|
Grex > Agora47 > #165: Saving Private Lynch - A PR spin goes out of control | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 18 new of 67 responses total. |
twenex
|
|
response 50 of 67:
| 
Nov 17 15:35 UTC 2003 |
Good point, remmers.
Profs 1, Visitors 0
|
rcurl
|
|
response 51 of 67:
|
Nov 17 18:13 UTC 2003 |
There are probably books one *should* read, even if one doesn't "care for
the author". That said, however, I don't know of any twits here that
one *should* read.
|
remmers
|
|
response 52 of 67:
|
Nov 17 18:22 UTC 2003 |
Textbooks being a case in point, if you're a student. But I was
speaking of discretionary reading.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 53 of 67:
|
Nov 17 19:13 UTC 2003 |
Creationists probably *should* read books on evolution by scientists, even
if they don't "care for the authors".
|
twenex
|
|
response 54 of 67:
|
Nov 17 19:37 UTC 2003 |
ROTFLMAO. My agreeable mood continues....
|
klg
|
|
response 55 of 67:
|
Nov 18 02:41 UTC 2003 |
And evolutionists ought to read more books on the subject of intelligent
design?????????
|
other
|
|
response 56 of 67:
|
Nov 18 04:26 UTC 2003 |
They did. That's part of why they're evolutionists.
|
sj2
|
|
response 57 of 67:
|
Nov 18 05:23 UTC 2003 |
OT - The "Blind Watchmaker" by Richard Dawkins talks how the design
behind evolution is very sophisticated yet unplanned.
Re #49, my point was that unless you are really hardpressed for time,
it doesn't hurt to know other people's point of view, no matter how
ridiculous they sound to you (provided they have one).
|
tsty
|
|
response 58 of 67:
|
Nov 18 06:12 UTC 2003 |
i guess the cancer survivor doesn't know about the tiwt flitter .... heh-heh.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 59 of 67:
|
Nov 18 06:49 UTC 2003 |
"Intelligent design" has been overwhelmingly should to be unsupported by
evolutionists that DO read their books. The IDists, however, appear not to
have read a word of evolution science, much less produced any evidence
opposing evolution science.
|
twenex
|
|
response 60 of 67:
|
Nov 18 10:26 UTC 2003 |
Your first sentence makes no sernse whatsoever.
|
remmers
|
|
response 61 of 67:
|
Nov 18 11:46 UTC 2003 |
Re #57: I would never filter someone whose point of view I didn't
already know.
|
gull
|
|
response 62 of 67:
|
Nov 18 15:04 UTC 2003 |
Re #60: Change the "should" to "shown" and it makes more sense.
|
twenex
|
|
response 63 of 67:
|
Nov 18 15:13 UTC 2003 |
Quite right; good idea.
|
klg
|
|
response 64 of 67:
|
Nov 18 17:10 UTC 2003 |
Wouldn't one suppose that the vast proportion of those who support
Intelligent Design have had much more exposure to Evolution than vice
versa? (The situation would be analagous to the fact that Jews living
in America generally know much more about Christianity than Christians
in America know about Judaism.)
|
gull
|
|
response 65 of 67:
|
Nov 18 18:51 UTC 2003 |
My experience with a lot of lay people who argue theories like that is
that they outright refuse to read books about evolution and the like,
because they feel those are works of the Devil.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 66 of 67:
|
Nov 18 19:15 UTC 2003 |
Thanks, gull. (That was an unlikely typo - the wrong letters aren't near each
other. Must have happened in the brain....)
The IDists have heard of evolution from the popular media, but don't study
the evidence. They like the metaphors (watches imply a watchmaker) more
than the facts.
|
willcome
|
|
response 67 of 67:
|
Nov 27 09:35 UTC 2003 |
man, those whores have gfoood MARIHUANA/
|