What is it with Catholic Priests?

[Ben Kenobi]

No one is suggesting that black felons get special treatment. All felons should be able to regain enfranchisement after they've done their time and reentered society without having to fulfill unreasonable requirements like a bill passed by the state legislature.

I disagree. I think conviction of a felony is sufficient cause to disenfranchise you. Felonies are serious things, Albert.

[Ben Kenobi]

Anyway, first of all, you have a group that is over-all disproportionately undereducated and disproportionately poor, particularly urban poor who are very likely to commit crimes.

Plenty of poor people don't commit felonies Albert. What's their excuse? Blaming their poverty? Bull****.

They chose to commit the crimes, while other people in the exact same neighbourhood chose to obey the law and make something of themselves.

I had you pegged from day one, Albert. You really don't believe in personal responsibility. That people can choose what they want to make of their own life. You believe that the environment is the source of these issues, not the person. You are very wrong.

[Al B. Sure!]

That's a good question. I believe that the universe is around 20 billion years old.

I believe that earth has been around about 4.5 billiion years.

I believe that people as we know it today have been around maybe 50 thousand years.

I believe that species live and die over time.

I don't believe that there was a common ancestor between apes and men.

I don't believe that paleontologists have an adequate understanding of human evolution. They can assume that apes became men, but they are unable to prove and demonstrate their theory.

I do believe in differentiation as observed by Darwin, of species adapting to a change in an environment to fill an ecological niche.

I don't believe in speciation, that one species can become another species.

How would I define myself? I'm not a young earth creationist. I'm not really a creationist at all. I'm a skeptic. I don't believe our understanding of biology has reached the fundamentals as we have with physics and chemistry.

Evolution, has not been observed. It is a theory which isn't falsifiable. It makes no predictions that can be tested. This is contrary to how we understand science. All evolution says is that animals change to adapt to their surroundings, but it doesn't make predictions as to the rate of evolutionary change over time, or how this evolution will change the animals.

The argument for evolution is that it is a slow process which occurs over time, and yet, as others have stated it sometimes goes very fast. These two statements are contradictory to one another. It cannot be both mechanical and catastrophic.

WRONG AGAIN, BEN. THE POPE SAYS YOU'RE WRONG!!!

The International Theological Commission in a July 2004 statement endorsed by Cardinal Ratzinger, then president of the Commission and head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, now Pope Benedict XVI, includes this paragraph...

According to the widely accepted scientific account, the universe erupted 15 billion years ago in an explosion called the 'Big Bang' and has been expanding and cooling ever since. Later there gradually emerged the conditions necessary for the formation of atoms, still later the condensation of galaxies and stars, and about 10 billion years later the formation of planets. In our own solar system and on earth (formed about 4.5 billion years ago), the conditions have been favorable to the emergence of life. While there is little consensus among scientists about how the origin of this first microscopic life is to be explained, there is general agreement among them that the first organism dwelt on this planet about 3.5 - 4 billion years ago. Since it has been demonstrated that all living organisms on earth are genetically related, it is virtually certain that all living organisms have descended from this first organism. Converging evidence from many studies in the physical and biological sciences furnishes mounting support for some theory of evolution to account for the development and diversification of life on earth, while controversy continues over the pace and mechanisms of evolution.[29]

[giblets]

I do believe in differentiation as observed by Darwin, of species adapting to a change in an environment to fill an ecological niche.

I don't believe in speciation, that one species can become another species.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html

How would I define myself? I'm not a young earth creationist. I'm not really a creationist at all. I'm a skeptic. I don't believe our understanding of biology has reached the fundamentals as we have with physics and chemistry.

I don't know what you have to be skeptical of. Billions of years provides plenty of time for the accumulation of changes through mutations and natural selection.

Evolution, has not been observed. It is a theory which isn't falsifiable. It makes no predictions that can be tested. This is contrary to how we understand science. All evolution says is that animals change to adapt to their surroundings, but it doesn't make predictions as to the rate of evolutionary change over time, or how this evolution will change the animals.

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA210.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA211.html

[Al B. Sure!]

The argument for evolution is that it is a slow process which occurs over time, and yet, as others have stated it sometimes goes very fast. These two statements are contradictory to one another. It cannot be both mechanical and catastrophic.

Why the hell not? It's amazing how a spat between Stephen Jay Gould and a few other biologists get's constantly cited by creationist whackjobs.

First of all, just because the exact specifics of the mechanism of speciation isn't certain doesn't mean that Creationism is the way to go! Secondly, I'm sure anyone can imagine speciation being a gradual process but a catastrophe occurs which rapidly accelerates speciation by changing natural selection pressure and causing population bottlenecks which allow genetic changes to have more of an effect in future populations than they would have had the catastrophe not occured.

[Al B. Sure!]

I disagree. I think conviction of a felony is sufficient cause to disenfranchise you. Felonies are serious things, Albert.

disenfranchise you FOR LIFE?

[Ben Kenobi]

Since it has been demonstrated that all living organisms on earth are genetically related, it is virtually certain that all living organisms have descended from this first organism.

Perhaps. Perhaps not. We shall see.

Faith and morals, Albert.

This is a different realm entirely. Unless of course, you regard the pope as authoritative on science?

[Ben Kenobi]

disenfranchise you FOR LIFE?

Yep. I have no problem with this. I don't like getting broken into by crackheads looking for a fix.

[Al B. Sure!]

I had you pegged from day one, Albert. You really don't believe in personal responsibility. That people can choose what they want to make of their own life. You believe that the environment is the source of these issues, not the person. You are very wrong.

Did I ever say that? Personal responsibility is critical and I have never (if you ever read any of my posts here I talked about stuff like this all the time) demanded anything but personal responsibility by people all around me.

But I'm not going to act like it's not harder for people under certain circumstances nor that a history of racism has not generated social, economic, and cultural momentum that fuels the cycle of poverty and crime.

Regardless, people are and MUST BE held responsible for their actions. Hence, why you go to prison for your crimes.

But see, maybe I'm crazy and think that people can be reformed and rehabilitated and that someone shouldn't have their past mistakes and sins haunt them for the rest of their life, long after they have paid their debt for the crime. Hmm... I guess it's crazy. It sure isn't what Jesus would want!

[Al B. Sure!]

This is a different realm entirely. Unless of course, you regard the pope as authoritative on science?

ARE YOU EVEN CATHOLIC?

The Pope is your authority. Infallibility and all that.

[Al B. Sure!]

Yep. I have no problem with this. I don't like getting broken into by crackheads looking for a fix.

It's amazing. I referenced the story of that Anderson guy in Virginia. To re-iterate, 11 years ago, as a young man, he was convicted for burglary. He served his time and is by all accounts rehabilitated. He is studying at George Mason University and worked for a political campaign. But he is barred from voting because he has speeding tickets from his time working as a courier.

You can't seriously say that this man, at 32 years old, should be barred from voting for the rest of his life for a crime he committed when he was 20.

[Ben Kenobi]

Why the hell not? It's amazing how a spat between Stephen Jay Gould and a few other biologists get's constantly cited by creationist whackjobs.

It's like saying that gravity is sometimes governed by an inverse square law, and sometimes, in special occasions that it is not.

The rationale of Stephen Jay Gould, is because he believes that evolution is not a fixed rate. Which means that it's not a mechanical process at all.

The reason why biologists rejected catastrophism is because they sought to 'remove the hand of God' from evolution. Now, Gould feels that it's necessary to bring it back in to save the theory.

That to me is a sign that evolution itself is the problem. Rather then patching it, you need an entirely new theory altogether. Classical mechanics had similar cracks which resulted in a whole new physics to explain nature, which has lead to the current duality we not possess where we have two measuring rods that say different things, yet they both record the same object.

First of all, just because the exact specifics of the mechanism of speciation isn't certain doesn't mean that Creationism is the way to go!

I'm not saying this. However, evolution as a nondeterministic theory would solve many of the problems that Gould has uncovered. It also means that the orderly progression nonsense is completely blown out of the water.

Secondly, I'm sure anyone can imagine speciation being a gradual process but a catastrophe occurs which rapidly accelerates speciation by changing natural selection pressure and causing population bottlenecks which allow genetic changes to have more of an effect in future populations than they would have had the catastrophe not occured

That's not science, albert. Saying that evolution sometimes slows down and sometimes speeds up tells us exactly nothing about the process of evolution and how it occurs.

What it does show us is that there is more than one 'force' acting on evolution per se. What you've described is a very much more complex system than as we currently understand evolution.

[Ben Kenobi]

The Pope is your authority. Infallibility and all that.

Hence the reference to faith and morals...

[Ben Kenobi]

Did I ever say that? Personal responsibility is critical and I have never (if you ever read any of my posts here I talked about stuff like this all the time) demanded anything but personal responsibility by people all around me.

Are you referring to the post, before or after you advocated theft?

But I'm not going to act like it's not harder for people under certain circumstances nor that a history of racism has not generated social, economic, and cultural momentum that fuels the cycle of poverty and crime.

Ah, it's all bull****. This is irrelevant. Plenty of people in the exact same situation make different choices in their lives. Go whine to them. They won't have the least bit of sympathy.

But see, maybe I'm crazy and think that people can be reformed and rehabilitated and that someone shouldn't have their past mistakes and sins haunt them for the rest of their life, long after they have paid their debt for the crime. Hmm... I guess it's crazy. It sure isn't what Jesus would want!

Jesus would want them to pay 7 times what they stole. Our current justice system doesn't demand restitution to the victims from the offender.

I'd be happy to permit felons to vote, if they willingly repaid their victims 7x what they stole, without prompting from anyone else. This to me would be a sign of rehabilitation.

Of the 4 breakins, none of the perpetrators have ever stepped forward for so much as an apology. Nothing. Two of them, I was fortunate not to lose anything, but one of them I lost some things that I will never get back. I lost memories and things that I had kept for a long time.

I lost two gifts from my father. You ask me to forgive these punks? If they want forgiveness, why don't they at least come to me and admit what they did and try to make it right?

[Al B. Sure!]

It's like saying that gravity is sometimes governed by an inverse square law, and sometimes, in special occasions that it is not.

The rationale of Stephen Jay Gould, is because he believes that evolution is not a fixed rate. Which means that it's not a mechanical process at all.

The reason why biologists rejected catastrophism is because they sought to 'remove the hand of God' from evolution. Now, Gould feels that it's necessary to bring it back in to save the theory.

That to me is a sign that evolution itself is the problem. Rather then patching it, you need an entirely new theory altogether. Classical mechanics had similar cracks which resulted in a whole new physics to explain nature, which has lead to the current duality we not possess where we have two measuring rods that say different things, yet they both record the same object.

Blah blah... so what's your brilliant proposal that will revolutionize evolution in the same manner than quantum mechanics changed classical mechanics? Creationism?

That's not science, albert. Saying that evolution sometimes slows down and sometimes speeds up tells us exactly nothing about the process of evolution and how it occurs.

You act like a 'founder effect' or a population bottleneck wouldn't result in a beneficial mutation becoming more prominent in a population.