What Is "Intellectual Dishonesty"?

It would be great if you could get some of these couples to provide some input to this topic.

I think it'd be great if you could explain how they're still together, despite your statement that the absence of God would prevent the union from lasting.Their input shouldn't matter. They are homosexual... they are still together. Your earlier statement doesn't provide for any exceptions.

---

"If I had to write ten jokes about potholders, I don't think I could do it. But I could write ten jokes about Catholicism in the next twenty minutes. I guess I'm drawn to religion because I can be provocative without harming something people really care about, like their cars."
-George Meyer, Simpsons writer

Dan Carroll,Can we continue our discussion here: Homosexuality vs. Heterosexuality

I'll probably be gone from work before it's approved, but I'd be happy to pick it up tomorrow morning.

---

"If I had to write ten jokes about potholders, I don't think I could do it. But I could write ten jokes about Catholicism in the next twenty minutes. I guess I'm drawn to religion because I can be provocative without harming something people really care about, like their cars."
-George Meyer, Simpsons writer

Great.Thank you.

Well, I would happen to be in one such couple (not 20+ years mind you, but going on 5 years), so I would be glad to add my input once the thread is approved.

---

"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

Excellent.I am looking forward to it Rei!

[P.S. Granted life grows from the sediments, but that does not mean the fossils entombed are the age of the substances they grew from, is not that why they date rocks by other atomic decay methodologies, and organic life by C14, proven by Andrew Snelling with a petrified wood sample]
Is this the same geologist that publishes in both scientific and Creo journals with diametrically-opposed positions?Edited to tighten up.This message has been edited by Nighttrain, 09-29-2004 06:38 PM

The dating controversy has been deemed off topic (Intellectual Dishonesty), though Intellectual dishonesty exists in the main stream scientific journals too, that is not giving Creationisms the time of day, cause it conflicts with federal grant money's, tenure, promotions, etc...How is Snelling going to get his articles posted in scientific journals, when its politically incorrect to promote lifes origins from the Christian persuasion, TJ never meant for the infidel to have greater freedoms of expression than has the Religion of Jesus Christ, etc...Didn't Thomas Jefferson infer that the infidels should be given the same protections as the Christian Religion, separation protections from church and state, Why would TJ do this, is it not obvious that the infidels of all denominations, (atheists, buddists, Hindu, etc...) were to have no greater rights than the Christian Religions, like for example to have more rights to teach evolution from a godless perspective in the public schools, than the Christian has to teach Creation from the God based perspective, truly its time to replace TOE with ID, or at least share equally the federal grants to both the Snellings of the World, and the Evolutionists of the World, its not fair to give the infidel the federal money's cause that violates the separation of church and state that Jefferson inferred would be included to the infidels, meaning equal funding should be included to teach creation from the God based perspective, the infidel was not suppose to have greater powers than the different religions, this was what Thomas Jefferson reason for saying the separation protections include the infidel, etc...This is what freedom in America is suppose to be about, tolerance, why MUSLIMS will vote for GWB because of their fear of Sharia law, the love of the Immigrant for the freedoms to believe whatever they believe, but not to allow one group to beable to force their beliefs upon our children, which is what has happened in the Theory of Evolution, and with my Tax dollars, lets tighten the belt, and stop giving the infidels federal tax moneys to infer their godless denomination or religion of Secular humanisms upon our children, they were not suppose to have greater rights than the religion of Jesus Christ, etc... The religion of Jesus Christ was to be protected by Congress according to George Washington, not to be supplanted by the infidels, its truly time to weed out the federal funding that promotes the infidels belief that lifes origin happened without God, without letting the other religions an equal playing field, to teach that God is responsible for origin, it clearly seem to be violating the infidel powers as suggested by Thomas Jefferson protections of separations of church and State freedoms which would include the godless religion of secular humanism that preaches TOE, and by promoting a godless origin, promoting the belief of atheism (an infidel)is violating the infidels protection of separation from the government, etc...When Tj included the infidel it was understood the infidels were not suppose to be granted more freedom, than the Religion of Jesus Christ, but the activist judges have incorrectly allowed this travisty to continue(Intellectual Dishonesty), etc...."[When] the [Virginia] bill for establishing religious freedom... was finally passed,... a singular proposition proved that its protection of opinion was meant to be universal. Where the preamble declares that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed, by inserting the word "Jesus Christ," so that it should read "a departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion." The insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend within the mantle of its protection the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo and infidel of every denomination." --Thomas Jefferson: Autobiography, 1821. ME 1:67This message has been edited by whatever, 09-29-2004 10:46 PM

I believe Snelling is a YEC, yet he writes of radiometric dating of ancient deposits.
I think the refusal to publish Creationist articles might have more to do with the value of the contents than the approach. And having (or not)personal intellectual honesty might colour one`s reputation. However, with the freedom to publish whatever one wants (within legal limits) means there is nothing to stop Creationist organisations setting up a independent publication with peer-reviewed articles from both sides of the fence.I`m sure there would be a lot of evo-minded individuals, tiring of waiting for publication in the recognised journals, who would be prepared to offer their articles if the new publication maintained even-handedness. Might set an example to those biased journals you blame.:-)
P.S. lay off the 'infidels' tag, or I'll start talking about religious nut-cases.

The Mediterranean diet is rich in fish and shellfish.They eat much more fish and shellfish than meat.The Mediterranean diet has been considered one of the healthiest diets in the world for many years.That's because people in the Mediterranean, who eat lots of shellfish, are very healthy and live long, healthy lives and have healthy offspring.

whatever writes:

quote:

---

The dating controversy has been deemed off topic (Intellectual Dishonesty), though Intellectual dishonesty exists in the main stream scientific journals too, that is not giving Creationisms the time of day, cause it conflicts with federal grant money's, tenure, promotions, etc...

---

Considering that overturning the reigning paradigm of biology would result in a Nobel prize, numerous grants, and literally every biotech lab and university in the world beating down your door begging you to join their institution and increase their prestige, I find it difficult to believe the claim that the reason creationism is rejected is because it threatens grant money, tenure, or promotions.Thank you for yet another example of intellectual dishonesty, whatever.

---

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

quote:

---

Intellectual dishonesty exists in the main stream scientific journals too, that is not giving Creationisms the time of day, cause it conflicts with federal grant money's, tenure, promotions, etc...

---

Be the first creationist ever to demonstrate this with 4 easy steps.1. provide a testable hypothesis of creation
2. demonstrate that this hypothesis is falsifiable
3. provide evidence both observed and experimental that supports the hypothesis
4. demonstrate how the hypothesis better explains natural phenomena than competing hypotheses or theories.If you cannot make it through ALL of these steps and crucially steps 1 and 2, then science and scientific journals have no reason to give creationism the time of day...

You see more examples of intellectual dihonesty, like if the media were being fair, they would of been plastering Mr. Kerry for not releasing his complete naval medical and military records, this is intellectual dishonesty, to favor one candidate over the other.P.S. If Martha Stewart was thrown in jail for what you call being Intellectually Dishonest, then Dan Rather should be thrown in jail too, for unfairly presenting false papers accusing GWB, instead Martha is serving time, and Dan Rather is given a get out of jail card, its all examples of Intellectual Dishonesty. You'd think the media should be held to a higher standard, instead they show they are intellectually dishonest. Mr. Kerry is another example of being intellectually dishonest, a lawyer, knowing the law, yet violating federal law in the taking of a salary, for time not present in the Senate. If he was to be intellectually honest, he would not be violating the laws that if he becomes president he would be sworn to uphold. The activist judges are not being honest in their interpretations of the Constitution, and were seeing the fruits of this in Mr. Kerry, who rather than step down from the Senate, or to simply not accept a salary that by the laws of the land he is not really entitled to, he instead takes the money, proving he is not being intellectually honest to the people that elected him to serve them with his presense in the Senate.This message has been edited by whatever, 09-30-2004 03:31 PM

quote:

---

You see more examples of intellectual dihonesty, like if the media were being fair, they would of been plastering Mr. Kerry for not releasing his complete naval medical and military records, this is intellectual dishonesty, to favor one candidate over the other.

---

See, now, I don't believe this is intellectual dishonesty. I think that Whatever honestly believes that Kerry's full record hasn't been released (although it would be nice to hear from him sometime as to what documents, exactly, he thinks haven't been released).

quote:

---

Martha Stewart ... Dan Rather ...

---

Well, Martha Stewart deliberately withheld information that she knew. Dan Rather never knew the information about the true sorce of the documents (only that it came from a TANG leader). Consequently, the former is intellectual dishonesty, and the latter isn't.On the other hand, your comments about how Kerry hasn't been working enough, knowing how much vacation Bush has taken, clearly *are* intellectual dishonesty (unless you don't know about how much time Bush has taken on vacation, or you like being a hypocrite).This message has been edited by Rei, 09-30-2004 09:07 PM

---

"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."