|
Author
|
Topic: Yet another Congressman who doesn't accept the theory of evolution
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
|
Message 4 of 231 (675160)
10-07-2012 7:58 AM
|
|
|
I don't understand how people like this guy and Todd Akin can get on government science committees. How do they get these jobs handed to them, what is the vetting procedure?
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 9 by Tanypteryx, posted 10-07-2012 12:05 PM | | Larni has not replied |
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
|
|
Message 11 of 231 (675182)
10-07-2012 2:36 PM
|
Reply to: Message 10 by NoNukes
10-07-2012 2:17 PM
|
|
Re: Reflect the electorate
Sixty percent of Republicans are Creationists of the Broun strip. That is a crazy high percentage. In the UK it is 17% Site Not Configured | 404 Not Found
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 10 by NoNukes, posted 10-07-2012 2:17 PM | | NoNukes has seen this message but not replied |
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
Representative Broun's beliefs may be wacky, but get back to me when he has actually done something that is demonstrably damaging to our country ok? Don't you think that anyone with wacky ideas shout not be in a position of political power? As a Brit this kind of talk would be a huge issue and one that would be lambasted significantly. When I see this kind of talk (apparently) being viewed as acceptable it's amazing. Many non Americans would see this attitude as hopelessly provincial.
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
Yes one can be quite productive in one's job despite crazy notions but would you really want a government where some based their ideas on a Bronze Age book? And just so we both know what we are talking about his interpretation of said book need not match yours. Is that what you want?
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 28 by foreveryoung, posted 10-15-2012 2:37 AM | | foreveryoung has not replied |
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
(1)
| |
| |
| |
The western world has been becoming progressively more socialist since the french revolution. There is the common man who lives day to day by the sweat of his brow and then there is the "educated" man who tries to control the "intellectual and cultural world" through his trade. This includes all forms of media and universities and scientific institutions. Anything that influences what a man thinks and believes is a prime target for these "elites". Centralized control of mankind just seems to fit naturally for these "elite" type of people who are not like the common man. They certainly are not adverse to it. Those who wish the world to be controlled by an oligarchy of people who all think alike are not content to just try a few measures here and there. They are aggressive and will not cease from their efforts until their goals are accomplished. This is why you see such consternation and threats of becoming expatriated when someone not of their ilk takes the reigns of power. Perfect description of any Abrahamic religion.
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 41 by foreveryoung, posted 10-17-2012 11:58 PM | | foreveryoung has not replied |
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
Re: Mainstream Media? Really?
Can I assume that this means that you have little if any accedemic qualification? Often people make a virtue out of their lack of education; are you guilty of this? Should people (potential yourself) who are very uninformed be considered qualified to have an opinion on the subject to hand? Would you support putting me in charge of a nation's fiscal policy? After all I have no education in economics so would not have been brainwashed (as you point out) and would also not be a victim of group think. Should I have that job? Edited by Larni, : Editing
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 55 by foreveryoung, posted 10-20-2012 12:59 AM | | foreveryoung has not replied |
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
|
|
Message 71 of 231 (676217)
10-20-2012 2:47 PM
|
Reply to: Message 64 by ICANT
10-20-2012 12:10 PM
|
|
Re: Mainstream Media? Really?
What facts? Perhaps you would like to educate yourself via the gift of the Internets. Honestly, they provide so much information that once you have absorbed it you can come back here to discuss it. Or not do that and ask for what has been provided an ignored for years.
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 64 by ICANT, posted 10-20-2012 12:10 PM | | ICANT has not replied |
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
|
|
Message 72 of 231 (676218)
10-20-2012 2:50 PM
|
Reply to: Message 68 by Coragyps
10-20-2012 12:46 PM
|
|
Re: Forever hurls insults. Again.
Khmer Rouge, anyone? Republican Party. Zing.
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 68 by Coragyps, posted 10-20-2012 12:46 PM | | Coragyps has not replied |
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
Now that you have explained what you beleive (it's refreshing to read a frank an concise post of that nature on EvC) can you explain why you beleive it? What evidence informs your beliefs?
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
Re: Are you wrong about everything
God commands us to hate evil. God also commands you to kill gay people. Do you do that?
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
Re: Are you wrong about everything
Maybe you read the Bible and find out exactly what it says instead of parroting what you have been told by people? There are several other verses that say gay people would be killed. You would know this if you did not relly on other people to think for you.
Leviticus 18:22 "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."
Leviticus 20:13 "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."
Romans 1:26-27 "For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet." Edited by Larni, : Bible bits
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 217 by jar, posted 10-29-2012 10:26 AM | | Larni has replied |
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
|
|
Message 218 of 231 (677347)
10-29-2012 10:38 AM
|
Reply to: Message 217 by jar
10-29-2012 10:26 AM
|
|
Re: Are you wrong about everything
You are right, of course. I thought a bit of Biblical context was in order as FEY was characteriing motivation and knowledge of myself as a result of his ignorance about his religion and I simply had to bring it up. Not the most on topic of posts though, I cannot disagree. Edited by Larni, : Last two sentences added about an hour later.
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 217 by jar, posted 10-29-2012 10:26 AM | | jar has seen this message but not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2