Pilot's Political Orientation

"C J Campbell" wrote:

By those who, like Dan Luke, want to portray Jefferson as
godless in order to further their own political agenda of
excluding religious views from the political forum.

I certainly would never claim Jefferson was godless. Rather, my point
was that he would not pass the test for religious correctness of the
religious right, whose political agenda is to enlist government in
proselytizing their views.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

"Dan Luke" wrote in message
...
"C J Campbell" wrote:

By those who, like Dan Luke, want to portray Jefferson as
godless in order to further their own political agenda of
excluding religious views from the political forum.

I certainly would never claim Jefferson was godless. Rather, my point
was that he would not pass the test for religious correctness of the
religious right, whose political agenda is to enlist government in
proselytizing their views.

With the left forcing the teaching of Darwin's "Origin of Species" in public
schools, while knowing full well that it is scientifically false, makes your
comments projection, Dan.

"Tarver Engineering" wrote:
With the left forcing the teaching of Darwin's "Origin of Species"
in public schools, while knowing full well that it is scientifically
false,

Bull****.

This is exactly the kind of crap we are getting with the religious
right's political agenda. Folks like Tarver are typical recruits.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

"Dan Luke" wrote in message
...

"Tarver Engineering" wrote:
With the left forcing the teaching of Darwin's "Origin of Species"
in public schools, while knowing full well that it is scientifically
false,

Bull****.

Geological evidence demonstrates that if evolution occurs at all it does so
in a single generation, but that evidence is more likely replacement of one
species by another. Geological evidence also demonstrates that species come
into being rapidly following a global cataclysm. Jay Gould's evolution
reconciliation of Darwin's "Origin of Species" with hard physical evidence
rapidly approaches Creation.

Modern Cosmological theory suggests that the Universe is a vacuum
fluctuation, completely consistent with Creation. Although the contrivance
of an infinite number of parallel universes can be used to produce a secular
solution.

This is exactly the kind of crap we are getting with the religious
right's political agenda. Folks like Tarver are typical recruits.

A little science will drive you away from God, but a lot of science will
bring you right back.

Stop the teaching of religion as science in America's public schools.

"Tarver Engineering" wrote:

Stop the teaching of religion as science in America's public schools.

The big lie.

I'm not going to argue this with you here, Tarver, but I will be glad to
continue the discussion over in talk.origins. Repost there and I will
respond.

"Dan Luke" wrote in message
...

"Tarver Engineering" wrote:

Stop the teaching of religion as science in America's public schools.

The big lie.

Yes, Darwin's "Origin of Species" is a big lie.

I'm not going to argue this with you here, Tarver, but I will be glad to
continue the discussion over in talk.origins. Repost there and I will
respond.

Talk.origins still believes "noone knows how gravity works", so you would
have to agree to a scietific venue; as opposed to me comming to your church.

"Tarver Engineering" wrote:
Talk.origins still believes "noone knows how gravity works",

And you do? Time to pick up your Nobel Prize.

so you would have to agree to a scietific venue; as opposed to me
comming to your church.

Chicken.

Tarver Engineering wrote:

With the left forcing the teaching of Darwin's "Origin of Species" in
public

schools, while knowing full well that it is scientifically false, makes your
comments projection, Dan.

Please point out those parts of "Origin of Species" that are false.
Chances are
you'll either find out that scientists have already recognized the
error, or that
you have mis-understood the material. If you really have found an
unrecognized
error, science will thank you for allowing it to improve our
understanding of the world.
If you are in error, you'll thank us for helping you become a
better-informed citizen.

Rich Lemert

"L Smith" wrote in message
link.net...
Tarver Engineering wrote:

With the left forcing the teaching of Darwin's "Origin of Species" in
public

schools, while knowing full well that it is scientifically false, makes
your
comments projection, Dan.

Please point out those parts of "Origin of Species" that are false.
Chances are you'll either find out that scientists have already recognized
the
error,

Yes, nearly all of science knows Darwin's "Origin of species" is completely
false. That is why I provided you with two other brances of science:
Physics demonstrating a theory with repeatable and demonstrable resilts
applied to Cosmology, Geology falses Darwin's "Origin of Species" with hard
physical evidence and then from within the church of Darwin itself, Jay
Gould replaces Darwin's work with a thirteen hundred page treatise trying to
reconcile the obvious undisputable falshoods within Darwin's "Origin of
species". All of the scientific community knows what is being taught in
school is a lie.

Stop teaching Darwin's religion as science in public schools.

Tarver Engineering wrote:

"L Smith" wrote in message
hlink.net...



Please point out those parts of "Origin of Species" that are false.
Chances are you'll either find out that scientists have already recognized


the


error,



Yes, nearly all of science knows Darwin's "Origin of species" is completely
false. That is why I provided you with two other brances of science:
Physics demonstrating a theory with repeatable and demonstrable resilts
applied to Cosmology, Geology falses Darwin's "Origin of Species" with hard
physical evidence and then from within the church of Darwin itself, Jay
Gould replaces Darwin's work with a thirteen hundred page treatise trying to
reconcile the obvious undisputable falshoods within Darwin's "Origin of
species". All of the scientific community knows what is being taught in
school is a lie.

Stop teaching Darwin's religion as science in public schools.

So far, nothing in your response above even comes close to answering
my questions.
I asked you to point out where you believe Darwinian theory is in error.
You respond with
a bunch of hand-waving that claims "this group shows its false, and that
group shows its
false, and blah-blah-blah." Since I don't accept the "because they said
so" argument from
people who count (such as those in political office), why do you think
I'll accept that
argument from someone I don't know from Caesar?

If you're unwilling to tell us where you think Darwinian theory is
wrong, are you at least
willing to tell us what you think Darwinian theory says?

By the way, while repeatability is a significant component of a
scientific theory, its not
a necessary or even a sufficient component. Otherwise, there could be
_no_ theories
of the universe. The _necessary_ and _sufficient_ condition required in
order for a
hypothesis to become a scientific theory is that the hypothesis must
lead to predictions
that can be proven false. "The moon is made of green cheese", for
example, meets
this test. You can prove the theory wrong by going to the moon and
seeing what it's
made of.

Can your favorite creation "theory" predict the development of
anti-biotic resistant
bacteria?

Rich Lemert