Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Creationism, Evolution and the Public Schools
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 121 of 145 (30843)
01-31-2003 11:14 AM
Reply to: Message 82 by Arachnid
01-27-2003 2:07 PM


quote:
1. Israel became a nation in 1312 B.C.E., two thousand years before the rise of Islam.
Native Americans were in North America 30,000 ago, many thousands of years before any Europeans came here.
Does that mean it would be OK for them to get the UN to help them kick all of us out now so they could have their land back?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Arachnid, posted 01-27-2003 2:07 PM Arachnid has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 129 by jdean33442, posted 01-31-2003 4:13 PM nator has not replied

John
Inactive Member


Message 122 of 145 (30850)
01-31-2003 12:02 PM
Reply to: Message 119 by Arachnid
01-30-2003 8:18 PM


quote:
I realize it's the popular thing to be pro Palestinian.
Don't be dismissive. It is irritating. I don't do anything for the sake of popularity and I don't appreciate the inference.
quote:
What I see is Barack offered them an incredible deal of land and control of half of Jerusalem...
The thief is offering to give back some of the spoils and you call this an incredible deal? If it were me, I'd be offended and it looks like the palestinians were.
quote:
Honestly, WTF? Are you telling me that the Navajo have the right to go into a local Safeway and blow everyone to shit because a burgeoning U.S. government gave them some land instead of kicking them to the curb and leaving them to fend for themselves? That makes no sense to me.
It makes no sense to me either. Good thing I said nothing similar. The argument has been made that Israel rightfully belongs to the Jews because they were there first-- 2000 years ago. It follows then, by the same logic, that North America belongs to the Native Americans because they were here first. So do we give it back? Should the UN carve up the US and give it back to its rightful owners? And if the UN did so, what would happen? Answer: Lots of americans would fight back-- that is, lots of americans would do precisely what the palestinians are doing and precisely what the palestinians are being criticised for doing.
quote:
The Palistianians aren't fighting for freedom.
They are fighting for what was stolen from them. If Mexico, by some miracle, suddenly took Texas back and kicked everyone out ( except for the Mexicans already living here ) would we be fighting for freedom or for the land that was stolen?
Would you then argue, as has been done in the case of Israel, that Mexico had a right to take Texas because some Mexicans already lived here?
Suppose Mexico made the generous offer to return the pan-handle to the dispossessed Texans, would that make you feel better about the situation?
quote:
Are Israeli children taught to hate the Arabs?
Hang around many Israeli's? I have been lately. The hatred I've seen is pretty intense. The literature is quite incendiary.
quote:
If Israel wanted, they could have whiped out all the Palestinians and their Arab neighbors by now if that was their intention.
Doubtful. Israel doesn't have that much power without international support. All out slaughter would erode that support and, in fact, that very thing seems to be happening. Israel has to look good to the outside world.
quote:
They simply want to exist in peace.
On stolen land. You guys seem to miss that fact.
It clearly is not. They simply want to exist in peace. If anyone harms them, they will do whatever is neccessary...just like ANY government...just like any individual.
------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by Arachnid, posted 01-30-2003 8:18 PM Arachnid has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 123 by Arachnid, posted 01-31-2003 12:43 PM John has replied
 Message 136 by zipzip, posted 01-31-2003 10:48 PM John has not replied

Arachnid
Inactive Member


Message 123 of 145 (30860)
01-31-2003 12:43 PM
Reply to: Message 122 by John
01-31-2003 12:02 PM


**sigh** i know im arguing with a rock. You can't formulate and argument with duel ideals. Are you so stupid to think that the palesinians just grew out of the ground?? I think we've exhausted the bounderies of your wit and psuedo-intelligence. You don't have anything remotely resembling knowlege about this subject. I suspect that you get the majority of your information from MTV. Living with your mother can help you live on the wages McDonalds pays you, im sure....but your world view from the deep fryer is kindergarten at best.
You have been presented with reason, logic, and facts...and your response has been childish and deliberately ignorant...i say deliberately, becasue I can't imagine anyone naturaly this stupid...(that's a compliment)
You have been soundly spanked on this forum and this discussion and it's time for us to move on. Let us part amicably and say "we just don't agree" while secretly knowing in our hearts that you are a retard. I wish you well and hope you get promoted to the drive through window.
[This message has been edited by Arachnid, 01-31-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by John, posted 01-31-2003 12:02 PM John has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 124 by John, posted 01-31-2003 1:34 PM Arachnid has replied
 Message 127 by shilohproject, posted 01-31-2003 3:23 PM Arachnid has replied

John
Inactive Member


Message 124 of 145 (30863)
01-31-2003 1:34 PM
Reply to: Message 123 by Arachnid
01-31-2003 12:43 PM


So... you really have nothing intelligent to say then?
------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com
[This message has been edited by John, 01-31-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by Arachnid, posted 01-31-2003 12:43 PM Arachnid has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by Arachnid, posted 01-31-2003 1:48 PM John has not replied

Arachnid
Inactive Member


Message 125 of 145 (30866)
01-31-2003 1:48 PM
Reply to: Message 124 by John
01-31-2003 1:34 PM


Not enough one-syllable words to explain it to you...so, no.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 124 by John, posted 01-31-2003 1:34 PM John has not replied

Satcomm
Inactive Member


Message 126 of 145 (30869)
01-31-2003 3:01 PM
Reply to: Message 120 by nator
01-31-2003 11:10 AM


quote:
Satcomm: That doesn't surprise me. I guess the Dems aren't liberal enough for you.
Schrafinator: And no, the Democrats aren't progressive enough for me. There is very little difference between the two parties now. The republicans are mostly pretty far right wing and the Democrats are pretty much centrists for the most part.
You just proved my statement valid, regardless of whether you support McCain or not. I like McCain too. He seems like an honest politician. Probably why he's nothing more than a senator.
"Progressive" = a new substitute epithet for liberal. Just go read Breaking News & Views for the Progressive Community | Common Dreams
When I see house minority leaders like Nancy Pelosi running the democratic party now, I don't think moderate.
quote:
There is no "left" in the US that has any power or influence.
Thank goodness. Although, they are in control of the state of California.
quote:
Hell, Dick Nixon would have had to be a Democrat if he was alive today because he would have been way to "liberal" on the environment.
I'm not sure what you mean by this.
quote:
Don't try to use that conservative tactic of saying that if one is liberal, left-leaning or progressive one is evil or a commie or anti-American.
Nah. Liberalism = idiocy.
------------------
What is intelligence without wisdom?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by nator, posted 01-31-2003 11:10 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 135 by nator, posted 01-31-2003 9:25 PM Satcomm has not replied
 Message 137 by nator, posted 02-01-2003 12:03 AM Satcomm has not replied

shilohproject
Inactive Member


Message 127 of 145 (30871)
01-31-2003 3:23 PM
Reply to: Message 123 by Arachnid
01-31-2003 12:43 PM


Hey Arachnid,
Do you think this post is in keeping with the notion of non-personal debate? In keeping with forum rules?
I know that you are pretty new here, as am I, but do you think this sort of post aids your credibility?
Curious,
-Shiloh

This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by Arachnid, posted 01-31-2003 12:43 PM Arachnid has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 128 by Arachnid, posted 01-31-2003 3:52 PM shilohproject has replied

Arachnid
Inactive Member


Message 128 of 145 (30877)
01-31-2003 3:52 PM
Reply to: Message 127 by shilohproject
01-31-2003 3:23 PM


I can appreciate your concern, and typically I would agree with you...except this discussion has only garnered hostility and personal attacks to begin with. As for the forum rules, here is a quote from the administrator.
quote:
I saw a reference to the forum guidelines somewhere above, so in case anyone has forgotten or isn't sure, the Free For All forum is unmoderated. It is the only unmoderated forum on the site, and one of only two that do not require registration (the other is Welcome, Visitors!). Participate here at your own risk.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 127 by shilohproject, posted 01-31-2003 3:23 PM shilohproject has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by shilohproject, posted 01-31-2003 5:14 PM Arachnid has replied

jdean33442
Inactive Member


Message 129 of 145 (30881)
01-31-2003 4:13 PM
Reply to: Message 121 by nator
01-31-2003 11:14 AM


quote:
Native Americans were in North America 30,000 ago, many thousands of years before any Europeans came here.
What data do you have to prove indians lived here 30,000 years ago? Indians own land in the US and some are making quite a bit of scratch from it. Your point is worthless, as usual.
quote:
Does that mean it would be OK for them to get the UN to help them kick all of us out now so they could have their land back?
It would be great if the native americans could get the UN to kick you out of the US. Or at least confiscate your computer.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by nator, posted 01-31-2003 11:14 AM nator has not replied

jdean33442
Inactive Member


Message 130 of 145 (30885)
01-31-2003 4:34 PM
Reply to: Message 120 by nator
01-31-2003 11:10 AM


quote:
I don't have time for a full response right now
Too busy cutting bread to post?
quote:
I just told you I would have voted for JOHN McCAIN.
Oh, why didn't you say so. I agree with everything you have to say from here on.
quote:
And no, the Democrats aren't progressive enough for me. There is very little difference between the two parties now. The republicans are mostly pretty far right wing and the Democrats are pretty much centrists for the most part.
You are progressively getting dumber by the post. I've met 5 year olds with stronger political arguements.
quote:
There is no "left" in the US that has any power or influence.
Oh that is a scary statement. Not that it's true, but the fact your little warped mind believes the left wing has no influence. How far left do you go?
quote:
Don't try to use that conservative tactic of saying that if one is liberal, left-leaning or progressive one is evil or a commie or anti-American.
How about this conservative tactic. Liberals lack common sense and on a general basis, are simpleton path followers.
I have a riddle for you. What does your brain and the below share in common?
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
Answer: They are both filled with empty space.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by nator, posted 01-31-2003 11:10 AM nator has not replied

shilohproject
Inactive Member


Message 131 of 145 (30889)
01-31-2003 5:14 PM
Reply to: Message 128 by Arachnid
01-31-2003 3:52 PM


Arachnid,
Thanks for taking the time to cite the quote. Having said that, I must add that simply having no hall monitor is hardly a reason to do what is destructive to one's own purpose. The forum rules may not be enforced, but they do establish a standard we might ought to remember...all of us.
One would think that in a forum such as this we would all hope to appear either like(in no particular order!):
A.) Reasonable, level headed "scientific" type folks; or,
B.) Reasonable, level headed "Christian" type folks;
Neither of which is spoken well of by attacks, name calling, etc., even if it is completely warrented.
Example, I personally disagree with your take on this particular issue, but that's okay by me.
-Shiloh

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by Arachnid, posted 01-31-2003 3:52 PM Arachnid has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 132 by Arachnid, posted 01-31-2003 5:38 PM shilohproject has not replied

Arachnid
Inactive Member


Message 132 of 145 (30893)
01-31-2003 5:38 PM
Reply to: Message 131 by shilohproject
01-31-2003 5:14 PM


Shilo,
You may be right, but John really IS a boob.... Don't kill me, I'm only the messenger.
I'm glad you feel free to disagree with me, but I'm more glad that the state of Israel is not affected by you or those of like mind.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by shilohproject, posted 01-31-2003 5:14 PM shilohproject has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 133 by Arachnid, posted 01-31-2003 5:43 PM Arachnid has not replied

Arachnid
Inactive Member


Message 133 of 145 (30894)
01-31-2003 5:43 PM
Reply to: Message 132 by Arachnid
01-31-2003 5:38 PM


BTW Shilo,
What association do you have with the shilo project?
[This message has been edited by Arachnid, 01-31-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by Arachnid, posted 01-31-2003 5:38 PM Arachnid has not replied

Satcomm
Inactive Member


Message 134 of 145 (30901)
01-31-2003 9:05 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by John
01-30-2003 6:52 PM


quote:
Who do you think wrote history? Magic Honest fairies who never tell lies?
A good portion of history is written by those who wanted to keep an accurate account of what was going on. Yes, yes, I know some history is revisionist. It's up to historians to sift through the garbage to find the gold. Archeology has a tendancy of spouting history too.
quote:
What you've said makes sense, until one realizes that your 'official and formally recognized sites' are those most likely to be biased.
I disagree. There is information and then there is opinion.
quote:
You are making sense, but your actions violate these very ideals. As far as I can tell you refuse to look at anything not for your position. Noble sentiment but it is all posture.
I'm disappointed that you've come to that conclusion, John. I've read and reviewed the majority of the references you've posted. Wouldn't those be something not for "my position"?
quote:
Satcomm: What you're suggesting is that nothing is true and everything is false, except your own opinion.
John: It is pretty clear that I am not the one with this opinion.
It's pretty clear that you are the one with that opinion. And I'll go on with further evidence of this with another one of your quotes:
quote:
Yeah, I probably never will no the truth. Life sucks like that.
quote:
Apparently it cannot be so identified as you are blind to cases where just this sort of revision has been done. But since that revision fits your prejudice, it is history.
I think it's the other way around. Except you commonly embrace the revisions of others to match your own opinion, instead of forming your own revision.
quote:
Again, you make sense but your actions violate these ideals. Everything not pro-Israel you have dismissed as being Islamic fundamentalism.
That is incorrect. Everything you've sent me I've dismissed as anti-Israel or liberal rhetoric.
You didn't see me dismissing the five reference books that Quetzal posted. In fact, I'm going to order them when I get the chance.
quote:
Think about the Jewish holocaust in Germany. Does writing about that atrocity make one an Jewish fundamentalist and hence unreliable? Nope. Yet writing about what the Jewish government and Zionist movements have done the local arab populations makes one an Islamic militant and an unreliable source.
This is simply absurd. You can't possibly compare the Jewish holocaust to the current government in Israel. There are too many differences.
I'm sorry, I don't buy the rhetoric. It's propaganda and unreliable.
quote:
Its a double standard.
Hmmm lets see:
double standard - A set of principles permitting greater opportunity or liberty to one than to another.
The way I see it you impose this upon yourself in this debate.
quote:
This is a very strange statement. I suppose that if I were to criticize Judaism for this same reason you'd not object?
Haha, I'm glad you approve. Criticize Judaism all you want, I could care less. However, we're talking about the modern state of Israel. And I was talking about militant Islamic fundamentalists who I don't trust.
Let's recap on this one:
quote:
Satcomm: I'd trust the Israeli Foreign Ministry over a group of militant Islamic fundamentalists bent on my destruction.
John: You make this judgement based on what?
Satcomm: Judge not by what the people do, but by what the faith teaches. This makes me distrust Islam in general.
I made that statement (which you so eloquently called a judgement) based on what I've read in the teachings of Islam. I also base it on my observations of Islamic fundamentalists. With that being said, there are also peaceful and secular Muslims in this world, and especially in this country. Hence I said one shouldn't judge based on what an entire group of people do, but what the actual faith teaches. If someone is a fundamental, they have a tendancy to uphold their doctrine to the letter.
quote:
What difference does it make whether Palestine was a nation or not?
You said, "That they dislike having been kicked out of their country", indicating that they had a country. I corrected you.
quote:
People who lived there were terrorized and evicted from their homes.
No. They were encouraged to leave by the neighboring arab nations because jews are considered great enemies to Islam.
quote:
The people who lived there were as native or more as the Jewish peoples who imigrated from around the world.
I agree with this, as they are both native to the region by definition. Both jews and arabs have immigrated to that area at one point or another.
quote:
Based of Israel's say-so? Unbelievable......
Based on historical data.
quote:
I don't expect you to...
It seems like yyou were hoping I would. Hence the endless debate.
quote:
This doesn't follow.
I am critical of everything but not for the sake of being critical.
You are most of the time, based on your posts.
quote:
Then you should accept that Israel is an ultra pro-Israel source and discount its say so as well. But this you won't do.
Nope, because I believe they are telling the truth. A lot of historical data confirms this.
quote:
I haven't read all text books. However, it is possible to track changes in textbooks as the years pass. For the most part, the changes are minor but, on some issues, the changes can be radical. Ideally, this would be the result of the emergence of new information-- documents and such.
But you won't accept any of the information in the books due to the fact that they can be changed?
quote:
Satcomm: No, they were encouraged to leave by the surrounding nations.
John: ... rather than stay and be shot. Yes, that makes sense.
That was not always the case. Again, you are depicting the Israelis as some sort of Nazi regime.
quote:
1) Peace-keeping force == army
2) Yet it did, and you used this vey thing to justify the cration of Israel
3) There you go again making claims for which you cannot possibly have information. I am not a fan of the UN.
1) Ok, by definition. However there is a difference between an army sent in to eradicate, and a police force sent in to keep the peace.
2) No I did not use that. I'm making a case that Israel had justification to become a country and remain a country. The UN is beside the point.
3) I'm drawing conclusions based on observation of your behavior. I'm glad many in the U.S. are not a fans of the UN. They are an insult to our national sovereignty.
quote:
Religious in that the Zionist Jews and quite a few christians feel that Israel is a god-given right.
And the fact that you have no involvement in the situation makes it still religious and spiritual. It's God vs Anti-God and pseudo-God.
quote:
hmmm... lets see.
1) Spanish wanted gold. Zionists wanted land. Not a significant difference.
2) Spanish were nice in the beginnning and traded for what they wanted. Zionist were also nice in the beginning and traded for what they wanted.
3) As Spanish power, and numbers, increased it turned bloody. As Zionist power, and numbers, increased it turned bloody.
4) When the Spanish got the upper hand, the indians were turned into slaves. When the Zionist got the upper hand-- ie Israel was declared a nation-- the arab populations that remained were chased out.
Exactly. That is a poor analogy and different situation:
1) Gold and land are two very different things. Strike one.
2) The difference between the Spanish and the Zionists is that the Spanish were there to pillage and conquer, whereas the Zionists were there to start a new life free of discrimination. Strike two.
3) The Spanish were conquering and the Zionists were retaliating. That's strike three, and you're out already.
4) How is that a similarity? The arabs were never made into slaves, nor were they "chased out" as a majority. If only you could hit the ball.
quote:
How exactly does "Moot. You distrust everything." fit into this series?
Exactly my point. Your question was irrelevant. You've proven that you distrust everything and won't even look at the data presented. It wasn't just the fact that you won't look at the military analysis data, it was the consolidation of things you've stated on the matter.
quote:
You have been supporting your claims by insisting that Israel is blameless because it says so, while discounting anything contrary to those claims. That is just silly. Of course, you claim to believe israel because it is telling the truth but the only proof has been the claims made by israel. That is circular.
This conversation is circular.
I am not insisting that Israel is "blameless" and it is a nation containing human beings who have the capability to error. And I don't discount anything to the contrary of the idea that Israel has a right to exist. What is silly is that you keep insisting that those are my claims.
I don't claim that Israel is telling the truth just because "they say so". I am basing my claims on historical data and philosophy. I've provided historical data, analytical data, opinion, and argument, whereas you are merely providing your own opinion and any rhetoric that supports it.
quote:
I am not aware of my discounting anything. I know what Israel claims, and it doesn't hold under the weight of the evidence.
Are you kidding? You are discounting everything I state and all the data I use for support. Your claims don't hold under the weight of evidence.
quote:
It looks to me like the Quraysh were an arab tribe, a kind of large family group. Calling them jews doesn't make sense.
My mistake. I meant to say Mecca, not Quraysh in regards to the jews living there.
quote:
I hope you spent some time reading your own lesson plan.
Why, because you won't bother?
Well, here are a couple more history lessons for you:
Jews and Arabs from WW2 to the 1967 (Six-Day) War
Joyous Israelis, Resentful Palestinians: 1967
Also, here is a link to a listing of some other prominent history sites:
Subject | ipl: Information You Can Trust
------------------
What is intelligence without wisdom?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by John, posted 01-30-2003 6:52 PM John has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 144 by John, posted 02-01-2003 5:52 PM Satcomm has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 135 of 145 (30905)
01-31-2003 9:25 PM
Reply to: Message 126 by Satcomm
01-31-2003 3:01 PM


Liberal political policies made possible the following:
work for millions of people during the Great Depression
the 5-day work week
child labor laws
come to mention it, any labor laws
the minimum wage
anti-discrimination in employment laws
fair housing laws
safe workplace laws
environmental & clean air/water laws protection laws
food safety laws
product safety laws
ended Jim Crow in the south
"What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label "Liberal?" If by "Liberal" they mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar, then the record of this party and its members demonstrate that we are not that kind of "Liberal." But if by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people -- their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties -- someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."
John Fitzgerald Kennedy"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by Satcomm, posted 01-31-2003 3:01 PM Satcomm has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024