Page 5 of 5

Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2005 9:50 am
by Brazilian dude
Well, did mine name me Brazilian dude? I thought Stargzer was Hebrew.

Brazilian dude

Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2005 11:24 am
by KatyBr
BD, look at the way we sign our posts. stargzer signs his- ///Larry.

Katy

Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2005 11:42 am
by Brazilian dude
Would you believe it if I told you I hadn't seen that?

Brazilian dude

Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2005 12:08 pm
by Stargzer
Bd, you didn't really think Stargzer's mom named him stargzer, did you?

Katy
:D

My handle is spelled that way because there are days when I'm not sure if I'm missing an "a" or two "e's" . . .

. . . while my name appears in the signature.

Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2005 1:11 pm
by Stargzer
Dearest Larry,

A wink and a nod does not an argument make.

A similarly false argument could be brought against any professor from any biology department in any university.
. . .
Anything and anyone that go against the conventional wisdom are questioned and often ridiculed, and sometimes even worse when religion is involved: witness Galileo. Science in and of itself doesn't deny Creation, just the literal iterpretation of the Genesis account of it.
Sure, we have a right to be suspicious when a conflict of interest is there, like the fact that the officials that work at the FDA do work for, or have worked for and, most likely, will work again for various drug companies, but that doesn't automatically discredit everything that they say, does it?
No, but it does mean we need to be aware of the possible conflict of interest and take that into account when evaluating their opinions. See below.
An argument does not consist of statements like "you're just saying that because you're a Republican" or "sure, a Democrat would say that." These are ad hominem statements and are not part of a logical argument.
Yes, but Twain's observation is still for the most part true. See above.
Perhaps you don't care to take the time to listen to anti-evolution arguments. That is your choice, but don't try to assume that your own a priori assumptions can win the day and enlighten us.
I listen once in a while, and then pray for the Holy Spirit to descend upon them and enlighten them. Unfortunately, I must not be praying hard enough.

If we followed the Old Testament literally, we would still be sacrificing animals, avoiding shellfish, stoning adulterers, burning witches, growing beards (well, I've got that part down pat), and impregnating our dead brothers' wives (Onan in Gen. 39:7-10 and the Law in Deut. 25:5-10). Of course, as a male, I feel that Deut. 25:11-12 is quite justified! Must have been some tough women backthen!

It is my belief that the Old Testament with its stories and strict laws was written for nomadic herders moving from the Stone Age into more modern times, and was designed to make sure they were able to multiply as they went forth without killing too many of each other.

I prefer the New Testament which can be summed up as: Love God. Love your neighbor. The rest is just implementation details.
I return your wink, but there will be no nod to your wise grandfatherly dismissiveness.

Apo
:wink:

Posted: Thu Apr 21, 2005 1:28 am
by Apoclima
Good enough, Larry!

You're a friend and a scholar!

Apo

Posted: Thu Apr 21, 2005 3:18 pm
by Stargzer
Good enough, Larry!

You're a friend and a scholar!

Apo
Some may quarrel with the scholar part, but I'll go for the friend! :D

Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2005 11:43 am
by M. Henri Day
...
Fathers, before your boy leaves for camp, privately discuss the importance your church family's reputation. Make sure that he is fully aware that if he does anything to embarrass you or the Lord this summer, Jesus will tell on him and you will beat his little bare behind with a rusty buckle and have him shipped off to a Russian orphanage when he gets home. Let him know that you didn't raise him to be a sissy or a cry-baby so if you get word that any of that nonsense is going on, he'll have to find a new Daddy when he gets back from camp, because you don't want him to be your son anymore.
...
Some of the parents got upset when they saw how fatigued and distressed their son was. But their reaction was to work within the system to appeal privately to the Superintendent to make conditions better for their boy. When one mother told me she had never seen her son looking so bad, I responded by shifting the blame from the situation to her son. "What's the matter with your boy? Doesn't he sleep well?" Then I asked the father, "Don't you think your boy can handle this?"
He bristled, "Of course he can -- he's a real tough kid, a leader." Turning to the mother, he said, "Come on Honey, we've wasted enough time already." And to me, "See you again at the next visiting time."


It seems to me that we men (or many of us, at any rate) bear a great responsibility in our (often unconscious) assumption that our most important endeavour in bringing up sons is to ensure that they not be - or still more importantly, not be regarded by others as «sissies». ...
I was reminded of the above while reading an article in the Science section of today's New York Times on the first open-door event at the Johnson Space Center since 2001. This was the passage that tweaked my memory :
Bryan Kundrat, a fourth-grader from Cypress, Tex., thought the demonstrations were "pretty cool," but he hesitated when asked if he wanted to be an astronaut. "I don't want to blow up," he said as his father, Ed, an engineer, groaned in dismay.
I hope Mr Kundrat generally exhibits more empathy for his son than that shown in the exchange above....

Henri

Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 12:18 pm
by M. Henri Day
...
What was interesting was the last line of that article [cited by Apo - [sub]MHD[/sub]] :
If you have faith in groundless assertions, you can believe in evolution. But when it comes to hard evidence, science is against evolution.
....
Apo, Stargzer, and others as well may be interested to note that while a belief in evolutionary theory may not be politically correct under the present US administration, one important branch of the government does seem to be a true believer -
"Manage quality first and then schedule," the panel emphasized in what is sound advice in most places except the Pentagon, which has pronounced the program in a state of "evolutionary acquisition." This means the parts were designed and contracted out first in hopes of actually making them work later. Evolutionary, indeed: where are the intelligent design enthusiasts when we need them?
Those who wish to read the leader in extenso need merely click on the link (but hurry, after 14 days it will no longer be available for free)....

Henri