than anything regarding Obama and his ilk.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2010 3:44 PM
Re: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
HMann wrote:
rjkarl wrote: Anyone who believes the Earth is only 6000 years old is a moron who cannot possibly be followed on any level much less be POTUS.
Anyone who believes dinosaurs and man walked the Earth together gives morons a bad name.
Isn't Obama a Christian?
How do you and Bill Maher support a guy who takes his wife and kids to listen to crazy kooks in church all the time as he has done over the last few weeks?
Every Sunday, these days, it seems he is carrying around that crazy book with the tilted X on it.
Ever read any of the those nutjob stories in there?
There is no way to water it down---anybody who professes to be a Christian is clearly delusional, ignorant, and unfit to be POTUS. I dont think its being Christian per se, its the level of how wacked out religiously she is. I mean she thinks masturbation is a sin, lol. There are plenty of christians who dont think like that at least.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2010 4:02 PM
RE: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
I believe in some sort of evolution and a higher power behind it all. Anyone who believe the earth was created in 7 days as the bible says is wacked, as well as the earth being 6,000 years old.
The problem is you have too many christians and other religious people thinking the bible is true word for word.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2010 4:07 PM
RE: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
I dont mind a chistian holding office If they at least have some common sense.
Plenty of people believe in some sort of God, or higher power and believe in science like evolution and dont take the bible word for word.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2010 4:14 PM
Re: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
MotelInn wrote:
HMann wrote:
rjkarl wrote:Anyone who believes the Earth is only 6000 years old is a moron who cannot possibly be followed on any level much less be POTUS.
Anyone who believes dinosaurs and man walked the Earth together gives morons a bad name.
Isn't Obama a Christian?
How do you and Bill Maher support a guy who takes his wife and kids to listen to crazy kooks in church all the time as he has done over the last few weeks?
Every Sunday, these days, it seems he is carrying around that crazy book with the tilted X on it.
Ever read any of the those nutjob stories in there?
There is no way to water it down---anybody who professes to be a Christian is clearly delusional, ignorant, and unfit to be POTUS. I dont think its being Christian per se, its the level of how wacked out religiously she is. I mean she thinks masturbation is a sin, lol. There are plenty of christians who dont think like that at least. Actually, there are several folks on here who think that anyone who believes in God is a moron---except in cases where the supposed Christian leads their political party and is really smooth and cool, in which case it is A-OK to profess faith as a substitute for intellectualism. Some of these folks do watch Bill Maher's show and masturbate, though, so I do agree with what you are saying to a certain extent... |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2010 4:21 PM
RE: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
Well those people are dumb, ignorant atheists who I make fun of a lot.
With how complex this earth is, not to mention the entire universe, you are still ignorant enough to think a higher power does not exist? In some ways THAT is dumber than any wacked out religious person.
Last edited 10/26/2010 4:22 PM by MotelInn
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2010 4:23 PM
RE: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
Being agnostic is a good way to go actually. They believe a chance of a higher power is out there at least.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2010 4:43 PM
RE: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
rjkarl wrote:
CyberDeac wrote: She's a conservative...that's all that matters. This is the reason our country is in trouble...as long as someone has a certain theoretical position who that person is or their competence doesn't matter. Thats true to an extent, but at least Palin has conservative principals at the core. It goes a long way. I care about that a lot, certaintly more than anything Obama stands for. Would I want her to be president? Hell no.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2010 4:50 PM
Re: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
HMann wrote:
rjkarl wrote:Anyone who believes the Earth is only 6000 years old is a moron who cannot possibly be followed on any level much less be POTUS.
Anyone who believes dinosaurs and man walked the Earth together gives morons a bad name.
Isn't Obama a Christian?
How do you and Bill Maher support a guy who takes his wife and kids to listen to crazy kooks in church all the time as he has done over the last few weeks?
Every Sunday, these days, it seems he is carrying around that crazy book with the tilted X on it.
Ever read any of the those nutjob stories in there?
There is no way to water it down---anybody who professes to be a Christian is clearly delusional, ignorant, and unfit to be POTUS. No there is no way to water the fact that ANYONE who believes the Earth is 6000 years old is a total WACKO...... Of all the Christian people know from Catholics to Quakers and everything in between, I don't know ONE who believes the Earth is 6000 years old. If you beleive the Earth is 6000 years old you are irrational.... |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2010 4:54 PM
RE: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
People who believe the bible word for word do.
I went to a christian school in the 8th grade for 1 year, thank god. The science teacher said there was no chance of life in the universe, and that the earth was 6,000 years old.
The science teacher!!!!! I still cant get over that
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2010 5:00 PM
RE: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
I think Ph believes the earth is 6000 years old. Anyone else here secure enough in their Christianity to admit the same?
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2010 5:03 PM
RE: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
ShoosheskiShmoosheski wrote: I think Ph believes the earth is 6000 years old. Anyone else here secure enough in their Christianity to admit the same? Why would a person secure in his/her Christianity admit that the earth was 6000 years old? |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2010 7:50 PM
RE: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
ShoosheskiShmoosheski wrote: I think Ph believes the earth is 6000 years old. Anyone else here secure enough in their Christianity to admit the same? I'll admit that I believed that when I was 12. I was brainwashed tho.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2010 9:14 PM
RE: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
OliveGardenDeac wrote:
ShoosheskiShmoosheski wrote: I think Ph believes the earth is 6000 years old. Anyone else here secure enough in their Christianity to admit the same? I'll admit that I believed that when I was 12. I was brainwashed tho. I'd be willing to bet that the overwhelming majority of educated Christians don't believe that the earth is 6000 years old. either. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2010 10:36 PM
RE: O'donnell: the reason I'm running
WakeandBake wrote:
ConnorEl2 wrote:
WakeandBake wrote: my bad.
Connor, isn't the Creationist/Intelligent Design movement, by its very nature, anti-Science?
I think that's too broad a characterization. Plenty of very bright folks reasonably allow for some version of creationism or intelligent design (using the terms very broadly). Those who assiduously deny "evolution" or an old earth age do seem pretty much anti-science to me. I respectfully disagree. Sorry for the delay--just getting back here. I assume you've not met and assessed most of the very bright folks in the world. So do you intend to indicate that you consider anyone allowing for the possibility of God's existence (even broadly understood to be "behind" the universe) to be, by definition, not possibly very bright?
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
