Page 733 of 750 FirstFirst ... 233633683723732733734743 ... LastLast
Results 25,621 to 25,655 of 26239

Thread: Oz Politics.

  1. #25621
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    55,826

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    "It clashes with too many of post-modern man’s preferences."

    Of course what humans actually do clashes John, it always did and the franchises and the governing classes over the centuries have worked assiduously to stay relevant to actual human behaviour. Some of the traditional sects have failed to adapt, hence Morrison's happy clappers and the other odd balls, like scientology and raelism. Humans seem to have a problem coping with 'is that all there is' and centuries of authority certainly have traded quite well on baseless promises of a better life 'up there'. Biggest con job and outright fraud ever perpetrated. Of course in evolutionary terms as well as empire building terms common purpose is one of the reasons we as a species are where we are. Doesn't make any of it actually true of course. But it will persist in some form, most sects and religions seem to have evolved from something else before them. I imagine as long as there are humans about the myths will continue.

  2. #25622
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Between Bourgeoisie and Proletariat - Australia
    Posts
    3,855

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aquinian View Post
    No, we're not trying to make liberals go away, we're not pressuring you to think like us, we're not framing laws to penalise your thinking. It simply isn't happening, and if you want credibly to claim that it is, cite the specific details.
    'Penalise' is your word.

    My son must sit in a class doing absolutely nothing while the handful of believers in his school attend a religion class.
    They are allowed to 'study' ehtics, but the 'teacher' can’t actually be a teacher. They must be a volunteer (read intermittent – if they turn up at all, also unqualified - read 'they mean well'. Basically; every now and then they get an amateur do gooder to give a class usually badly)
    They are not allowed to do homework or any other kind of school work. Not allowed to go to the library and read a book. The religious nutters have locked it up in Law – black and white.

    Why is this stupid law IMPOSED on me and my family, by religious people, in a secular school? We don't want it.


    (once a volunteer 'ethics teacher' was actually an undercover operative for the religious nutters. She started to teach religion to the kids. I only found out because my son came home with a drawing of the crucifixion. It was a printed picture the kids coloured in. It had a question on it; "How does this picture make you feel?". My son wrote something, can't remember, but the 'ethics teacher' had crossed it out and written underneath 'It makes me feel sad and i want to cry'. She got the boot of course. Insidious people.)
    It's all fun and games until Darth Vader comes.

  3. #25623
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Between Bourgeoisie and Proletariat - Australia
    Posts
    3,855

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    It's all fun and games until Darth Vader comes.

  4. #25624
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Sorrento Australia
    Posts
    1,756

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Checks and balances? ........Who needs em!

    .........just noticed a new camera at the intersection of Burwood Hwy and Elgar Road! ....and it's not a traffic speed camera.
    (it's lunch time..)
    Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication. Leonardo da Vinci.

    If war is the answer........... it must be a profoundly stupid question.




  5. #25625
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    55,826

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Gypsie (#25622)

    I was first tossed out of RI at about 10 for asking awkward questions. Subsequently it happened twice again because I just liked disrupting the session and the person peddling the nonsense.
    Some kids got quite upset and wanted to fight me, but that was a very long time ago.
    The same refusers setup was in place then, so I just used to go home. The school got no sympathy or cooperation from my mother.

  6. #25626
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Uki, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    29,573

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07-...tists/11308616

    Adani demanded the names of all federal agency scientists reviewing its contentious groundwater plans so it could check if they were "anti-coal" activists, emails obtained under freedom of information show.
    To do something good
    with no
    Because.

  7. #25627
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    55,826

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Drip drip Gary.

    Well the rubes voted with their wallets and I have no sympathy with them at all. They can stew in their own police state.

  8. #25628
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Perth, Western Australia, Australia
    Posts
    1,929

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by skuthorp View Post
    Gypsie (#25622)

    I was first tossed out of RI at about 10 for asking awkward questions. Subsequently it happened twice again because I just liked disrupting the session and the person peddling the nonsense.
    Some kids got quite upset and wanted to fight me, but that was a very long time ago.
    It all changed pretty quickly after Vatican II, let me tell you.

    My experience was the opposite of yours. Briefly: (Hallam might find this interesting). I was 12, Year 8, CBC Geraldton (St. Pat's), 1981. R.E. class. Brother Murray hands out three moral conundrum questions, which we have to answer. I write down my best guesses, as does everybody else. Br. takes up the answers, says class is over, goes to walk out. Cheeky me put my hand up and asked, what are the correct answers? "There are no correct answers, that's not the purpose of the exercise." Me, thinking quickly, "Well, what does the Church teach?" "She doesn't teach any more." Oh sh*t! Think quickly again, OK, got it, "Well, what did she used to teach, when she did teach?" "Oh, I can tell you that..." and away he went, principle of double effect, proportionate cause, etc, he laid out all the relevant moral principles and applied them in turn to each of the challenges, all neatly and expertly, without missing a beat. "Thanks Brother, that's what I believe now."

    I think he hated me from then on. I had managed to trick him, as he saw it, into revealing what the Church teaches.

    This is why I told my parents they should be demanding their fees back. They paid for a Christian education, and the Christian (sic) Brothers actively refused to provide it. We did learn about how masturbation was perfectly natural and wouldn't make hair grow on your palms (as if, that one's down there with the flat earth theory for dishonesty), and we learned about Judaism, even had a faux Seder meal one day. But you couldn't find out what the Catholic Church teaches from them unless you employed some serious wit.

    And people wonder if anything really changed in the Church!

    Regards,
    John.

    PS The exercise we were being put through was a trendy weirdo idea called "values clarification," which was a kind of experiment conducted on unwitting children by supposed adults, aimed at avoiding "imposing" any doctrine, but instead aiding the children to discover their own values, "clarify" them. This was founded on the liberal stupidity that children will work out their own moral principles from scratch, unaffected by anything external, as if the culture they grow up in, the behaviour and instruction of their parents, and every other external influence isn't constantly moulding them anyway. Complete idiocy, an attempt to apply liberal dogma to the real world, without reference to fact at all.
    http://fairmaid.blogspot.com.au/

    "It's dawning on me that I should have worked out the tumbler details more in advance, rather than rely on bluster and over confidence. But that's just silly." Jim Ledger.

  9. #25629
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Above flood level, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    18,303

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Bigfella View Post
    Hook, line and sinker.......
    If that's the way you get your jollies Ian, I simply can't state exactly how pitiful that is.
    Curiously amusing that you think you've 'won' something, but essentially just tragically sad. Really...
    Jarndyce and Jarndyce

    The Mighty Pippin
    Mirror 30141
    Looe
    Dragon KA93

  10. #25630
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    55,826

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    The difference between you and me John is that you are a believer, and I am not.

    We do not come from a common point, or go toward a common destination.

  11. #25631
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Perth, Western Australia, Australia
    Posts
    1,929

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by skuthorp View Post
    The difference between you and me John is that you are a believer, and I am not.

    We do not come from a common point, or go toward a common destination.
    Absolutely, but that’s no reason not to like each other, Jeff, I think you’ll agree.

    Regards,
    John.
    http://fairmaid.blogspot.com.au/

    "It's dawning on me that I should have worked out the tumbler details more in advance, rather than rely on bluster and over confidence. But that's just silly." Jim Ledger.

  12. #25632
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Livin' in the Golden Triangle
    Posts
    58,342

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by Duncan Gibbs View Post
    If that's the way you get your jollies Ian, I simply can't state exactly how pitiful that is.
    Curiously amusing that you think you've 'won' something, but essentially just tragically sad. Really...
    Oh, go lighten up a tad Dunc.
    "Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome and charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime" Mark Twain... so... Carpe the living sh!t out of the Diem

  13. #25633
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Perth, Western Australia, Australia
    Posts
    1,929

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    On depression in Australia, and elsewhere...

    “We are the first humans to try to live alone and to imagine we can provide what we need for ourselves, as isolated individuals.”

    https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/nea...16-h0jaxx.html
    http://fairmaid.blogspot.com.au/

    "It's dawning on me that I should have worked out the tumbler details more in advance, rather than rely on bluster and over confidence. But that's just silly." Jim Ledger.

  14. #25634
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Wongawallan Oz
    Posts
    15,384

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by skuthorp View Post
    Drip drip Gary.

    Well the rubes voted with their wallets and I have no sympathy with them at all. They can stew in their own police state.

    who or what are these “rubes” that you keep referring to Jeff?
    Larks

    “It’s impossible”, said pride.
    “It’s risky”, said experience.
    “It’s pointless”, said reason.
    “Give it a try”, whispered the heart.

    LPBC Beneficiary

    "Keep away from people who try to belittle your ambitions. Small people always do that, but the really great make you feel that you, too, can become great!"

  15. #25635
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    55,826

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    An old American term for the know nothings Gary. I'm not sure of the provenance..

    Another temp record broken BTW, July 1.7 up world wide.

  16. #25636
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Wongawallan Oz
    Posts
    15,384

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by skuthorp View Post
    An old American term for the know nothings Gary. I'm not sure of the provenance..

    Another temp record broken BTW, July 1.7 up world wide.

    So I guess I know nothing - as I guess does the majority of Australia. I’m quite happy to be amongst the “rubes” who make up the “quiet Australia” who figured they at least knew just enough to keep Shorten out of the position, (in my case with any consideration of my wallet having absolutely nothing to do with it.....).
    Larks

    “It’s impossible”, said pride.
    “It’s risky”, said experience.
    “It’s pointless”, said reason.
    “Give it a try”, whispered the heart.

    LPBC Beneficiary

    "Keep away from people who try to belittle your ambitions. Small people always do that, but the really great make you feel that you, too, can become great!"

  17. #25637
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    South Australia and Tasmania
    Posts
    18,717

    Default

    I probably shouldn't do this. But it's cold and rainy outside and looks like staying that way all day.

    John what do think about this evolution thing?

    Trendy modern liberal clap trap or the real deal?

    Sent from my CPH1851 using Tapatalk

  18. #25638
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    55,826

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Greg, I acknowledge that once again there wasn't much of a choice. Under the system my vote ends up with one of the majors. All I could do was try to influence the senate, I am in a Lib safe seat anyhow, but I could not vote for Morrison and the crew he brings along. I did not vote 1st preference Labour either. But I voted on policies, and no government with Dutton and Morrison, with their record, would get my vote unless there was no alternative.
    I do not withdraw my term at all. Probably using an American one was not such a good idea.


    Phil: Evolution. Anne, 38 years a teacher, thinks devolution is well under way. Looking at our politicians I can well believe it.
    Last edited by skuthorp; 07-16-2019 at 06:05 PM.

  19. #25639
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Uki, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    29,573

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aquinian View Post
    On depression in Australia, and elsewhere...

    “We are the first humans to try to live alone and to imagine we can provide what we need for ourselves, as isolated individuals.”

    https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/nea...16-h0jaxx.html
    Well it’s certainly not a lack of a Religion causing most of it. I think you will find most of it boils down to financial stress.
    To do something good
    with no
    Because.

  20. #25640
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Uki, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    29,573

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by Phil Y View Post
    I probably shouldn't do this. But it's cold and rainy outside and looks like staying that way all day.

    John what do think about this evolution thing?

    Trendy modern liberal clap trap or the real deal?

    Sent from my CPH1851 using Tapatalk
    Bloody hell, now you’ve done it, that question will consume more than one rainy day. At least John is not Frank.
    To do something good
    with no
    Because.

  21. #25641
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    South Australia and Tasmania
    Posts
    18,717

    Default

    He can be quite frank. A bit wordy, but he says what he thinks. Which is good.

    Sent from my CPH1851 using Tapatalk

  22. #25642
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    South Australia and Tasmania
    Posts
    18,717

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skuthorp View Post
    Greg, I acknowledge that once again there wasn't much of a choice. Under the system my vote ends up with one of the majors. All I could do was try to influence the senate, I am in a Lib safe seat anyhow, but I could not vote for Morrison and the crew he brings along. I did not vote 1st preference Labour either.
    I do not withdraw my term at all. Probably using an American one was not such a good idea.


    Phil: Evolution. Anne, 38 years a teacher, thinks devolution is well under way. Looking at our politicians I can well believe it.
    Obviously I believe evolution to be thing and that the world is more than 5000 years old. I think the time spans of observable evolutionary change are long. I suspect that Anne's thoughts relate more to the breakdown and collapse of communities and their structures, rather than biological evolution. Interesting though that people are taller and more recently fatter than they were just a couple of hundred years ago. Better nutrition, and physical strength and natural medical health no longer define the "fittest".

    Sent from my CPH1851 using Tapatalk

  23. #25643
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Uki, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    29,573

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Job criteria, must love the mother county.
    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07-...rland/11299744
    To do something good
    with no
    Because.

  24. #25644
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    55,826

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    People are a gullible as ever though….

  25. #25645
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Perth, Western Australia, Australia
    Posts
    1,929

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by Phil Y View Post
    I probably shouldn't do this. But it's cold and rainy outside and looks like staying that way all day.

    John what do think about this evolution thing?

    Trendy modern liberal clap trap or the real deal?

    Sent from my CPH1851 using Tapatalk
    LOL!

    Yeah, you shouldn't do that.

    Look, the Church has no issue with it, so I have no great motivation to debate it or even any great interest in it at all. I had an interest when I was in school, because they were teaching it, and I had read a book on evolutionary hoaxes, so I was alert and not merely absorbing what was presented. But that interest long faded (decades ago).

    My view is probably composed of a few elements, each of which is certainly disputable, but they are something like this.

    1. It was not primarily a scientific thesis in the beginning, but a hunt around for a theory that would justify not believing in God. There is correspondence from the leading atheists of the day (Huxley et al.) back and forth discussing the upcoming Darwin book with great excitement as a key to their chances of success in pushing their position.

    2. The Catholic Church ignored the matter, but certain Anglicans took the bait and created the impression that it was a science vs religion issue. Well, it was, from the atheists' perspective, but it need to have been, and the rash responses of non-Catholic controversialists played right into their hands.

    3. I doubt that there is any other scientific theory with such a rich history of outright fraud supporting it. Piltdown Man is probably the most famous, but there were numerous other examples. The political nature of the case is illustrated by that history. Have a read of this: https://www.conservapedia.com/Evolut...nd_Speculation

    4. The evidence for the theory seems to be all at a level that is unrelated to the thing being claimed. What I mean is, we are told that elephants came from something similar but slightly different, which in turn came from something else similar, etc., right back in a series to bacteria or whatever. No evidence for elephant evolution remains, as far as I'm aware. This is true of all of the larger animals, and the reason given is that only fossilisation would have preserved the data, and fossilisation is rare. Ergo, you wouldn't expect the evidence to survive, and it hasn't; but it used to exist. Well, that's not how you go from not believing in something to believing in something. Generally you would be driven by evidence. What we are told is that there isn't evidence, but that's because it's been destroyed. It's a matter of plain historical fact that evolution actually didn't become popular by evidence, it became popular by political efforts and propaganda. Now when the average man looks at any data at all, he presumes it is evidence for evolution, whereas if you're like me, an old cynic with a hyper-critical mind, you look at it harshly and ask what the data really supports, and it is very, very, rare that I see some supposed evidence and think, OK, that's something in their favour. On the Scientific Knowledge thread, I think it got to where some flower or other changing colour, and bacteria developing resistance to antibiotics, and that kind of thing, were the chief evidence. Whatever we think of those things, they aren't evidence that an elephant changed at all. They are evidence that bacteria and flowers have changed. This is obvious. The case seems to be that evolution can happen, because it happens in these micro cases. What I would like is not evidence that something can happen, but that it did happen - in the case of men, elephants, donkeys, whatever.

    Evolution does not bear on the question of God's existence, at all. Evolutionary theory does not even pretend to explain why there is anything at all, why there is logic, why there is intelligibility in the universe and corresponding intelligence in man, etc. It's a giant red herring in terms of religion.

    Cheers,
    John.
    http://fairmaid.blogspot.com.au/

    "It's dawning on me that I should have worked out the tumbler details more in advance, rather than rely on bluster and over confidence. But that's just silly." Jim Ledger.

  26. #25646
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Perth, Western Australia, Australia
    Posts
    1,929

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by WX View Post
    Well it’s certainly not a lack of a Religion causing most of it. I think you will find most of it boils down to financial stress.
    That's not what the article says. The article is arguing that advanced liberalism (i.e. the logical working out of the notion, entirely without foundation, that man is essentially an individual, rather than a social animal) is the primary cause.

    We're trying to live alone, and it doesn't work, because our nature cannot bear it.

    Regards,
    John.
    http://fairmaid.blogspot.com.au/

    "It's dawning on me that I should have worked out the tumbler details more in advance, rather than rely on bluster and over confidence. But that's just silly." Jim Ledger.

  27. #25647
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    55,826

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    " but a hunt around for a theory that would justify not believing in God."

    LOL!!! You have no idea, none at all.

    You seem to have a predeliction for it, that's the definition of faith I guess.
    I don't, never did, (which doesn't mean I will not be interested at the end (given I have my senses) whether I'll know, or I'll just be beyond knowing anything. Fascinating eh?)

    It's pretty simple really.
    Last edited by skuthorp; 07-16-2019 at 10:50 PM.

  28. #25648
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Perth, Western Australia, Australia
    Posts
    1,929

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by skuthorp View Post
    " but a hunt around for a theory that would justify not believing in God."

    LOL!!! You have no idea, none at all.

    You seem to have a predeliction for it, that's the definition of faith I guess.
    I don't, never did, (which doesn't mean I will not be interested at the end (given I have my senses) whether I'll know, or I'll just be beyond knowing anything. Fascinating eh?)

    It's pretty simple really.
    That wasn't a description of you, Jeff, it was a description of historical events, way back in the nineteenth century. At the time, everybody but a few activists believed in God, and the activists were planning how to change that. That's the nutshell version, there was a lot more going on, but evolutionary theory was regarded by them as a Godsend, so to speak.
    http://fairmaid.blogspot.com.au/

    "It's dawning on me that I should have worked out the tumbler details more in advance, rather than rely on bluster and over confidence. But that's just silly." Jim Ledger.

  29. #25649
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Between Bourgeoisie and Proletariat - Australia
    Posts
    3,855

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aquinian View Post
    Evolution does not bear on the question of God's existence, at all. Evolutionary theory does not even pretend to explain why there is anything at all, why there is logic, why there is intelligibility in the universe and corresponding intelligence in man, etc. It's a giant red herring in terms of religion.

    I hope you don't mind me chopping it up a bit.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aquinian View Post
    Evolution does not bear on the question of God's existence, at all...... It's a giant red herring in terms of religion.
    I agree.


    Quote Originally Posted by Aquinian View Post
    Evolutionary theory does not even pretend to explain why there is anything at all, why there is logic, why there is intelligibility in the universe and corresponding intelligence in man, etc.
    I wrote what i thought about that - but what a waste of time.......
    Interesting choice but - pretend...... like a confident assertion?
    It's all fun and games until Darth Vader comes.

  30. #25650
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Perth, Western Australia, Australia
    Posts
    1,929

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Gypsie, the point is that the chief promoters of the theory from the beginning, people like Huxley then Haeckel, were atheists with a political agenda, and even so the theory itself did not address anything relevant to their actual agenda - wiping out belief in God.
    http://fairmaid.blogspot.com.au/

    "It's dawning on me that I should have worked out the tumbler details more in advance, rather than rely on bluster and over confidence. But that's just silly." Jim Ledger.

  31. #25651
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Uki, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    29,573

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aquinian View Post
    LOL!

    Yeah, you shouldn't do that.

    Look, the Church has no issue with it, so I have no great motivation to debate it or even any great interest in it at all. I had an interest when I was in school, because they were teaching it, and I had read a book on evolutionary hoaxes, so I was alert and not merely absorbing what was presented. But that interest long faded (decades ago).

    My view is probably composed of a few elements, each of which is certainly disputable, but they are something like this.

    1. It was not primarily a scientific thesis in the beginning, but a hunt around for a theory that would justify not believing in God. There is correspondence from the leading atheists of the day (Huxley et al.) back and forth discussing the upcoming Darwin book with great excitement as a key to their chances of success in pushing their position.

    2. The Catholic Church ignored the matter, but certain Anglicans took the bait and created the impression that it was a science vs religion issue. Well, it was, from the atheists' perspective, but it need to have been, and the rash responses of non-Catholic controversialists played right into their hands.

    3. I doubt that there is any other scientific theory with such a rich history of outright fraud supporting it. Piltdown Man is probably the most famous, but there were numerous other examples. The political nature of the case is illustrated by that history. Have a read of this: https://www.conservapedia.com/Evolut...nd_Speculation

    4. The evidence for the theory seems to be all at a level that is unrelated to the thing being claimed. What I mean is, we are told that elephants came from something similar but slightly different, which in turn came from something else similar, etc., right back in a series to bacteria or whatever. No evidence for elephant evolution remains, as far as I'm aware. This is true of all of the larger animals, and the reason given is that only fossilisation would have preserved the data, and fossilisation is rare. Ergo, you wouldn't expect the evidence to survive, and it hasn't; but it used to exist. Well, that's not how you go from not believing in something to believing in something. Generally you would be driven by evidence. What we are told is that there isn't evidence, but that's because it's been destroyed. It's a matter of plain historical fact that evolution actually didn't become popular by evidence, it became popular by political efforts and propaganda. Now when the average man looks at any data at all, he presumes it is evidence for evolution, whereas if you're like me, an old cynic with a hyper-critical mind, you look at it harshly and ask what the data really supports, and it is very, very, rare that I see some supposed evidence and think, OK, that's something in their favour. On the Scientific Knowledge thread, I think it got to where some flower or other changing colour, and bacteria developing resistance to antibiotics, and that kind of thing, were the chief evidence. Whatever we think of those things, they aren't evidence that an elephant changed at all. They are evidence that bacteria and flowers have changed. This is obvious. The case seems to be that evolution can happen, because it happens in these micro cases. What I would like is not evidence that something can happen, but that it did happen - in the case of men, elephants, donkeys, whatever.

    Evolution does not bear on the question of God's existence, at all. Evolutionary theory does not even pretend to explain why there is anything at all, why there is logic, why there is intelligibility in the universe and corresponding intelligence in man, etc. It's a giant red herring in terms of religion.

    Cheers,
    John.
    Errrrr, no, wrong. Darwin put forward the theory after his observations on the Galápagos Islands. It had nothing to do with disproving the existence of any god. In fact Darwin believed in god.
    On the Origin of Species reflects theological views. Though he thought of religion as a tribal survival strategy, Darwin still believed that God was the ultimate lawgiver, and later recollected that at the time he was convinced of the existence of God as a First Cause and deserved to be called a theist.
    To do something good
    with no
    Because.

  32. #25652
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    South Australia and Tasmania
    Posts
    18,717

    Default

    Sorry

    Sent from my CPH1851 using Tapatalk

  33. #25653
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Livin' in the Golden Triangle
    Posts
    58,342

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aquinian View Post
    LOL!

    Yeah, you shouldn't do that.

    Look, the Church has no issue with it, so I have no great motivation to debate it or even any great interest in it at all. I had an interest when I was in school, because they were teaching it, and I had read a book on evolutionary hoaxes, so I was alert and not merely absorbing what was presented. But that interest long faded (decades ago).

    My view is probably composed of a few elements, each of which is certainly disputable, but they are something like this.

    1. It was not primarily a scientific thesis in the beginning, but a hunt around for a theory that would justify not believing in God. There is correspondence from the leading atheists of the day (Huxley et al.) back and forth discussing the upcoming Darwin book with great excitement as a key to their chances of success in pushing their position.

    2. The Catholic Church ignored the matter, but certain Anglicans took the bait and created the impression that it was a science vs religion issue. Well, it was, from the atheists' perspective, but it need to have been, and the rash responses of non-Catholic controversialists played right into their hands.

    3. I doubt that there is any other scientific theory with such a rich history of outright fraud supporting it. Piltdown Man is probably the most famous, but there were numerous other examples. The political nature of the case is illustrated by that history. Have a read of this: https://www.conservapedia.com/Evolut...nd_Speculation

    4. The evidence for the theory seems to be all at a level that is unrelated to the thing being claimed. What I mean is, we are told that elephants came from something similar but slightly different, which in turn came from something else similar, etc., right back in a series to bacteria or whatever. No evidence for elephant evolution remains, as far as I'm aware. This is true of all of the larger animals, and the reason given is that only fossilisation would have preserved the data, and fossilisation is rare. Ergo, you wouldn't expect the evidence to survive, and it hasn't; but it used to exist. Well, that's not how you go from not believing in something to believing in something. Generally you would be driven by evidence. What we are told is that there isn't evidence, but that's because it's been destroyed. It's a matter of plain historical fact that evolution actually didn't become popular by evidence, it became popular by political efforts and propaganda. Now when the average man looks at any data at all, he presumes it is evidence for evolution, whereas if you're like me, an old cynic with a hyper-critical mind, you look at it harshly and ask what the data really supports, and it is very, very, rare that I see some supposed evidence and think, OK, that's something in their favour. On the Scientific Knowledge thread, I think it got to where some flower or other changing colour, and bacteria developing resistance to antibiotics, and that kind of thing, were the chief evidence. Whatever we think of those things, they aren't evidence that an elephant changed at all. They are evidence that bacteria and flowers have changed. This is obvious. The case seems to be that evolution can happen, because it happens in these micro cases. What I would like is not evidence that something can happen, but that it did happen - in the case of men, elephants, donkeys, whatever.

    Evolution does not bear on the question of God's existence, at all. Evolutionary theory does not even pretend to explain why there is anything at all, why there is logic, why there is intelligibility in the universe and corresponding intelligence in man, etc. It's a giant red herring in terms of religion.

    Cheers,
    John.
    You mean like this fossil of an elephant precursor species teeth?



    About 60 million years old, I believe. Come on over and I'll show it to you........
    "Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome and charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime" Mark Twain... so... Carpe the living sh!t out of the Diem

  34. #25654
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Perth, Western Australia, Australia
    Posts
    1,929

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by WX View Post
    Errrrr, no, wrong. Darwin put forward the theory after his observations on the Galápagos Islands. It had nothing to do with disproving the existence of any god. In fact Darwin believed in god.
    Yes, I know. That doesn't touch on the question of why certain people welcomed the theory wildly, and promoted it assiduously, despite the lack of evidence.

    One feature of post-modern thinking is that he is always willing to believe that others are products of their upbringing, prejudices, etc., whereas he has thought everything through from scratch all on his own, and is rational and independent. Actually, we're all products of our background to a great extent, and in the case of post-modern man, he is the product of hundreds of years of energetic effort aimed at destroying religion. People don't know their history, so they are entirely unaware of how it was done.

    One example is that Christian education was attacked, quite brutally, in one European country after another. Religious orders such as the Benedictines were expelled en masse from countries such as Italy and France, by anti-Christian governments, which wrecked the schools and rendered the youth susceptible to indoctrination in government-run schools. The brutality of this procedure was beyond description. Men and women who had lived peacefully in a monastery or convent, serving the community selflessly, for scores of years, were overnight thrown into the street by fascist (i.e. government, leftist, authoritarian, atheist) thugs, and sent to other countries where they didn't even know the language. Many of them ended up in the UK, the USA, and Australia. The French government (Freemasonic) nationalised ALL Church property overnight in the Revolution, including all of the churches and schools, and after forbidding all religious instruction in schools in the late nineteenth century, again essentially stole all of the Church's property (1904). The destruction of religious charity was active, determined, and persistent over scores of years, until the State eventually ran all hospitals and schools, with the sole aim being to break the Church and eventually, get rid of faith in the citizens. You can get a sliver of an idea by reading this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1905_F..._and_the_State

    That is the kind of effort that resulted in our "secular" society, and of which we are all, to a greater or lesser extent, products. It had absolutely nothing to do with science, or reason, or even an interest in the common good. It was ideological and malicious.

    And that is also why it will, ultimately, fail. If it isn't "natural" in any realistic sense, then it wasn't inevitable either. Nor will it last, and I think it's apparent that the trend has halted and is already moving back the other way.

    Regards,
    John.
    http://fairmaid.blogspot.com.au/

    "It's dawning on me that I should have worked out the tumbler details more in advance, rather than rely on bluster and over confidence. But that's just silly." Jim Ledger.

  35. #25655
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    55,826

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    I thought it was dinosaur spare ribs Ian, judging by the dry red behind it. Good dry reds are hard to come by these days….

    The franchises have always been adept at changing their story as discoveries were made. I doubt any of the claimants to divine inspiration in ancient Egypt were any different.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •