Post by: MicroBalrog on September 02, 2008, 04:07:47 AM
Here:
Quote
Sarah Palin was apparently a member in 1996 for a brief time with her husband Todd, about the same time Barack Obama was community organizing in Chicago for freebies from the federal government. She switched parties to Republican before running for mayor of Wasilla that year.
What liberals are belittling as a fringe party problem for her is something that middle America and libertarian-minded voters will cheer. Most rural states are fed up with Washington DC. Politically the GOP will welcome a new standard-bearer for the great conservative philosophical principles of self-determination and self-reliance. One suspects that Palin may steer the GOP back on their traditional political course.
The AIP party has been improperly described as advocating secession from the U.S. Their interesting platform refutes that sloppy reporting although some of their members would like to vote on it. They mainly want to amend the Alaska state constitution and call on Washington DC to respect our federalist system of government, what every libertarian-minded Republican would applaud.
It is also not a fringe party. Governor Walter Hickel was elected as a AIP member in 1990. The Alaska Independence Party is the 3rd largest in the state, ahead of both the Green Party and Libertarian Party.
What liberals are belittling as a fringe party problem for her is something that middle America and libertarian-minded voters will cheer. Most rural states are fed up with Washington DC. Politically the GOP will welcome a new standard-bearer for the great conservative philosophical principles of self-determination and self-reliance. One suspects that Palin may steer the GOP back on their traditional political course.
The AIP party has been improperly described as advocating secession from the U.S. Their interesting platform refutes that sloppy reporting although some of their members would like to vote on it. They mainly want to amend the Alaska state constitution and call on Washington DC to respect our federalist system of government, what every libertarian-minded Republican would applaud.
It is also not a fringe party. Governor Walter Hickel was elected as a AIP member in 1990. The Alaska Independence Party is the 3rd largest in the state, ahead of both the Green Party and Libertarian Party.
http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=1970
Also, the Party platform is here:
http://akip.org/platform.html
Post by: agricola on September 02, 2008, 04:43:32 AM
Unsurprisingly enough, the AIP is being described pretty unanimously over here as "a curious fringe organisation", though given that the entirity of the British press (with one or two exceptions, and by "one or two" I mean journalists, not newspapers) is blatantly pro-Obama. Those of you who experience bursts of anger when you read complete idiocy may wish not to click on the link below:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/oliverburkemanblog/2008/sep/02/uselections2008.palin
Post by: MicroBalrog on September 02, 2008, 08:18:47 AM
In fact what is wrong with being fringe?
Post by: longeyes on September 02, 2008, 08:24:07 AM
Post by: Matthew Carberry on September 02, 2008, 08:55:25 AM
Post by: agricola on September 02, 2008, 09:26:11 AM
To be fair, the AIP are a little nuts in practice. But it's a good kind of crazy.
Palin's team have released her voter registration cards:
http://www.alan.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/palinvoterreg.pdf
(bear in mind the cards are hosted at Alan Colme's site)
Whats the next scandal?
Post by: roo_ster on September 02, 2008, 09:30:09 AM
Whats the next scandal?
You mean the "mattress tag removal scandal" scheduled to hit this evening?
Post by: roo_ster on September 02, 2008, 09:33:07 AM
Seems great to me, though I confess ignorance on some of the local issues. I doubt those local issues are cover for, "re-institute slavery and outlaw motherhood & apple pie."
Post by: Matthew Carberry on September 02, 2008, 10:02:49 AM
Whats the next scandal?
You mean the "mattress tag removal scandal" scheduled to hit this evening?
Can't control her kid... can't control her cat...
Post by: Tallpine on September 02, 2008, 11:37:29 AM
Post by: longeyes on September 02, 2008, 11:43:49 AM
Quote
was really excited about moose hunting, salmon fishing, berry picking Sarah Palin at first, but I haven't seen anything about her riding a horse ...
What, they have a bear for Governor up there? Dang.
Post by: Scout26 on September 02, 2008, 11:59:34 AM
17 yo Daughter's pregnant
Husband was ARRESTED (not CONVICTED) of DUI.
Fishing on sister's licence.
Fired Public Safety Commissioner for not firing sleazebag BIL trooper.
I can't wait to hear about her traffic tickets, that she doesn't sort her recyclables, and they didn't cut their lawn for two weeks !! (an EL T hot button issue.)
Post by: agricola on September 02, 2008, 12:12:08 PM
Sounds like the Dem's/left are using the "Spaghetti Offense".....throw everything against the wall and see what sticks.
17 yo Daughter's pregnant
Husband was ARRESTED (not CONVICTED) of DUI.
Fishing on sister's licence.
Fired Public Safety Commissioner for not firing sleazebag BIL trooper.
I can't wait to hear about her traffic tickets, that she doesn't sort her recyclables, and they didn't cut their lawn for two weeks !! (an EL T hot button issue.)
17 yo Daughter's pregnant
Husband was ARRESTED (not CONVICTED) of DUI.
Fishing on sister's licence.
Fired Public Safety Commissioner for not firing sleazebag BIL trooper.
I can't wait to hear about her traffic tickets, that she doesn't sort her recyclables, and they didn't cut their lawn for two weeks !! (an EL T hot button issue.)
You missed "alleged member of a perfectly legal third party in Alaska". God knows what they would make of her if, say, she started her political career at the home of someone who blew stuff up.
Post by: Matthew Carberry on September 02, 2008, 12:13:08 PM
Quote
was really excited about moose hunting, salmon fishing, berry picking Sarah Palin at first, but I haven't seen anything about her riding a horse ...
What, they have a bear for Governor up there? Dang.
A fox.
Post by: Matthew Carberry on September 02, 2008, 12:13:47 PM
I was really excited about moose hunting, salmon fishing, berry picking Sarah Palin at first, but I haven't seen anything about her riding a horse ...
I think she has a motorcycle license.
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 02, 2008, 12:15:36 PM
Sounds like the Dem's/left are using the "Spaghetti Offense".....throw everything against the wall and see what sticks.
17 yo Daughter's pregnant
Husband was ARRESTED (not CONVICTED) of DUI.
Fishing on sister's licence.
Fired Public Safety Commissioner for not firing sleazebag BIL trooper.
I can't wait to hear about her traffic tickets, that she doesn't sort her recyclables, and they didn't cut their lawn for two weeks !! (an EL T hot button issue.)
17 yo Daughter's pregnant
Husband was ARRESTED (not CONVICTED) of DUI.
Fishing on sister's licence.
Fired Public Safety Commissioner for not firing sleazebag BIL trooper.
I can't wait to hear about her traffic tickets, that she doesn't sort her recyclables, and they didn't cut their lawn for two weeks !! (an EL T hot button issue.)
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/08/29/politics/politico/thecrypt/main4397109.shtml
Quote
Palin has said she smoked marijuana but didn't enjoy it and doesn't smoke anymore.
"I can't claim a Bill Clinton and say that I never inhaled, she told the Anchorage Daily News in 2006.
At the time, marijuana was legal under Alaska's liberal drug laws.
"I can't claim a Bill Clinton and say that I never inhaled, she told the Anchorage Daily News in 2006.
At the time, marijuana was legal under Alaska's liberal drug laws.
Post by: Scout26 on September 02, 2008, 12:28:17 PM
You missed "alleged member of a perfectly legal third party in Alaska". God knows what they would make of her if, say, she started her political career at the home of someone who blew stuff up.
Didn't just blow stuff up, but blew up Cops and .gov buildings (like the Pentagon). But yeah, I forget attend meetings of radical, rightwing, militia type, third party and mattress tag-gate.
Post by: seeker_two on September 02, 2008, 12:58:50 PM
Fishing on sister's licence.
If this is the best they can do, I think the biggest thing holding her back will be McCain......
Post by: Matthew Carberry on September 02, 2008, 01:00:03 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Independence_Party
It is also the 3rd-party option for folks who feel the Repubs are getting too anti-state's right. In the below case Joe Vogler offered the ticket to Hickel because Dems used our (then) open primary to put a liberal on the Rep. ticket. As you can see, you don't have to be a secessionist to be an independent.
Quote
In 1990, Walter Joseph Hickel, a former Republican, won the election for governor as a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, along with Jack Coghill as his running mate. This was the only time since Alaska joined the union that a third-party candidate has been elected governor. However, Hickel never agreed with the party's call for a vote on secession, leading to demands from party diehards that he be recalled. He rejoined the Republican Party in 1994, with eight months remaining in his term.
If Hickel's name is familiar, he was Sec of Int. under Nixon and was fired for criticising him over the Vietnam war and treatment of protestors.
Alaska politics is complex.
Post by: MicroBalrog on September 03, 2008, 05:03:55 AM
Post by: Josh Aston on September 03, 2008, 10:10:13 PM
Quote
At the time, marijuana was legal under Alaska's liberal drug laws.
At the time? It still is.
Post by: Matthew Carberry on September 04, 2008, 07:52:17 AM
Quote
At the time, marijuana was legal under Alaska's liberal drug laws.
At the time? It still is.
I seem to recall much wailing and gnashing of teeth in the '80s when personal use was made illegal.
Post by: longeyes on September 04, 2008, 08:09:54 AM
***
The Dems like to prattle about democracy and the average American. Well, now they've met someone who embodies the democratic process in action--and they are scared to death.
Post by: HankB on September 04, 2008, 11:20:44 AM
Whats the next scandal?
You mean the "mattress tag removal scandal" scheduled to hit this evening?
I understand Ms. Palin has very strong homo sapiens tendencies and engaged in public matriculation upon entering college, where she was alleged to have kept company with amateur thespians, some of whom performed their acts in public!
She has been known to engage in osculatory behavior with members of the opposite sex.
It is a certainty that she has committed piscatorial acts on boats flying the U.S. flag.
Have you ever accidentally dislodged a rock on the ground and seen what was underneath? Well, exploring Ms. Palin's background is dissimilar. All the slime and filth and corruption you can possibly imagine, even in your wildest dreams, are glaringly nonexistent in this woman's life. And even in her childhood!
Post by: Balog on September 04, 2008, 11:24:15 AM
Post by: roo_ster on September 04, 2008, 11:34:24 AM
http://www.reason.com/news/show/128567.html
http://snipurl.com/3n1n3
As anti-Real ID activist Bill Scannell, an Alaska native, told reason's Matt Welch, Palin "has been a pretty freaking awesome governor." Denver Post columnist and reason contributor David Harsanyi says that "for libertariansin the broadest sense of the small 'l' wordshe's the best candidate they can expect." And I suppose it is encouraging that, as a 2006 opposition research dossier obtained by Politico.com noted, with evident horror, Palin has attended at least one Libertarian Party meeting, at a Denny's restaurant in Anchorage.
She may not own a wookie costume...
...but who needs a wookie costume if you have a moose-skin rug?
In the interests of full disclosure, I have also attended a Libertarian Party meeting in a restaurant in a location to remain undisclosed, so as to save them the pain and humiliation of association with the LP. And me.
One more addendum:
A commenter in recounts his interaction with Palin..
http://www.reason.com/convention2008/show/128573.html#1071832
I was chair of the Alaska Libertarian Party briefly in the 90's. When we reached permanent party status by getting 2% of the registered voters to register as Libertarians, Sarah Palin, then mayor of Wasilla, was the only elected official of any party to congratulate us. She did so in person by stopping by our booth at the Alaska State Fair.
Post by: Sergeant Bob on September 04, 2008, 11:46:24 AM
Quote
She may not own a wookie costume...
...but who needs a wookie costume if you have a moose-skin rug?
...but who needs a wookie costume if you have a moose-skin rug?
If there were Wookies In Alaska, Id bet she'd have a Wookie skin rug too!
Post by: roo_ster on September 04, 2008, 11:47:32 AM
http://gov.state.ak.us/print_news-17852.html
Jury Rights Day
WHEREAS, September 5, 2007, will mark the 337th anniversary of the day when the jury, in the trial of William Penn, refused to convict him of violating Englands Conventicle Acts, despite clear evidence that he acted illegally by preaching a Quaker sermon to his congregation.
WHEREAS, by refusing to apply what they determined was an unjust law, the Penn jury not only served justice, but provided a basis for the U.S. Constitutions First Amendment rights of freedom of speech, religion, and peaceable assembly.
WHEREAS, September 5th, 2007, also commemorates the day when four of Penns jurors began nine weeks of incarceration for finding him not guilty. Their later release and exoneration established forever the English and American legal doctrine that it is the right and responsibility of the trial jury to decide on matters of law and fact.
WHEREAS, the Sixth and Seventh Amendments are included in the Bill of Rights to preserve the right to trial by jury, which in turn conveys upon the jury the responsibility to defend, with its verdict, all other individual rights enumerated or implied by the U.S. Constitution, including its Amendments.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Sarah Palin, Governor of the State of Alaska, do hereby proclaim September 5, 2007, as:
Jury Rights Day
in Alaska, in recognition of the integral role the jury, as an institution, plays in our legal system.
Dated: August 31, 2007
Holy fija.org, Batman!
Post by: MicroBalrog on September 04, 2008, 11:49:03 AM
Post by: mtnbkr on September 04, 2008, 12:05:04 PM
OK, I think I'm in love:
http://gov.state.ak.us/print_news-17852.html
Jury Rights Day
WHEREAS, September 5, 2007, will mark the 337th anniversary of the day when the jury, in the trial of William Penn, refused to convict him of violating England’s Conventicle Acts, despite clear evidence that he acted illegally by preaching a Quaker sermon to his congregation.
WHEREAS, by refusing to apply what they determined was an unjust law, the Penn jury not only served justice, but provided a basis for the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment rights of freedom of speech, religion, and peaceable assembly.
WHEREAS, September 5th, 2007, also commemorates the day when four of Penn’s jurors began nine weeks of incarceration for finding him not guilty. Their later release and exoneration established forever the English and American legal doctrine that it is the right and responsibility of the trial jury to decide on matters of law and fact.
WHEREAS, the Sixth and Seventh Amendments are included in the Bill of Rights to preserve the right to trial by jury, which in turn conveys upon the jury the responsibility to defend, with its verdict, all other individual rights enumerated or implied by the U.S. Constitution, including its Amendments.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Sarah Palin, Governor of the State of Alaska, do hereby proclaim September 5, 2007, as:
Jury Rights Day
in Alaska, in recognition of the integral role the jury, as an institution, plays in our legal system.
Dated: August 31, 2007
Holy fija.org, Batman!
http://gov.state.ak.us/print_news-17852.html
Jury Rights Day
WHEREAS, September 5, 2007, will mark the 337th anniversary of the day when the jury, in the trial of William Penn, refused to convict him of violating England’s Conventicle Acts, despite clear evidence that he acted illegally by preaching a Quaker sermon to his congregation.
WHEREAS, by refusing to apply what they determined was an unjust law, the Penn jury not only served justice, but provided a basis for the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment rights of freedom of speech, religion, and peaceable assembly.
WHEREAS, September 5th, 2007, also commemorates the day when four of Penn’s jurors began nine weeks of incarceration for finding him not guilty. Their later release and exoneration established forever the English and American legal doctrine that it is the right and responsibility of the trial jury to decide on matters of law and fact.
WHEREAS, the Sixth and Seventh Amendments are included in the Bill of Rights to preserve the right to trial by jury, which in turn conveys upon the jury the responsibility to defend, with its verdict, all other individual rights enumerated or implied by the U.S. Constitution, including its Amendments.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Sarah Palin, Governor of the State of Alaska, do hereby proclaim September 5, 2007, as:
Jury Rights Day
in Alaska, in recognition of the integral role the jury, as an institution, plays in our legal system.
Dated: August 31, 2007
Holy fija.org, Batman!
Countdown to C & S's Daddy calling her a "hero of the revolution"...
Chris
Post by: Scout26 on September 04, 2008, 08:00:35 PM
Post by: Scout26 on September 04, 2008, 08:16:57 PM
Hillary needs Obama to lose and lose bad, she can't wait until 2016. I think her supporters know that and will get out the vote for McCain.
Post by: just Warren on September 05, 2008, 09:13:40 AM
Post by: doczinn on September 05, 2008, 09:27:15 AM
Post by: Matthew Carberry on September 05, 2008, 10:05:00 AM
If there are such things, we have good hippies.
Post by: roo_ster on September 05, 2008, 10:14:52 AM
Post by: Dntsycnt on September 05, 2008, 10:15:34 AM
I'm gonna go get "Palin '12" tattooed on my forehead!
Post by: Matthew Carberry on September 05, 2008, 10:21:00 AM
Maybe if we get Palin elected, we can finally get Creationism taught in public schools.
I'm gonna go get "Palin '12" tattooed on my forehead!
I'm gonna go get "Palin '12" tattooed on my forehead!
What part of the Constitution would allow a President or Vice-President to do that?
Given that she has publically stated her personal beliefs do not trump the law of the land, how would she do that even if she wanted to?
Post by: Balog on September 05, 2008, 10:58:30 AM
Maybe if we get Palin elected, we can finally get Creationism taught in public schools.
I'm gonna go get "Palin '12" tattooed on my forehead!
I'm gonna go get "Palin '12" tattooed on my forehead!
What part of the Constitution would allow a President or Vice-President to do that?
Given that she has publically stated her personal beliefs do not trump the law of the land, how would she do that even if she wanted to?
You know all us Christians are secretly working to overthrow the fed.gov and establish a theocracy.
Post by: Dntsycnt on September 05, 2008, 11:16:05 AM
But it's fun to imagine how repressed and misrepresented your poor little majority is, right?
Post by: Matthew Carberry on September 05, 2008, 11:36:10 AM
I wasn't referring to the fact that she's a Christian. I was referring to the fact that she thinks creationism should be taught in public schools.
But it's fun to imagine how repressed and misrepresented your poor little majority is, right?
But it's fun to imagine how repressed and misrepresented your poor little majority is, right?
Do you have a quote where she said creationism should be taught in public schools?
What I read in context from the interview documented above was that student questions shouldn't be stifled and, if raised, the controversy should be taught.
A little different than mandating new text books or denying current evolutionary theory.
In any event, care to point out where a Pres. or VP has the power under the Constitution or US law to dictate what local school districts use for science curriculum? Take your time.
I think most here would point out that the Fed.gov shouldn't be involved in education at all. It's only because some on the left thought the government was more qualified to run local education than the locals in the first place that makes gvernmental involvement they dislike as an issue at all.
Post by: Balog on September 05, 2008, 11:55:17 AM
I wasn't referring to the fact that she's a Christian. I was referring to the fact that she thinks creationism should be taught in public schools.
But it's fun to imagine how repressed and misrepresented your poor little majority is, right?
But it's fun to imagine how repressed and misrepresented your poor little majority is, right?
Fed.gov forcing your view of the world down my kids throats; perfectly acceptable. My wanting equal time for viable alternative theories; evil theocracy!
Post by: Dntsycnt on September 05, 2008, 12:19:15 PM
Fed.gov forcing your view of the world down my kids throats
What, objective reasoning? Empirical evidence and peer review?
My wanting equal time for viable alternative theories
If it was a viable alternative theory, there would be no problem. Contrary to what you might think, scientists are not scheming bond villains wishing to brainwash your children. Come up with a credible, peer reviewed theory, and it will be taught. If someone had something better than evolution, they would win the Nobel prize, not be shooed away in some grand conspiracy.
Post by: Balog on September 05, 2008, 12:31:49 PM
Fed.gov forcing your view of the world down my kids throats
What, objective reasoning? Empirical evidence and peer review?
My wanting equal time for viable alternative theories
If it was a viable alternative theory, there would be no problem. Contrary to what you might think, scientists are not scheming bond villains wishing to brainwash your children. Come up with a credible, peer reviewed theory, and it will be taught. If someone had something better than evolution, they would win the Nobel prize, not be shooed away in some grand conspiracy.
A lot of scientists who look into the matter have questions about evolution. But there is a reason Galileo was persecuted for going against the accepted norms; human nature is no different now, all that's changed is the religion held up as the standard. Evolution can be no more empirically proven than intelligent design; they both require a certain amount of faith.
And just try to get even the best researched, most clearly clearly written, and thoroughly documented paper even admitting that ID is viable peer reviewed, let alone published. For all the bleating and moaning, you are the one trying to force an unprovable theory be taught as absolute truth, and suppress any alternative views.
Post by: Manedwolf on September 05, 2008, 12:35:48 PM
Evolution can be no more empirically proven than intelligent design; they both require a certain amount of faith.
That's not correct. Evolution can and has been proven in the lab with everything from bacteria to fruit flies, and can be empirically observed in the fossil record of adaptations and extinctions in the face of changing conditions.
For heaven's sake, just look at a line of 'pith skulls, and make sure to include Robustus, the giant vegetarian that was a dead end and thus went away.
Post by: Matthew Carberry on September 05, 2008, 12:38:53 PM
Fed.gov forcing your view of the world down my kids throats
What, objective reasoning? Empirical evidence and peer review?
My wanting equal time for viable alternative theories
If it was a viable alternative theory, there would be no problem. Contrary to what you might think, scientists are not scheming bond villains wishing to brainwash your children. Come up with a credible, peer reviewed theory, and it will be taught. If someone had something better than evolution, they would win the Nobel prize, not be shooed away in some grand conspiracy.
And on this you are correct.
The only reason that ID should come up in a science classroom, and this is exactly in line with Gov. Palin's remarks , goes like this.
Teacher: Evolutionary theory shows how life appears to have changed and developed over time using various mechanisms (scientific detail, cool movies etc.).
Student: My parents taught me G-d was involved in creating the universe and life.
Teacher: That is a common belief in this country. What we are studying here though is the physical evidence we have for how life appears to have developed over time. That evidence cannot prove or disprove any actions by by a supernatural creator, so we only address the evidence we actually have.
Student: (now being disruptive) But, but... the banana, the eye...
Teacher: We are in this class to talk about science. By definition science can neither prove nor disprove supernatural actions. Please listen and learn the information presented, we can discuss this later with your parents should they choose.
The End
Nothing about current science curricula should be taught as "disproving" G-d, as science can't do that. The most science can do is demonstrate a rational theory as to why overt action by G-d is not apparently necessary for evolutionary theory to work. As long as teachers stick to that perfectly accurate line, there is no controversy.
Parents can fill in the theological portions on their own.
Post by: Balog on September 05, 2008, 12:44:42 PM
Evolution can be no more empirically proven than intelligent design; they both require a certain amount of faith.
That's not correct. Evolution can and has been proven in the lab with everything from bacteria to fruit flies, and can be empirically observed in the fossil record of adaptations and extinctions in the face of changing conditions.
For heaven's sake, just look at a line of 'pith skulls, and make sure to include Robustus, the giant vegetarian that was a dead end and thus went away.
Uhh, no. Or at least not the way you're using the term. Damn you for forcing me to split semantic hairs through your imprecise language use.
Tremendous variety within species is not just possible but required under the Biblical model of Creation. This might be termed "micro-evolution" if you'd like. All dogs from chihuahua to saint bernard are descended from a common canid ancestor.
"Macro-evolution" ie one type or species of animal changing to another has never been documented anywhere. And transitional forms are utterly lacking. If one type gradually changed into another type, we would see a slow change. What we actually see is abrupt shifts. Similar but distinct species with nothing directly connecting them. Even many leading evolutionary proponents who are intellectually honest admit this.
Post by: Manedwolf on September 05, 2008, 12:48:47 PM
"Macro-evolution" ie one type or species of animal changing to another has never been documented anywhere. And transitional forms are utterly lacking. If one type gradually changed into another type, we would see a slow change. What we actually see is abrupt shifts. Similar but distinct species with nothing directly connecting them. Even many leading evolutionary proponents who are intellectually honest admit this.
Actually, it has, but you're using that same "I don't understand what transition is so I'll disbelieve it la la la" excuse used by that Florida "museum" that shows people riding dinosaurs.
I can't continue any sort of conversation there, because you're simply disbelieving things that have been proven beyond a doubt in countless laboratories.
And there's nothing more to say there. Believe what you wish. Reality is that which, regardless of whether you believe it exists or not, continues to exist.
Post by: Balog on September 05, 2008, 12:51:56 PM
"Macro-evolution" ie one type or species of animal changing to another has never been documented anywhere. And transitional forms are utterly lacking. If one type gradually changed into another type, we would see a slow change. What we actually see is abrupt shifts. Similar but distinct species with nothing directly connecting them. Even many leading evolutionary proponents who are intellectually honest admit this.
Actually, it has, but you're using that same "I don't understand what transition is so I'll disbelieve it la la la" excuse used by that Florida "museum" that shows people riding dinosaurs.
I can't continue any sort of conversation there, because you're simply disbelieving things that have been proven beyond a doubt in countless laboratories.
And there's nothing more to say there. Believe what you wish. Reality is that which, regardless of whether you believe it exists or not, continues to exist.
Right back at ya slick. The old saying really is true; arguing on the intarwebz is like the special olympics.
Post by: The Annoyed Man on September 05, 2008, 01:02:54 PM
http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/155351
Post by: Harold Tuttle on September 05, 2008, 08:55:56 PM
Post by: roo_ster on September 06, 2008, 06:17:27 PM
Actually, it has, but you're using that same "I don't understand what transition is so I'll disbelieve it la la la" excuse used by that Florida "museum" that shows people riding dinosaurs.
I can't continue any sort of conversation there, because you're simply disbelieving things that have been proven beyond a doubt in countless laboratories.
And there's nothing more to say there. Believe what you wish. Reality is that which, regardless of whether you believe it exists or not, continues to exist.
I can't continue any sort of conversation there, because you're simply disbelieving things that have been proven beyond a doubt in countless laboratories.
And there's nothing more to say there. Believe what you wish. Reality is that which, regardless of whether you believe it exists or not, continues to exist.
Uh, laboratories have nothing to do with empirical data and how it does not support evolution as currently promulgated.
The fossil record is as Balog states. Not just incomplete, but lacking the transitional critters one would expect in a continuous, gradual evolution. The fossil record supports a sort of quantum evolution, not the gradual evolution peddled by most.
Claiming, as was done in Darwin's time, that they had few fossils and that the gaps would be plugged in time is no longer an acceptable hand-waving technique to gloss over the lack of evidence supporting evolution as a gradual process.
It seems the biologists cling to gradual evolution as a shield against religiously-motivated opponents who might use/abuse any admission that the present theory of evolution might have shortcomings. That is too bad, because their fervor in support of a flawed theory looks to prejudice their assessment of the evidence.
Similar such wrongheaded attitudes/paradigms/etc. stunted the progress of science in the past and is likely doing so now.
FWIW, I have no problem reconciling whichever theory of evolution that fits the evidence with my religious beliefs. I only have room for one faith-based big idea in my psyche and gradual evolution is not it.
Also, I am not a fan of ID...for several reasons I can go into later.
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 07, 2008, 06:10:54 AM
Maybe then the left would finally realize that fed.gov has no business meddling in education.
Post by: longeyes on September 07, 2008, 06:39:50 AM
We've had tatts, then piercings; time for flatheads for a flat universe. I think a flat universe is good for our energy problems; it's much easier to travel on a flat surface.
Post by: Tallpine on September 07, 2008, 06:56:30 AM
Man isn't the center of the universe, the Democratic Party is.
We've had tatts, then piercings; time for flatheads for a flat universe. I think a flat universe is good for our energy problems; it's much easier to travel on a flat surface.
We've had tatts, then piercings; time for flatheads for a flat universe. I think a flat universe is good for our energy problems; it's much easier to travel on a flat surface.
Actually, it's much easier to travel downhill.
If the Democrats really wanted to solve our energy problems, they would pass legislation requiring all roads to be downhill roads.
OTOH, if Obama is elected, then allegorically speaking they will achieve that
Post by: longeyes on September 07, 2008, 08:52:40 AM
They're right. It's time to show the door to Marxism, Anthropogenic Globalwarmingism, and Secular Humanism.
Creationism isn't our biggest worry, Recreationism is. We've bred a nation of escapists.
Post by: Matthew Carberry on September 07, 2008, 09:17:08 AM
I'm glad the Left is all het up about pseudo-science.
They're right. It's time to show the door to Marxism, Anthropogenic Globalwarmingism, and Secular Humanism.
Creationism isn't our biggest worry, Recreationism is. We've bred a nation of escapists.
They're right. It's time to show the door to Marxism, Anthropogenic Globalwarmingism, and Secular Humanism.
Creationism isn't our biggest worry, Recreationism is. We've bred a nation of escapists.
Your post was too long, so I stopped reading and went back to watching TV.
Post by: Tallpine on September 07, 2008, 11:23:25 AM
I'm glad the Left is all het up about pseudo-science.
They're right. It's time to show the door to Marxism, Anthropogenic Globalwarmingism, and Secular Humanism.
Creationism isn't our biggest worry, Recreationism is. We've bred a nation of escapists.
They're right. It's time to show the door to Marxism, Anthropogenic Globalwarmingism, and Secular Humanism.
Creationism isn't our biggest worry, Recreationism is. We've bred a nation of escapists.
I'm sorry - I was out riding my horse when you posted. Yippee-ti-yi-yo!
Post by: agricola on September 09, 2008, 12:21:23 AM
Actually, it has, but you're using that same "I don't understand what transition is so I'll disbelieve it la la la" excuse used by that Florida "museum" that shows people riding dinosaurs.
I can't continue any sort of conversation there, because you're simply disbelieving things that have been proven beyond a doubt in countless laboratories.
And there's nothing more to say there. Believe what you wish. Reality is that which, regardless of whether you believe it exists or not, continues to exist.
I can't continue any sort of conversation there, because you're simply disbelieving things that have been proven beyond a doubt in countless laboratories.
And there's nothing more to say there. Believe what you wish. Reality is that which, regardless of whether you believe it exists or not, continues to exist.
Uh, laboratories have nothing to do with empirical data and how it does not support evolution as currently promulgated.
The fossil record is as Balog states. Not just incomplete, but lacking the transitional critters one would expect in a continuous, gradual evolution. The fossil record supports a sort of quantum evolution, not the gradual evolution peddled by most.
Claiming, as was done in Darwin's time, that they had few fossils and that the gaps would be plugged in time is no longer an acceptable hand-waving technique to gloss over the lack of evidence supporting evolution as a gradual process.
It seems the biologists cling to gradual evolution as a shield against religiously-motivated opponents who might use/abuse any admission that the present theory of evolution might have shortcomings. That is too bad, because their fervor in support of a flawed theory looks to prejudice their assessment of the evidence.
Similar such wrongheaded attitudes/paradigms/etc. stunted the progress of science in the past and is likely doing so now.
FWIW, I have no problem reconciling whichever theory of evolution that fits the evidence with my religious beliefs. I only have room for one faith-based big idea in my psyche and gradual evolution is not it.
Also, I am not a fan of ID...for several reasons I can go into later.
Actually, there are lots of fossils that show a gradual evolution as well as lots that show what you describe as "quantum" evolution, and these often exist side-by-side (trilobites being the most obvious).
Its also worth pointing out that there is, and has been for at least the last fifteen years, a lively and ongoing debate as to whether gradualism, or "punctuated equlibria" (quantum) or a combination of the two is correct when viewing ancient evolutionary processes. As far as I am aware, noone has been burnt / stoned to death / drowned as a result of these debates.
Post by: mtnbkr on September 09, 2008, 02:00:17 AM
Chris
Post by: roo_ster on September 09, 2008, 07:14:42 AM
Another thing to consider is whether or not there would be enough transitional creatures to leave much in the fossil record. If they're transitional, that means they probably weren't around long, which means fewer opportunities for fossilized remains.
Chris
Chris
This ^^^ conception is one of long plateaus of stasis and short transition periods of change where the transitional critters go offstage to die.
I might buy that, were there evidence to support it. Thing is, for a change/mutation to be gradual, it must also be marginal, giving the critter only a very small advantage over his closest not-yet-evolved-as-he critter ancestors/contemporaries.
The theory as generally presented (of evolution) by most proponents is more a continuous process, which is inadequate to describe the evidence.
Quote from: agricola
Actually, there are lots of fossils that show a gradual evolution as well as lots that show what you describe as "quantum" evolution, and these often exist side-by-side (trilobites being the most obvious).
Its also worth pointing out that there is, and has been for at least the last fifteen years, a lively and ongoing debate as to whether gradualism, or "punctuated equlibria" (quantum) or a combination of the two is correct when viewing ancient evolutionary processes. As far as I am aware, noone has been burnt / stoned to death / drowned as a result of these debates.
Its also worth pointing out that there is, and has been for at least the last fifteen years, a lively and ongoing debate as to whether gradualism, or "punctuated equlibria" (quantum) or a combination of the two is correct when viewing ancient evolutionary processes. As far as I am aware, noone has been burnt / stoned to death / drowned as a result of these debates.
Hmm, interesting. The last time I took a good, long look at the data was a few years back. I'd be interested in a primer on this sub-topic.
Also, the intolerance is generally not between those on the "same page in the hymnal," but between outsiders (attitude-wise) who do not accept the evolution dogma as presented and the insiders who defend the theory versus all outside inquiry, no matter how valid. Some folks are just not willing to say, "I don't know for sure and the facts could support either conclusion."
Too much intellectual arrogance masquerading as rational empiricism.
Post by: agricola on September 09, 2008, 07:22:49 AM
Try "Invertebrate Palaeontology and Evolution", which is on Google Books.