Populist Indeed!

[DriveInDriveOut]

The results of an NBC News poll take a few days ago..........66% of the respondents believed that will be in a major war within 4 years. I believe that if there is it will as the result of the biggest foreign policy blunder since Vietnam. Right now it's an all volunteer force which might not last too long if it's a ground war of attrition . It would therefore most likely leave the president with 3 choices..... withdraw forces, reinstate the draft or break out the nukes. If it's the draft then as sure as the sun comes up in the morning the children of the nations elite won't get their heads blown off in some far away land. They will use their money and connections to keep the heirs and heiress's out of harms way.

Despite whatever politicians want to call it, we're in a major war now. We have been in a major war pretty much continuously for the entire history of our country. The economy is built around that fact and it's probably never going to change.

You're delusional if you think there will ever be another draft, people are too connected to each other through technology. You'd see organized protests, work stoppages, and riots nationwide. Not going to happen.

 

[bacha29]

Despite whatever politicians want to call it, we're in a major war now. We have been in a major war pretty much continuously for the entire history of our country. The economy is built around that fact and it's probably never going to change.

You're delusional if you think there will ever be another draft, people are too connected to each other through technology. You'd see organized protests, work stoppages, and riots nationwide. Not going to happen.

Protests, riots etc, we had "yuge" riots and protests about Vietnam back in the 1960's and they kept right on drafting kids. Then again if there is no chance of a military draft then why are kids still required to register? And don't forget Trumpler says that he loves war.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

Protests, riots etc, we had "yuge" riots and protests about Vietnam back in the 1960's and they kept right on drafting kids. Then again if there is no chance of a military draft then why are kids still required to register? And don't forget Trumpler says that he loves war.

Modern warfare does not need huge armies.

 

[njdriver]

This is such a bad argument. So your claim is anything that any religious group claims is a tenet of their faith shouldn't be taught in public schools? So if the church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster says they believe in calculus as the holy method of study of continual change it shouldn't be taught in schools? How about we just keep religious beliefs at home where they belong and you can stop pretending science is a religious belief.

Finally we agree on something.

Christianity and Humanism SHOULD be kept at home. Let parents instruct their children the way they want, and allow them to inculcate the values, or lack of them, to their offspring.

Contrary to popular belief, I am not against science. The fact you want to use the whole of science as a bulwark to your position is not persuasive to me. What I am against however is the notion that evolution is settled science. It may be to you and millions of others, BUT, there are also millions of others that don't believe that for myriad reasons.

Having evolution taught as settled in school is just as offensive to me as the teaching of Creation is offensive to you. The Humanist Association could have opted to go another route however. They could have continued to teach evolution as a theory alongside the story of Creation as a theory, and let each child have at least an option. That would have been an acceptable alternative that should have appeased both sides, but that's not what happened.

Lawsuits were brought seeking to remove Christianity from the public sphere, and they were successful. Under the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment, the state cannot hold one religion in higher regard than any other, or be seen as adopting a state religion.

I accept that ruling.

What I can't accept however, is how one religious belief as to how life began is allowed to be taught, and another excluded on the very grounds that Humanists sought to have their philosophy be ruled a religion in the first place.

Seems pretty exclusionary and purposefully disingenuous to me, and quite frankly sir, it is THAT incongruity that is absurd.

 

[MrFedEx]

what special forces unit was Maxine waters , harry reid , Bernie saunders or nancy Pelosi in? I know you want to slam the republicans but

View attachment 121882

Democrats don't generally profess the love of the military and ownership of patriotism as the GOP does.

You like to beat the drum, but not serve.

 

[bacha29]

Modern warfare does not need huge armies.

And modern warfare can pile up dead bodies far more quickly than their predecessors . Not to mention that given reports coming out today North Korea has may have an inventory of VX. Now that's a genuine cause for concern especially for people living in Seoul given how close it is to the border with North Korea.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

And modern warfare can pile up dead bodies far more quickly than their predecessors . Not to mention that given reports coming out today North Korea has may have an inventory of VX. Now that's a genuine cause for concern especially for people living in Seoul given how close it is to the border with North Korea.

Yes, that is definitely a concern, for the people in South Korea.
Commerce with all nations, alliance with none should be our motto.

Look, let me break down my opinion on the matter for you. Throughout the baby Bush administration, liberals were up in arms against the war. I was with them on that. Then Obama got in office, and where were they then? I didn't hear a word about all the death for 8 years.

Now Trump's in office and they're worried about war again.....
So bottom line is both of our two major parties support the death when they are in office, since one of those two is getting elected, it's almost useless to talk about it at this point.

 

[bbsam]

Yes, that is definitely a concern, for the people in South Korea.
Commerce with all nations, alliance with none should be our motto.

Look, let me break down my opinion on the matter for you. Throughout the baby Bush administration, liberals were up in arms against the war. I was with them on that. Then Obama got in office, and where were they then? I didn't hear a word about all the death for 8 years.

Now Trump's in office and the're worried about war again.....
So bottom line is both of our two major parties support the death when they are in office.

I get you to a point.

War with Trump at the helm is a scary proposition. Nukes aren't out of the question for him.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

I get you to a point.

War with Trump at the helm is a scary proposition. Nukes aren't out of the question for him.

I'm not sure they ever were out of the question, but I do think saying that on the international stage as president puts us all in a more dangerous situation. I don't really think he's any more likely to use them than Bush was. But as usual, it's Trump's words rather than his actions that cause the biggest problems.

 

[It will be fine]

Finally we agree on something.

Christianity and Humanism SHOULD be kept at home. Let parents instruct their children the way they want, and allow them to inculcate the values, or lack of them, to their offspring.

Contrary to popular belief, I am not against science. The fact you want to use the whole of science as a bulwark to your position is not persuasive to me. What I am against however is the notion that evolution is settled science. It may be to you and millions of others, BUT, there are also millions of others that don't believe that for myriad reasons.

Having evolution taught as settled in school is just as offensive to me as the teaching of Creation is offensive to you. The Humanist Association could have opted to go another route however. They could have continued to teach evolution as a theory alongside the story of Creation as a theory, and let each child have at least an option. That would have been an acceptable alternative that should have appeased both sides, but that's not what happened.

Lawsuits were brought seeking to remove Christianity from the public sphere, and they were successful. Under the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment, the state cannot hold one religion in higher regard than any other, or be seen as adopting a state religion.

I accept that ruling.

What I can't accept however, is how one religious belief as to how life began is allowed to be taught, and another excluded on the very grounds that Humanists sought to have their philosophy be ruled a religion in the first place.

Seems pretty exclusionary and purposefully disingenuous to me, and quite frankly sir, it is THAT incongruity that is absurd.

You seem to lack an understanding of the scientific term theory. Creationism is not a scientific theory, it's a fairy tale. Evolution is settled science akin to the theory of gravity. Evolution is supported by observations. The more we learn the more the theory is reinforced.
Claiming a magic sky grandpa snapped his fingers and life began is not supported by observation. They are not equal.

 

[bbsam]

You seem to lack an understanding of the scientific term theory. Creationism is not a scientific theory, it's a fairy tale. Evolution is settled science akin to the theory of gravity. Evolution is supported by observations. The more we learn the more the theory is reinforced.
Claiming a magic sky grandpa snapped his fingers and life began is not supported by observation. They are not equal.

Actually the classic creation story gets the order pretty much right. Somehow it was known that before life on the planet, the sun had to provide energy etc..

 

[njdriver]

You seem to lack an understanding of the scientific term theory. Creationism is not a scientific theory, it's a fairy tale. Evolution is settled science akin to the theory of gravity. Evolution is supported by observations. The more we learn the more the theory is reinforced.
Claiming a magic sky grandpa snapped his fingers and life began is not supported by observation. They are not equal.

Oh, okay, I get it now.

Which observation would that be?

The observation that someone actually saw a monkey change into a man.

Or, maybe it's the observation that someone saw a blob of matter suddenly burst forth with life.

Name some names please.

I'd really like to know!

Who was around when nothing became something?

Tell me, which scientific effort has created a truly new structure out of nothing.

Maybe you'll take Darwin's word to mean something.

"The number of intermediate varieties which have formerly existed on earth must be truly enormous. Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory." - Charles Darwin 1902 edition.


I am quite conscious that my speculations run beyond the bounds of true science.It is a mere rag of an hypothesis with as many flaws and holes as sound parts. Charles Darwin to Asa Gray, cited by Adrian Desmond and James Moore, Darwin, (New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 1991) pp. 456, 475

 

[njdriver]

Actually the classic creation story gets the order pretty much right. Somehow it was known that before life on the planet, the sun had to provide energy etc..

Some other quotes by scientists:

"The Darwinian theory of descent has not a single fact to confirm it in the
realm of nature. It is not the result of scientific research, but purely the
product of imagination." Albert Fleischmann. Witnesses Against
Evolution by John Fred Meldau (Denver: Christian Victory Publishing,
1968), p. 13.

“Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great
con-men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever.
In explaining evolution, we do not have one iota of fact.” Dr. T. N.
Tahmisian Evolution and the Emperor's New Clothes by N.J. Mitchell
(United Kingdom: Roydon Publications, 1983), title page.

“[T]he theory suffers from grave defects, which are becoming more and
more apparent as time advances. It can no longer square with practical
scientific knowledge, nor does it suffice for our theoretical grasp of the
facts. No one can demonstrate that the limits of a species have ever
been passed. These are the Rubicons which evolutionists cannot
cross. Darwin ransacked other spheres of practical research work for
ideas, but his whole resulting scheme remains, to this day, foreign to
scientifically established zoology, since actual changes of species by
such means are still unknown.” Albert Fleischmann, "The Doctrine of
Organic Evolution in the Light of Modern Research," Journal of the
Transactions of the Victoria Institute 65 (1933): pp. 194-95, 205-6, 208-
9.

"With the failure of these many efforts, science was left in the somewhat
embarrassing position of having to postulate theories of living origins
which it could not demonstrate. After having chided the theologian for
his reliance on myth and miracle, science found itself in the inevitable
position of having to create a mythology of its own: namely, the
assumption that what, after long effort could not prove to take place
today had, in truth, taken place in the primeval past." Loren Eisley, The
Immense Journey (1957), p. 199.

"If complex organisms ever did evolve from simpler ones, the process
took place contrary to the laws of nature, and must have involved what
may rightly be termed the miraculous." R.E.D. Clark, Victoria Institute
(1943),



Not everyone sees evolution as settled science.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

Not everyone sees evolution as settled science.

Science is never settled. That's a big difference between it and religion. Science isn't about pretending to have all the answers. It's about organizing knowledge into theories and explanations to try to understand the world around us. Pointing to quotes scientists made generations ago is so short sighted it's laughable.

 

[newfie]

Democrats don't generally profess the love of the military and ownership of patriotism as the GOP does.

You like to beat the drum, but not serve.

not sure if you're talking to a mouse in your pocket but I beat the drum and served.

If you're going to call out the republicans for not serving then you should call out the idiots on your side that also found other ways to avoid service.

 

[newfie]

I get you to a point.

War with Trump at the helm is a scary proposition. Nukes aren't out of the question for him.

yea ok. thank god its not Nancy (bush is president and Kasik is governor of Illinois ) Pelosi leading the charge. At least Trump knows where he is at.

 

[newfie]

. Evolution is settled science akin to the theory of gravity. Evolution is supported by observations. The more we learn the more the theory is reinforced.
.

I must have missed that class, show me where someone created life out of a lump of clay.

 

[wkmac]

Actually the classic creation story gets the order pretty much right.
Somehow it was known that before life on the planet, the sun had to provide energy etc..

If by the classic creation story you mean Genesis Chapter 1, that classic creation story has all plants and vegetation created on the 3rd day and the Sun, Moon and Stars created on the 4th day.

Genesis Chapter 1

First day verse 1 thru 5

"1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day."

Second day verse 6 thru 8

"6 And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” 7 So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day."

Third day verse 9 thru 13

"9 And God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw that it was good.

11 Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day."

Fourth day 14 thru 19

"14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day."

Now I'll just quietly step back and out of the way and let you take this in any direction you like in comparing this to science.

I will add just one comment and that is about the events of the Second day of creation. What is being described here fits the make up of earth in the cosmos with what we know today as the "Flat Earth" theory which interestingly enough seems to be making a little bit of a comeback. This image might provide a good visual reference as you read verses 6 thru 8.

Wishing you luck with your "Bible as Science" mission.

 

[wkmac]

I must have missed that class, show me where someone created life out of a lump of clay.

Read Genesis Chapter 2 as for the most part that is how god created Adam.

 

[bbsam]

If by the classic creation story you mean Genesis Chapter 1, that classic creation story has all plants and vegetation created on the 3rd day and the Sun, Moon and Stars created on the 4th day.

Genesis Chapter 1

First day verse 1 thru 5

"1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day."

Second day verse 6 thru 8

"6 And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” 7 So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day."

Third day verse 9 thru 13

"9 And God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw that it was good.

11 Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day."

Fourth day 14 thru 19

"14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day."

Now I'll just quietly step back and out of the way and let you take this in any direction you like in comparing this to science.

I will add just one comment and that is about the events of the Second day of creation. What is being described here fits the make up of earth in the cosmos with what we know today as the "Flat Earth" theory which interestingly enough seems to be making a little bit of a comeback. This image might provide a good visual reference as you read verses 6 thru 8.

Wishing you luck with your "Bible as Science" mission.

Bible as science? Only in so far as it is written in such a way as what was observable theory and conclusion at the time. You see, for me, science and religion are not and have never been "at war" with each other.