It’s great when conservatives and others who tend to support the Republican party are willing to take a stand against the creationist elements on the right. Charles Johnson may not be, strictly speaking, a conservative, but his blog Little Green Footballs is widely read by conservatives, and he’s been doing a great job defending evolution against the religious right. Regardless of your views of his politics, he deserves applause for speaking up on behalf of real science in the face of an often hostile crowd. To see what I mean, just click over and scroll down. – Pandas Thumb
I suppose if militant atheists like the religious bigot Richard Dawkins and others are actually helping the cause of Darwinism, then that comment makes sense.
In my opinion they only hurt the cause of Darwinism. You don’t persuade people by being condescending and insulting while acting like a pompous ass.
From my experience the most condescending and insulting have been the Darwinist, that in and of itself speaks volumes.
You can only persuade people by being fair mined, honest and balanced and then let people decide for themselves. But you must also respect their opinion otherwise how could you ever expect them to respect yours?
(Update @ 4:06pm, Timothy Sandefur who is quoted above from Panda’s Thumb is a Senior Staff Attorney at the Pacific Legal Foundation.)
Also see http://sandefur.typepad.com/
I think that is really “Cato the elder” at 1.0 or something like that. The same who baited Robert Spencer into joining whatever hate group that was. Kind ironic the createor of the hate group is a member of 1.0, yet they somehow claim that makes Robert a bad guy. Nothing better then planting your very own BS evidence and then saying look, evidence!
Also note how 9/11 Troofer this is becoming. Attorneys pretending to be experts in Darwinism while the 9/11 Troofers have economic professors pretending to be experts in structural engineering.
Same shit different topic.
Updated # 1 @ 6:00pm, March 10th.
Timothy Sandefur says below in post # 124: ….“but I can say with certainty that I have never written anything under the pseudonym of “Cato the Elder,” and don’t know who you are. I don’t spend time in chat rooms or blog discussion areas, and rarely post comments to blogs.”
Update # 2: Tonight I found this at 1.0
# 1053 Cato 3/10/09 8:17:57 am reply quote
“I have represented a lot of sign owners in my day and the 1st Amendment arguments usually don’t work because there are time and place restrictions applicable. Also, since Lady Bird Johnson’s beautification initiative, signs have been considered an eyesore”.
Now, I suppose its not impossible to have a poster at 1.0 who is an attorney with this nic (Cato) and a reader of 1.0 from the Cato institute who is also an attorney and they are not the same person, but I still wonder, the coincidence seems a bit close.
It should be noted that Mr Sandefur is part of the Darwinist crusade to censor balanced discussion of evolutionary theory in science classrooms.
So Charles Darwin Johnson and Mr Sandefur see eye to eye in that regard. These types are looking to have their atheistic agenda taught in public school on the public dime, while others views are not allowed. I detest censorship of any kind and as we see, others not so much.
“Mr. Sandefur wishes to exempt his own religious belief — atheism — from constitutional scrutiny”.-Michael Egnor
And also see this from the Discover Institute
Timothy Sandefur responds to Michael Egnor
Tags: Charles Johnson, Evolution, LGF
We are all aware of the Alexi Traffic Data that shows a near 43% drop. I have a hunch that drop is the faithful and conservatives who have left.
They left out ‘with ridicule, mocking and bannings.’ at the end of that sentence.
Admins
And where in the heck is the sidebar quote widget?
…speaking up on behalf of real science in the face of an often hostile crowd.’
By hostile they mean those that want to talk about it, and have a discussion like adults do. Since we can’t do that at 1.0 without ridicule and banishment, the brave are who? The mighty apple dumpling gang and their lumpkin king?
It is interesting….. Charles refuses to side with anti-terrorist groups if he doesn’t like just ONE of their stances, or feels that someone in the group may, possibly, be considered racist sometime in their life….
but to defend his evolution-based stances, he’ll side with radical lefties like Dawkins.
That’s “Philosophical Purity” Johnson style.
Hey S&D,
I think the grease monkeys are tinkering under the hood, getting the bugs out of the new model.
Awesome how creationists, Ider’s and religious types are all now grouped together.
/It’s and elitist thing and we just wouldn’t get it.
Yep,
CJ has such an narrow view, it excludes almost anyone who is not lockstep in every philosophy he holds near and dear.
I just added an update to the post with a link.
bar
Cato the Elder was one of my greatest antagonists over at 1.0. Curious, he quit posting over there after we got into it on many occasions -I had a large group that were defending me at the time – and suddenly reappeared after I was shown Charles’ back door.
Sounds like Charles is ’salting the mine’. Well, I guess big egos must be fed continuously.
S & D Man
That is very curious.
I am not absolutely positive that Timothy Sandefur is Cato the Elder, but it sure looks like it.
Now here 1.0 goes again, getting their own members to post stuff all over the place the linking to it like it means something.
Darwin Johnson plants his own evidence and then says look, evidence that I was right.
What a really sick dude he is.
Sparky,
I suspect the posters over there are enamored to be part of a highly visible blog and will bend or suppress their convictions just to be a part of that community.
I guess many of us were not that fascinated by the celebrity of being recognized as a high profile poster over there.
And what an aladam shame that is.
However I will admit it was nice to quoted in many other blogs from 1.0. I was even quoted by Michelle Malkin in 1.0’s heyday. That was cool. But I will always post what I beleive and have no compunction to challenge and fact check the asses whose views I deemed unreliable or false. And of course, fact checking Charles’ ass was the last straw in my stay at 1.0.
What was I thinking that the leader was not open to questioning?
Sparky
One would think, it they are Darwinists, that opinion should just evolve as the info is introduced.
Oh yeah, survival of the fittest. However the self perceived fittest has a ban stick.
Now why am I reminded of Hitler?
bar
1.0 cannot withstand scrutiny with reason.
errata on my first post. The drop is approaching 40% and not 43.
Good thing I didn’t say 42, because that is the ultimate answer.
S&D,
Looking at them, some must live that blog 24/7. What a pitiful existence, to coddle up to a egotist like that. Playing in bands for 20 years I understand the limelight though.
I mostly liked the links supplied and still rummage through them to find nuggets. I can’t bear to go through the comments. It’s such an echo chamber. I found it hard to watch my fav’s go down one by one for having a difference of opinion. Facts have a way of sorting themselves out in the end, if others are allowed to post. I enjoyed those who took the time to refute them when warranted. Myself, I am more of a collector who is looking for info to sort through.
If Sandefur really is Cato the Elder, that would be truly scandalous. This business of getting your own minions to praise you on other blogs and then turning around to cite those blogs as “corroborating” you is just laughable.
Bar—-What makes you think Sandefur is Cato the Elder?
Anastasia
Notice the link to this old timer attorney who is from the “CATO Institute”, that really sounds like way to much of a coincidence? = Cato the Elder!
It would follow with the 1.0 anti-logic and all those links to conservative web sites that are pro-Darwin, come to find out 99.9% are all 1.0 members with monogrammed LGF knee pads.
Which makes for great evidence, well “great” evidenced they planted themselves.
Sparky
I regret to inform you I was one of those 24/7 guys.
And to tell the truth, I loved posting there and enjoyed being popular. But when need obliged I was ready to post my opinion. Especially on spiritual matters. Now that I think of it, this must have been irritating to Charles. But he was silent then, and there were many faithful who were still quite prominent who read me and agreed with what I had to say.
I think Charles’ was biding his time and waiting anxiously for the opportune time to bid me adieu.
And back to my love of posting there. That feeling became a burden and I was quite happy when I was shown Charles’ back door.
Do Pandas have thumbs?
If so, why haven’t they evolved?
sadm,
Cato the Elder had only recently started imposing his know-it-all self shortly before I left 1.0. What a jerk.
It didn’t matter what the subject, he always had an opinion, and some explanation as to how he became so expert in so many diverse fields.
I ignored him, he caused my BS detector to peg each time. Then one night, he saw one of my comments on the subject of diet and colon cancer, and claimed my statement was BS and I obviously didn’t know anything about anatomy. Rather than respond directly to him, which I never had before, I posted several links and quotes on research in that field. He never responded, and a number of posters roundly criticized him for not knowing what he was talking about.
It was too funny.
S&D
I too spoke out initially on the religious threads, albeit sparingly. It felt too much like talking to a wall after awhile. I do enjoy those more vocal than I as they keep it lively, but that was discouraged over there.
I wonder if we could have a mock 1.0 commenters thread here. Now that might be some fun!
n2l
He called many of my posts BS, but offered no differing opinion. A true one point o’er he is.
And who the heck came up with the term 1.0?
It is so much better than the nomer Candy Mountain.
sadm,
That’s him, alright.
I meant to add, he never once directed a comment towards me after that, and he seemed to be on every thread, at the same time, pontificating on things he knew nothing about.
S&D
I am guessing Wrath, seeing as after he came aboard this place became “lgf 2.0. the blogmocracy”?
I love the software numbering.
2.0 works for me, it is twice as good as 1.0.
Sparky
The problem with 1.0 and the truly faithful who used to post there may have been the threads on Islam invited religious overtones and opinions from the opposing view and subsequently offered a forum for those who believe in God an open court.
/The Blogtator must change the face of his pseudo conservative site.
Maybe that is why 1.0 has shifted it’s editorials *cough* to Dawkinism. Te Blogtator has to unveil stories that MUST suppress the opinion of those who believe the Eternal is the Creator.
Hence the ID debate and the purge of the truly faithful.
Oh yeah, I must submit, the faithful over there are not now true believers in God since he really has nothing to do with what reality is.
Song, That place is addictive. The chatroom aspect, I mean.
There are some regulars still there, I believe, who are paying the price (a loss of self-respect, if nothing else) for their daily fix.
The day you were banned it was as if something—-or Someone—led you to draw a line in the spiritual sand.
Maybe Somene was leading you out of Egypt.
sadm( I like n2ls better)
Yep, so sad, as it was a great place for those early years. Loved talking to
Reaganite, you could really get to the bottom of a topic and keep it civil. On to better things now. Viva 2.0!
Anastasia
A big bingo to you.
And you’re correct. I was emailing Babba as the thing unfolded and I told her I was relieved to have been shown 1.0’s back door.
It was as though my soul and spirit emitted a sigh of relief.
You are spot on in your analysis.
Since Chucky is such an avid reader of 2.0, he should read this book review.
Darwin Strikes Back.
Of course, I realize he is all knowing, and the debate is over, but still, I think even he with the lizard brain, might learn something.
I think Charles sets up shills and minions. He registers people that he’s already vetted or recruited behind the scenes and then brings them on to play the role of an “independent” commenter.
Every now and then you get a newbie or someone who hasn’t commented in years popping full force onto threads arguing the agenda. It’s like they’ve rehearsed it all. Creepy.
bar
So do I. 1.0 is perfect since it suggests a better version is available.
We are small now but, as you and everyone else here notices, our numbers are growing.
Yep. We didn’t go from 1.0 to 1.1.
It’s a whole new version.
*open the pod bay door Hal*
n2l
“The debate is over”, is that Goresque or what? They even look a little alike.
Maybe that separated at birth thing?
Sparky,
Yeah, and they also have in common that the debate is very much engaged, to their displeasure.
It is only the weak minded that fear an honest debate, or dissent.
Sparky,
Next time I talk to reaganite, I’ll tell him where you can be found.
n2l
Stuck in the craw comes to mind when mentioning Cato. Him, not me.
n2l
Invite him over, we need the good ones.
Is Sharm an alter ego or is that just me?
Always wondered.
And to add to my uncovered scandal check this out.
http://sandefur.typepad.com/
Maybe this is not Cato the Elder, but he is a fan of LGF, so the evidence is planted and complete bull shit.
Sparky
Goretesque?
sadm
That too!
I used to always avoid the Darwin vs. Creationism threads, mostly because of the hostile attitudes. Sharmuta once asked me why I didn’t comment. I told her something like it wasn’t worth it. Later, after many had been blocked, I explained that was why I wasn’t getting involved.
However, I did make the “fatal” mistake of looking in on one of those threads one night. I forget how it got around to Sarah Palin, but, it did. When Charles labeled her a Creationist and that this was the reason McCain had picked her. I lost it. Had to reply and tell Charles what I thought. The idea that McCain picked Sarah because she was a Creationist was just ludicrous. Most people could not have cared less. That was not an election issue. His insane idea that McCain lost because of her beliefs, was just that… insane.
He never posted my comment and I was immediately banned. Actually, I thought he would post it and then I could finally have a go with him and his followers. I never got the chance. I’m sorry about that, but it’s just as well. Life’s too short for a virtual battle.
It’s much better here and the air’s fresher!
Sparky
Sharmuta.
she is easily silenced if one is inclined to do so.
I did so many times.
sadm,
I didn’t give him any thought, but you actively engaged him.
If you never did, google up his nic, for the historical reference.
As his demeanor indicated, he was quite pleased with himself.
Hagar,
Lucky.
/Napoleon Dynamite voice.
I had posts that never made it. They were deleted before anyone saw them.
I was a special case.
Sparky,
You know reaganite, all I can do is tell him where you can be found. He and I were the one’s who tried to get folks at GCP to just forget about 1.0, and quit the bashing, so don’t know if he would be comfortable.
Your question about Sharm, was that for me? Reaganite only had one sock puppet, as far as I know, Super Elite Heather, or something like that, but it was a sarcastic sock puppet, and not one he hid behind.
I admit I was at times a bad boy for my ‘I’ll take that to task’ attitude and wrote something that was not to the liking of the Blogtator.
It may have been deemed vile o some, but heh, sometimes we must speak the truth when it may not be politically correct.
Bar—- Great find!
The “independent” comment praising Chucky ends up being just another LGF boy!
Pathetic.
n2l
no need for that. We butted heads all too often.
Ahh-Hah!
Pandas don’t quite have a thumb, which means they aren’t evolved.
THE DEBATE IS OVER!
Song,
You were sorta like Charles’ Rush Limbaugh. Ha!
bar
I think you nailed it.
I agree with Anastasia. Great find.
sadm,
You and many others.
He’s a good man. Tough as nails, but his good goes bone deep.
He was still active duty when he was at 1.0, and retired shortly before he left. His career field had a different mindset than most, and suffering fools usually meant someone got killed.
n2l,
Sharm was a half-hearted poke at CJ. She is what I envision CJ like as a woman.
Eventually, I hope this blog evolves away from it’s root cause and focuses us on future elections. O, already has his forces in place and the longer we stay disorganized the more they secure the power base. It’s a new game and we don’t get to make all the rules. Thanks for the Steele vid the other day. Is he the one to unite us? Jindal, I don’t think is it, as much as I like him. The MSM seems able to marginalize anyone who is gives the libs a run for their money.
Hagar
It was a tough gig being a poster who was read and at the same time a very vocal critic of CJ.
Fact check you ass was a vaible option back then and CJ was at that time one who was not untouchable.
I remember very distinctly when CJ was interviewed by a news source that is now forgotten about Islam where he stated something to the effect that Islam was, as Bush stated, a ROP. I quoted the transcipt and asked CJ outright it that is what he belived.
Of course you could almost hear crickets sounding from the page. He didn’t answer me, of course, but then something curious happened. Others in the thread also found it curious that he remained silent. At the time CJ rarely made an appearance in the comments, but some commented that CJ should address the question.
The schlemiel hadn’t yet exposed himself.
Here’s something to ponder:
Six Definitions for “Evolution”
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5564822033295043928
So that Mona Lizard picture was really of Sharmuta, not of Chucky on a Saturday night?
And of course my challenge cannot be found there since my 30K posts have been deleted or rather hidden.
Sparky,
I don’t know who will be the person who unites conservatives.
I still think Bobby Jindal can be that person, given the right exposure. I know the rebuttal to B-HO’s yammering last week was intended as an introduction, but without the rousing pep squad to bolster his speech, unlike B-HO’s, he came off as unprepared.
Jindal missed his best opportunity, when he had to cancel his appearance at the RNC last summer. He was a little tied up with a hurricane, and his efforts did not go unnoticed in Louisiana, as the emergency response, and lack of a catastrophe is testament to that.
Steele? I don’t know. He’s a good man, but off to a shaky start, and the congress critters don’t seem interested in listening to him.
I think our biggest ally in the 2010 mid-terms is the overreaching by the donks.
Sparky
As 1.0 falls farther and farther into the Darwinian abyss, they will no longer be worthy of being mention.
The only reason I still harp on this subject is because I want more people to know how dishonest 1.0 trolls.
And it sure gets the traffic going, but don’t tell anyone.
Anastasia
What pic? Give…
Here’s something to ponder
Six Definitions for “Evolution” [28min]
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5564822033295043928
Btw perhaps I shouldn’t be a SITE ADMIN? I registered and became site admin, doesn’t sound very correct
S&D
She is referring to the picture I put up on yesterdays thread about LGF.
The picture is of Mono Lizard.
n2l
I suspect we will see the electorate turning towards conservatism. heck we are only a month into the B. Hussein reich and we now have a 2 trillion
here
2,000,000,000,000
dollar deficit.
They didn’t get that from a Bush, they got it from the Top Gun socialist.
bar
It is overly appropriate to mention the inadequacies of 1.0 as opposed to 2.0.
It’s not overkill, it is the 2.0 version of fact check the other asses.
n2l,
I hope so, but the silence by the MSM is deafening. We need to get some congressional seats backs, now! Steele is the guy for that. Nationally we have a little time, but without the seats we have no teeth.
Bar,
You guys are doing a great job! And that’s how I found you btw. Google search.
Song,
It’s just another example of clearing the playing field.
There’s some good folks over there. It’s going to be a long 4 years and who knows what the next headline will bring. Venting and some humor may be the only way to get through it. At least here, we don’t have to hold back. Let’s hope those silent good people at 1.0, get fed up and follow the light to here.
You have got to check this out. Today, the tax revolt for CA took place.
Over 15,000 people showed up.
http://orangejuiceblog.com/2009/03/kfis-john-kens-tax-revolt-live-broadcast-from-fullerton-ca/
Am I the only one blocked by wordpress?
20minutes, now I’m back, wtf… that’s gotta hold back traffic to the site.
Isa the hand done yet?
Sparky
The 1.0′ers are pissed.
testes…testes
When I was first banned from 1.0 I had my 1.0 safe email account show up FOR THE VERY FIRST TIME if one googled my nic, and my email addy;s were hacked.
This was malicious with intent.
n2l
That’s testes, 1, 2.
Alright, then.
sadm,
Made a post to your comment, but it went poof.
Basically, I see the donks in Congress, and B-HO’s overreaching very similar to the ‘92. I hope the midterm result in ‘10 will be the same as it was in ‘94.
We do need a spokesman, like Newt, though.
Sparky,
I agree that ‘10 is the prize we should be eyeballing.
I don’t know if Steele has the marbles, but I sure hope so.
If by
the author refers to the ad hominem, ridicule, mocking, and silencing (banning) of people who disagree with macro-evolution, then that might be accurate, if that meets your definition of handling dissenters in a “great” way.
Johnson and his cronies, from what I saw while I was at LGF 1, didn’t even so much defend Evolution as they made fun of and laughed at Creationism and ID.
It seems as though I got banned merely for placing anti-macro-evolution links into a post at LGF. That isn’t a “great” way of handling someone who disagrees with evolution.
I don’t think that members of the “religious right” are the only critics of evolution. Over the years, I have from time to time, on TV shows, and in web articles here and there, come across agnostics and some atheists question it as well.
Not all “Intelligent Designers” are even theists.
On another, but still somewhat related, topic…
Some militant, pro-Evolutionist atheists at one site I sometimes visit are upset that some people in Oklahoma expressed displeasure over a proposed visit and speech by Richard Dawkins (and the funny thing is, this link below is from the dreaded Discovery Institute):
Censorship Is Wrong – by Michael Egnor
The opening to that page reads:
I say let the atheistic, evolutionist people have their say. Don’t censor them.
The glaring thing, is, though, that many times, those who disagree with evolution (whether they be Creationists, IDers, or atheists) get censored, fired, demoted, harassed a lot.
A bit more from the link above:
n2l
the (R)’s can;t be trusted anymore. They had, just recently the Congress and the executive and decided to slither across the political isle for NO GOOD.
I am fed up with our two party hardly a representative republic anymore.
There must be another way, and there is, but all too many are complacent with the status quo.
Cloudy Day
Neo, welcome to the real.
1.0 is a Dawkinists delight.
S&Dman
It’s not overkill, it is the 2.0 version of fact check the other asses.
Amen to that.
Strange, when I tried to post this I kept getting a message saying I was commenting to fast, Slow Down.!
sadm,
Well, it is the system we currently have, and it does work with the right people.
Of the many fresh new faces in ‘94, many of them honored their original vow of term limits. For a few years, we had some Republican congress critters that were serious about their work, and didn’t hang and party with the usual people in D.C. Many of them had a sign on their office doors which said, “WDNAGFL.” We do not accept gifts from lobbyists. We need another revolution like that. As for what happened over the course of twelve years, especially in the Senate, is they became part of the D.C. establishment, and not representative of their constituents, or the nation. I still think term limits could solve that problem, but we are no where near reaching that goal.
When I think of the most treacherous of Senators, I don’t think of Mc first, but of Trent Lott.
bar
Anyone trying to post here was getting that message.
Now isn’t that a special coincidence?
Y’all have a good’un.
I have to get up early.
There’s virtually no difference between Muslim terrorists and Christian creationists. They both deserve nothing but contempt and relentless ridicule.
I my opinion, saying that you believe in God and evolution, what you are really saying is evolution is intelligent design.
All the lizards that claim this, although I understand it could be just to appease Darwin Johnson, prove from their own statements they really haven’t a clue what Darwinism is and Darwin Johnson when he says evolution and God are compatible, proves his own complete lack of understanding and lack of depth in thinking.
If God in involved in anyway, its intelligent design.
S&D
Of course Arwyn could be trying to upgrade, so maybe that was the issue?
Although being attacked and hacked makes for a better story.
n2l
Term limits may be a cure, and could resolve the systemic idea of those who hope to make a career of incumbency.
I use to say this over at 1.0. There are many who enter politics with grand ideas and honorable positions, but when they get to the real mud pit they realize they must play in an arena that is dirty and so to get along they also must get dirty or remove themselves to the sideline where little or nothing is their portion.
Pork is the way to get noticed at home rather than working toward improving, or rather, sustaining gevernment as was prescribed by the founders.
It is apparent bobzzzz knows no god.
Except maybe Baal
n2l wrote,
This is too funny, because earlier today, I learned about this blog:
)
Smugopedia (SMUG o pedia)
- sounds like Cato and a few other “LGF1.0ers” get their info from that blog
CJ
so nice of you to drive by
Cloudy— ROFL !
One of these days I should do a post on DNA and how 98% is considered “junk DNA”, but only because scientist don’t understand what it does.
I don’t say that to bad mouth science, I only say that because people need to have a realistic view of the real evidence and not some overblown pop-science bullshit.
I think Bobxxxx was being sarcastic but without a tag?
Hey, bobxxxxxxxxxx, Since 1.0 likes to call this a “stalker” blog, what do you call lizardorks who stalk 2.0 ?!
Bar— Chuck & Co. claim to be worried about science education. (I actually don’t believe it, but that is what they CLAIM.) Do not they realize that the surest way to kill a kid’s interest in science is to tell him/her that every question has been answered already? My own observation is that kids LOVE a mystery, they love learning about the things we haven’t figured out.
If they really were so interested in raising a generation of evolutionary biologists (?), they’d WANT to teach the puzzles, problems, and weaknesses of the theory.
Hey S & D
Did you see my link on the tax revolt in California. I hope Obama is paying attention cause this is the future for when the rest of the country wakes up.
Anastasia
I agree, we do not educate we only indoctrinate.
There is so much misinformation being taught in school in all subjects and to kids that never question but only follow.
Someone else here linked to this blog page recently (entitled “Ann Coulter, The SPLC, LGF And The CCC”). The comment section makes for an interesting read.
At one point (in the comment area), the blog owner (”Steve”) says that Johnson used to steal content from his blog.
Oh – and Johnson made the bogus claim that this Steve guy once mailed him hateful, vicious e-mails.
Back when I used to read LGF1, I noticed Johnson would make that claim quite often, that someone or other would supposedly send him “hate mail.”
hmmm…
I’ve been putting off a thread over at the the Chamber about creationism and evolution. I dunno. Maybe the delay stems from the idea of having someone like Cj inspiring the topic of discussion, especially when the subject would rank pretty low on the totem pole considering all the problems in the world.
In the meantime, I’m more than welcome to take up the challenge, I suppose, and defend an assertion that evolution and the belief in a creator are not mutually exclusive ideas. Not by a long shot, all things considered, actually. And this is coming form someone who may, say, not go to church. Ever.
I think that the intellectually honest among us can admit that there is plenty of room for both, given what we know and what we don’t know at this stage.
There really isn’t a whole lot of motivation to dishonestly attempt to prove Darwin wrong, unless one is a Biblical literalist. Darwin made no attempt to explain the birth of DNA, life, or even address fundamental concepts like the author of laws of physics or the source or the matter in the universe.
Its the argument being waged on the either-or level that frustrates me, and discourages me from even entering the fray. Can people put their beliefs on a shelf and have a serious, rational discussion about life? The world? I dunno. I’m kinda sick of this idea that its the believers vs. the atheists, that’s for sure.
Chen wrote,
I’m a “Biblical literalist,” but I would never lie about Darwin or what he believes.
I would not intentionally / knowingly misrepresent Darwin or his beliefs.
Most “Biblical literalists” are honest folks, as they believe in the commandment in the Old Testament about not lying, and/or the teachings in the New Testament about being honest and ethical.
It would go against the faith of the Biblical literalists to lie or intentionally misrepresent someone or some topic.
I think the evolution debate is mostly boring.
The only area of it where I get interested is in related areas – like how so many Non- or Anti- Evolutionists get discriminated against in classrooms, or scientific journals, (or on blogs like Johnson’s), or where ever, merely for speaking out against macro-evolution.
There are some Christians who believe in “theistic evolution,” so yes, an attempt to reconcile evolution with theism has been done.
I myself don’t believe in theistic evolution no matter what guise it takes (”Day Age,” “Gap theory,” whatever), but I find the whole thing so dull I can’t be bothered to debate it much with fellow believers.
I find it hard to believe there we originated from some sort of ‘primodial soup of life’ after some amoebas decided to ‘walk the land’ so to speak.
BTW what ever happened to DJM? Anybody know?
well it looks like 1.0 is taking a page from Axlerod’s playbook and getting into astro-turfing. probably a desperate attempt to generate buzz for his flagging empire.
What the hell?…it was only New York right……………President Hamid Karzai on Sunday welcomed President Barack Obama’s call to identify moderate elements of the Taliban and encourage them to reconcile with the Afghan government.
Obama’s call “was good news because this has been the stand of the Afghan government,” Karzai told a gymnasium full of Afghan women during a speech to commemorate International Women’s Day. Obama said in an interview with The New York Times published Sunday that there may be opportunities to reach out to moderates in the Taliban. (AP) http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3682973,00.html
PAPER: Obama to bring Cuba in from the cold; Ready to ease restrictions on travel, trade…
IRAN TEST FIRES NEW LONG-RANGE MISSILE http://www.drudgereport.com/ …how you like your daddy now?
106. Storage
Yeah, before we even get the 17,000 over to Afghanistan let’s go ahead and tell the world and the Islamonuts we’re losing.
Great. That’ll scare them.
I avoid the ID/evolution threads, but I do enjoy the exchange with many friends at LGF. I’ve been very sad about the banning of many of you here who are also my friends.
My main point: evolution is a TINY part of the science curriculum. Teaching kids about competing theories with their pros and cons is an aid to EVALUATION, the highest level of Bloom’s Taxonomy. I do not see how that will destroy the future of America’s scientists.
Coward,
Well all I can say is, there is more we don’t know than what we do know. I wouldn’t be one to state as fact something that was not observed 1st hand. The record only tells part of the story.
I was driving by a babbling brook just the other day with small trees and bushes lining the bank, set against a blue sky and then picturing the surface of every other known planetary body, it makes me go ‘hmmmm’.
boxxxxxx
What a great intellect you show. Thanks for the laugh.
sadm,
This is where that narrow descriptor of somethings definition, that must be accepted by all persons or they are rejected comes into play. One of CJ’s favorite ploys.
‘If a person doesn’t think there is a God to be accountable to, then—then what’s the point of trying to modify your behaviour to keep it within acceptable ranges? That’s how I thought anyway. I always believed the theory of evolution as truth, that we all just came from the slime. When we, when we died, you know, that was it, there is nothing…’
Jeffrey Dahmer, in an interview with Stone Phillips, Dateline NBC, Nov. 29, 1994.
With that excellent explanation, is it any wonder society is like it is? Seriously? You will have more crazies like Dahmer in the future, the more socialist you become.
Evolutionism is the core teaching of socialism, without it socialism would be dead and gone.
Sparky
I have to admit I’m not religous in the least but seeing how beautiful our planet is compared to others does give me pause.
Annie-
Just how many planets have you been to? lol
Hi kids
Ha Ha Chen, many say I’m out there.
“Charles Johnson may not be, strictly speaking, a conservative”
I guess the word is finally getting out.
Please forgive my ignorance, as I haven’t been following the LGF creationism crusade very closely….
I am curious, is it the LGF cult line to reject all types of creationist theory, or just “Young Earth creationism” and/or Intelligent Design?
(BTW- what I was referring to upthread in my drunken stupor was “theistic evolution“, which is another type.)
Chen
1.0 claims that Intelligent Design is nothing but Creationism in a new dress.
And if you admit to being a young earth Creationist you get ridiculed really bad.
Theistic evolution that fully accepts Darwinism they consider ok.
I think Theistic evolution that accepts Darwin is an oxymoron.
The person that 1.0 is giving props to for saying such nice things about him re: Creation vs. Evolutionism (besides being a LGF commenter -as were the other long lists of people who like 1.0.) is an proud “out” atheist
Now, of course, there is nothing wrong with being an atheist (in principle), and I commend this guy for admitting it (on his own site, whether he mentions it on LGF is another story – I don’t know either way)
HOWEVER, this is not the stance that Mr. Johnson takes. He still claims not to be hostile to religion, and won’t comment on his actual stance on religion.
If he truly is a G-d fearing, or conservative person, it should be awfully interesting to him that the more time passes, the more he is congratulating, agreeing with, and “associating” with atheists, and liberals.
Again, there is nothing wrong with that, but it sure does but his repeated insistence that he is a conservative and G-d fearing (ie: religion respecting) into question.
(ps: you have to chuckle at the fact that 1.0 is quoting 1.0ites to prove again that 1.0 “has friends”)
Wrath— I knew you’d get a big kick out of this after the post you had showing those “conservative bloggers who agree with LGF” were covert lizards.
Kudos to Bar for figuring out that in this Panda’s Thumb piece we once again have LGF praising LGF! Too funny.
I want to add I have yet to find absolute evidence that this fellow is Cato the Elder from JihadWatch and 1.0.
But this Timothy Sandefur who wrote the article at Panda’s Thumb is from the Cato institute and his title is there is “Elder”.
I also note that searching “Little green footballs” at Panda’s Thumbs turns up 6 articles written by guess who?
Bar @ 122
Noted.
Your blog is new to me, and I don’t understand a lot of the jargon you’re using (I don’t know what “1.0″ refers to, for instance), but I can say with certainty that I have never written anything under the pseudonym of “Cato the Elder,” and don’t know who you are. I don’t spend time in chat rooms or blog discussion areas, and rarely post comments to blogs.
The Cato Institute, of course, is actually named after Cato’s Letters, a series of newspaper articles published in the 18th century by Trenchard and Gordon. They, in turn, took the name from the play Cato by Joseph Addison–a play, incidentally, about Cato the Younger, not Cato the Elder.
Timothy Sandefur
Thank you for stopping by and conveying your side. 1.0 refers to LGF,
this blog is lgf 2.0 the blogmocracy.
Most here have been banned from 1.0 because of this evolution/creationism debate and a few other reasons, so a few people started this blog, in order to counter some of the outright lies that Charles Johnson has posted about them. Charles has also insinuated that many here and anyone else banned from his website to be rather crazy unhinged people and much deserving of such action. So we here let people banned from 1.0 or not have their say in a free speech environment without fear of the totalitarian blog owner.
I made the assumption that you could possibly be the poster from 1.0 and Jihad Watch who goes by the nic “Cato the Elder”, the coincidence seemed a bit to close, but you have corrected the record and I will have to take your word for it, thank you.
I will add an update to this post, conveying what you have said.
We also have discovered that 1.0 provides lots of evidence that simply does not really exist, so this just seemed liked par for the 1.0 course.
Now what I do not understand is why post that comment at Panda’s Thumb when you have your own blog? Although I do understand that you post at Panda’s Thumb also.
Is it possible that Panda’s Thumb has more validity with regard to the creation/evolution debate, then your own blog would carry?
And thus my call that this was very weak evidence with regard to this debate. I also noted that your personal website said “Fellow LGF readers”, thus you are a reader and a fan of 1.0 and not much of an independent third party opinion.
I thank Tim also for the polite response.
So he is a reader of 1.0 not a poster, sounds reasonable. Bar, you connected the dots well, and are more of a gentleman to let it stand. How did Tim hear of this it wonder?
Sparky
Maybe the link to Panda’s Thumb would show this site or maybe someone from 1.0 told?
Sparky
Thank you for the kind words.
I see nothing from Tim’s own website or anything he has written at Panda’S Thumb that would suggest he is anything less than an honorable man.
So I take his word for.
Bar,
That’s the way to roll. Keep it up.
Bar- I second Sparky’s kind words and thank you for the update!
Thanks also to Timothy Sandefur for his helpful correction.