Tweet
Originally posted by Kidicious
View Post
-
No you just had the proverbial lobotomy and stopped trying."Ceterum censeo Ben esse expellendum." -
Originally posted by dannubis View Post
I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
- Justice Brett KavanaughComment
-
Mirror mirror on the wall..."Ceterum censeo Ben esse expellendum."Comment
-
From Raiders of the Lost Ark it is clear that Hitler was planning on using the Ark of the Covenant to help in the war effort. I there hadn't been an Ark at all, Hitler likely wouldn't have been so brazen to think that he could win WWII. Thus he wouldn't have started it.
From here I will let the reader draw the obvious conclusion as to who caused WWII ...Comment
-
That's not so bad. My pastor thinks Stephen King is a prophet.Originally posted by Aeson View PostI drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
- Justice Brett KavanaughComment
-
This file changed my opinion on the causes of the american revolution
What can make a nigga wanna fight a whole night club/Figure that he ought to maybe be a pimp simply 'cause he don't like love/What can make a nigga wanna achy, break all rules/In a book when it took a lot to get you hooked up to this volume/
What can make a nigga wanna loose all faith in/Anything that he can't feel through his chest wit sensationComment
-
If ken is offering to answer biology questions, how did mammals go from laying eggs to giving birth to live young? Were there intermediate mammals that were ovoviviparous, like sharks? Does it have something to do with marsupials?John Brown did nothing wrong.Comment
-
No, I'm not offering to answer biology questions. The kind of questions such as how did this one trait appear however are pretty much irrelevant, the theory of evolution is a theory describing the mechanism for how those changes can occur, not a detailed catalogue of every change to occur. As has been said a million times now, it's an incredibly easy theory to destroy, yet no-one has been able to provide a single example that does so.Originally posted by Felch View PostComment
-
There is fossil evidence of other animals giving birth to live young like fish etc. Sharks give birth to live young. So it's not just how did mammals evolve it, it's evolved loads of times. It's basically a fairly simple evolutionary step.
Keeping your embryo in a nutritious case with a protective layer is a good strategy then you need to keep it warm. It's not a massive leap to start keeping the egg inside for longer and longer and eventually you keep it in so long the embryo needs to break out of the layer whilst inside the body.
The egg layers and marsupials diverged in the Jurassic period primarily because they got isolated geographically.Last edited by MikeH; December 6, 2012, 10:34.Jon Miller: MikeH speaks the truth
Jon Miller: MikeH is a shockingly revolting dolt and a masturbatory urine-reeking sideshow freak whose word is as valuable as an aging cow paddy.
We've got both kindsComment
-
Oh and here's a lizard that is undergoing that evolution RIGHT NOW!
Jon Miller: MikeH speaks the truth
Jon Miller: MikeH is a shockingly revolting dolt and a masturbatory urine-reeking sideshow freak whose word is as valuable as an aging cow paddy.
We've got both kindsComment
-
A very quick Googling provides:Originally posted by kentonio View Post
It gets cited rather often. We don't really go for Augustine in my church, but he wasn't a total loon. Fundamentalism/biblical literalism/whatever you call such lunacy is a historical novelty formed largely as a reaction to Darwin, AFAICT. I'm not a historian, but I do know that the popular narrative of religion-vs-science is often distorted. Especially the Galileo Affair..."Often a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other parts of the world, about the motions and orbits of the stars and even their sizes and distances,... and this knowledge he holds with certainty from reason and experience. It is thus offensive and disgraceful for an unbeliever to hear a Christian talk nonsense about such things, claiming that what he is saying is based in Scripture. We should do all that we can to avoid such an embarrassing situation, lest the unbeliever see only ignorance in the Christian and laugh to scorn."
- St. Augustine, De Genesi ad litteram libri duodecim (The Literal Meaning of Genesis)
It would at the very least have a lot more barbarous and unjustified invasions. "These savages live nasty, benighted lives, so we are right to invade them and kill them until they submit and become [X]" is commonly held to be bad when X is a religion. When X is some variation on modern, secular democracy, of course, Hitch was all for it. And then there's that fun quote from the PBS interview, cited in post #33, in which oppression and cruelty were admirable when done against people who believed the wrong thing. That he stood up for libertines and their lifestyles, or whatever you say he did...so what?Such as what? Hitchens was far more of a moralist than most of the religious people I've ever read. He usually displayed a genuine affection for humanity as a species, while recognizing and often embracing the supposed frailties that often provide much of the joy in peoples lives. He was an alchoholic, often an intellectual bully, but through it all shone a man who genuinely loved life and despised those who preach that people should live lives of guilt and repression. If we had a few more Hitchens and a few less priests the world would be a far more fulfilling place.Comment
-
Platypus.No, I did not steal that from somebody on Something Awful.Comment
-
The Pope condemned the Iraq War and Hitchens supported it.John Brown did nothing wrong.Comment
-
That quote does not undermine what I said, the living world at the time and the level of human knowledge was not wildly seperated from the narrative of the bible. St Augustus may have been demanding that christians not make up farcical interpretations of the events in the bible, but at the same time many of the very things he believed to be truth such as the age of the earth were themselves examples of biblical literalism.Originally posted by Elok View Post
I don't understand why you think it would be any other way, the sheer power of the early religions was due to mans lack of understanding of natural phenomena. If you believe that a storm is a sign of gods anger or that a volcanic eruption is a punishment from the heavens, then why wouldn't you literally believe the written word of God?
If you followed Hitchens work and evolution of thinking over time, you'd know just how artifical it is taking individual quotes of his and holding them up as examples of his moral compass. For one thing he was prone to heavy use of hyperbole, and for another the way he expressed his ideas was often in the form of an initial heavy clublike pronouncement that would make people sit up and take notice, and then a thorough dissection of the the rationale or subtly undermining his initial point to make a much stronger one.Originally posted by Elok View Post
So did I initially, there were strong moral reasons for supporting it before the US managed to totally **** the whole thing up.Originally posted by Felch View PostComment
Comment