God Damned Fundies!
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Dennis Hall
|Sub: Typical theist dishonesty
|Date: 14 Apr 96 09:40:13
EID:787c 208e4d06
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fc9
PID: FM 2.02
>> DH> Atheism asserts that there is no God (god).
fr> Oh? Care to give us the name of ANY atheist in this forum which
fr> states that? Or are you just lying because it's expected of
fr> Christians?
> Let me restate. Atheism according to Webster:
> atheism (n) 1. a disbelief in the existence of deity.
> 2. the doctrine that there is no deity.
>
> atheist (n) 1. one who denies the existence of God.
Your "Webster" is wrong (or you're using a definition you just made up.)
Atheism is the lack of belief in the existance of deity constructs. You
are _lying_ when you demand that an atheist "denies" the existance of a
"God" inasmuch as atheists can't deny something that doesn't exist _and_
doesn't denote the Christanic pantheon mistakenly capitalized to elevate
it to a higher position above all the other gods and goddesses.
I'll ask again: Care to give the name of ANY atheist in this forum who
states that there are no gods? Do it now or admit that your masters are
lying to you.
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Judith Bandsma
|Sub: ADOLPH HITLER WAS A CHRISTIAN. GET OVER IT.
|Date: 14 Apr 96 09:41:10
EID:6cfb 208e4d25
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fca
PID: FM 2.02
FR> I would suggest that you divest yourself of that embarrassing
FR> ignorance. Might I suggest some easy reading materials for you?
jb> Sorry, Fred, I think Dr. Seuss is a bit beyond him.
What sort of clothes do you suppose
would be worn by a man with a mole on his nose?
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Al Schroeder
|Sub: EVIL
|Date: 14 Apr 96 09:43:26
EID:5209 208e4d6d
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fcb
REPLY: 1:116/19 040A0C9A
PID: FM 2.02
as> Uh oh. Anthony and Mark Craig are now getting together.
as> Witness the birth of the new Nazi party.
FR> We already have. It's called "The Religious Reich."
as> If you would read more of the posts, you would find my opinion
as> of Reed and his group is not substantially higher than yours.
Except that employing the label "reich" denotes a connection to a certain
"third reich" we all know and... love. Are you, at least, willing to admit
that Adolf Hitler was in fact a Christian as he stated and as the the majority
churches of Nazi Germany agreed?
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Al Schroeder
|Sub: CHRISTANIC BLOW JOBS
|Date: 14 Apr 96 09:45:29
EID:d4d9 208e4dae
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fcc
REPLY: 1:116/19 040A1302
PID: FM 2.02
FR> In actual fact the only elections which really matter are the local
fr> ones: school board, city boards, and perhaps the mayor. (Pretending
fr> to actually vote for a president is pretty silly, don't you think?)
as> Not at all. Yes, it is usually choosing the lesser of two evils.
I think you finally understood what I was getting at. In any event local
elections are _far_ more important than pretending to vote for a president.
That may change depending on how the line-item veto is used.
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Al Schroeder
|Sub: DON'T READ THE BIBLE!
|Date: 14 Apr 96 09:54:26
EID:c9ee 208e4ecd
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fcd
REPLY: 1:116/19 031C269C
PID: FM 2.02
gf> That's an oxymoron isn't it, _learned religious_ ?
FR> Hell, there's a great deal of truth in the statement that
FR> anyone who reads the classical Christanic mythologies once
FR> can't remain a believer. Anyone who learns scientific
FR> method and critical thinking and _employ_ both can't be a
FR> believer in the mythologies.
as> I can keep this up as long as you can, Fred.
And continue to be debunked every time.
as> Roger Bacon, who first formulated the idea of observation
as> and experimentation against theory, i.e., the scientific
as> theory in its essence, was a Christian monk.
Your reading comprehension would appear to be mostly faulty, Al.
The fact that I "underscored" the word "employ" above doesn't seem to have
registered in your brain. Perhaps it couldn't make it past your preconceptions?
Would you like for me to explain for you in simpler terms?
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Al Schroeder
|Sub: ADOLPH HITLER WAS A CHRISTIAN. GET OVER IT!
|Date: 14 Apr 96 09:58:36
EID:49ee 208e4f52
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fce
REPLY: 1:116/19 031C3024
PID: FM 2.02
FR> Adolf Hitler was no different than the thousands of
FR> tyranical, murdering Christians which came before him
EF> True, with one exception: Hitler wasn't a Christian.
dc> Now you went and done it... Be afraid, very afraid.
c> Clean out your HD, as you will need the storage space....
FR> He's been thinking of some other Adolf Hitler, no doubt.
as> Not at all, as the source Elliot quoted...
as> AND WHICH YOU POINTEDLY IGNORED...proves.
Not at all, as the sources _I_ provided came straight from Hitler's mouth
and from the pens of a great many Christian church leaders at the time.
dc> You have done one of the 3 unpardonable offences in HS
dc> in questioning Fredric on "Hitler wasn't an xian".
FR> I actually posted some fresh debunkings of the claim.
as> What, quotes from Hitler?
How typical. Why not just admit that being a Christian does nothing to
turn a murdering tyrany into a human being? Why not just admit that you
have read the truth, don't like the truth, and filtered it out entirely?
If you would like to be debunked yet once again, please let me know and
I'll provide the quotes yet once again -- affording you another chance to
ask rhetorically "what, quotes from Hitler?"
Hitler's actions show conclusively that he was a Christian as well -- unless
you care to deny the bloody history of Christianity as so many Christians
do.
Hitler _was_ a Christian, Al. It's time to get over it.
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Al Schroeder
|Sub: Which Christian goes next?
|Date: 14 Apr 96 10:02:49
EID:bfae 208e5058
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fcf
REPLY: 1:116/19 031C9C3A
PID: FM 2.02
I wonder if you'll start to demand that Jim Jones also wasn't a Christian.
Who's next on your list of Christians you'll deny? Torquemada? David Duke?
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Don Martin
|Sub: Hardly's truth filter
|Date: 14 Apr 96 10:04:14
EID:107c 208e5087
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fd0
REPLY: 1:261/1000.0 3169712c
PID: FM 2.02
Michael Hardy
FR> A far better moral and ethical ideal would be to treat
FR> others as they like to be treated. Try that.
mh> Please practice your superior ethic -- treat me as I
mh> would like to be treated, per the above description.
FR> I am. And you know it. You wouldn't be here if it weren't true,
FR> By the way: Your truth filter isn't working.
dm> Bullshit! When have you EVER seen any truth
dm> in one of his messages? It's working FINE!
}:-} There's an idea... Put a truth filter on everything that goes _out_.
Perhaps that's what his masters do for his postings.
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Michael Hardy
|Sub: Hardly _WANTS_ to live in a theocrazy
|Date: 14 Apr 96 10:06:29
EID:876f 208e50ce
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fd1
REPLY: 1:3625/470.0 89594393
PID: FM 2.02
RS> He has selected a Thursday, May 2, for this national religious ritual.
RS> If we really believe in separation of church and state, I think that
mh> I say if this dog-and-pony show is the worst thing you have to worry
mh> about, you should count yourself lucky and consider how you came to
mh> have so much free time on your hands.
If you think that violating the Constitution of the United States is not
something to worry about, might I suggest that you go move to Iran? You
know: One nation under god?
Thanks. Be seein' ya.
ps: Or perhaps you would feel better in Nazi Germany under the rule of the
Christian fascist Adolf Hitler?
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Ed Mills
|Sub: His Daily Dead People Walking
|Date: 14 Apr 96 10:14:12
EID:677d 208e51c6
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fd3
REPLY: 1:105/40.762 f9146b25
PID: FM 2.02
George Mooth
GM> Luke made the amazing and startling statement that Jesus was
GM> alive, He was seen by a great multitude of people, and His
GM> resurrection was confirmed by a great number of convincing proofs.
em> This means that there's a significant hope I could write on
em> thin, crinkly parchment that something which blatantly violates
em> all confirmed facts of physics took place and "thousands of
em> people saw it", and it would be believed a couple millenia from now.
George is suffering from a great deal of ignorance.
#1 Many people at that time "died" and then came back
from the "dead." It wasn't until the early 1800's
of the formation of the "Society of the ressucication
of those aparently dead" came along and started to
discover that those who appear dead can be manipulated
to restore life. At the time of the alleged "Jesus"
myth, being dead and coming back was mundane.
#2 The classical Christanic mythologies have conflicting
accounts of the myth.
#3 The myth of the "resurrection" was added centuries
after Paul/Saul created the cult. The fact that the
"Jesus" myth had to be _voted_ into being a god
indicates that the myth was being voted into acceptance.
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Ed Mills
|Sub: The Royal Family
|Date: 14 Apr 96 10:16:36
EID:3e78 208e5212
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fd4
REPLY: 1:105/40.762 4b236a3d
PID: FM 2.02
em> I was looking at some posts which talked about Adam & Steve, or
em> Eve, or whoever, and I'm ashamed to say that it has only just now
em> occurred to me: Who did Enoch schtup to start all those begats?
Fundies will tell you that at that time there was no stigma associated with
mating with one's mother or father. They base that claim upon their willful
belief in a "fall" which occured later, causing a "degeneration" of humanity
such that genetic defects were then possible.
You can trap a fundy in a lie easilly... yet they simply invoke magic to
escape.
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Jesse Jones
|Sub: The truth fits. Wear it.
|Date: 14 Apr 96 10:17:53
EID:6b12 208e523a
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fd5
REPLY: 1:135/71.0 245a5939
PID: FM 2.02
SA> Something you fundies never seem to do.
jJ> What is a "fundie?"
SA> Look in the mirror.
JJ> And why do you call me one?
SA> Because I believe in calling a spade a spade.
jcj> That is not an answer, Sue.
FR> She told you, you ignorant death cultist lawyer. Look in the
FR> mirror for once. You'll find a fundy looking back at you.
FR> jcj> That is not an answer either, Fred.
FR> There's another artifact of the low quality of education in
FR> America raising its ugly head again. Or perhaps your problem is one
FR> of being a lawyer. Or perhaps it's because you're an ignorant death
FR> cultist.
jcj> That still is not an answer.
You're not _allowed_ to ask questions about your cult, leave alone accept
answers.
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: All
|Sub: Jesse does it! Do I win a buck?
|Date: 14 Apr 96 10:21:17
EID:d90a 208e52a8
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fd6
REPLY: 1:135/71.0 245a593a
PID: FM 2.02
FR> To all Christians: He's one of yours.
jcj> How ironic to receive this hateful diatribe on this Easter Day,
jcj> when Christians celebrate the Resurrection of Jesus the Christ!
Great! While it's not the lengthy ranting tirade about how his intellectual
superiors have "taken over" a "Christian ritual," at least he's still publically
trying to demand that the Fertility Festival of Isis has something to do
with his cult's deity constructs.
And I noticed that he's still pretending that his deity construct was "resurrected"
-- in direct conflict with his own master's mythologies.
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Jesse Jones
|Sub: Jesse Jones Fucks Up Again
|Date: 14 Apr 96 10:23:36
EID:3b73 208e52f2
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fd7
REPLY: 1:135/71.0 245a593b
PID: FM 2.02
FR> people like Jones drive the nation's expenses up, at least I and
FR> my sons won't have these lunatics to compete with in the job
FR> marketplace.
jcj> Don't write their applications for them, okay? It's "my sons and I."
FR> That's an interesting accusation yet I suspect you've stuffed your
FR> lawyer foot into your lawyer mouth. The inclusive case may be formed
FR> correctly using either syntax. You're probably suffering under the
FR> delusion that I typed "me and my sons."
jcj> Inclusive case?!? Sorry, I can't even
jcj> find such an animal in any work I have.
Can't admit you're wrong, huh? Was the truth of what I said so hurtful
that it's driven you to such resentment? (Gee, and I didn't even mention
Christmas trees in that one.)
Feel free to correct my spelling, lawyer, as I can use it. Yet when you
fuck up, have the decorum to admit it -- if not to everyone else then at
least to yourself.
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Ed Dutkiewicz
|Sub: Hitler was a Christian. Get OVER it.
|Date: 14 Apr 96 10:39:51
EID:36ff 208e54f9
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fd8
REPLY: 1:236/20.0 3169484e
PID: FM 2.02
fr> His actions show that he used the tools and followed the
fr> historic policy of Christianity. His actions showed that
fr> he was undeniably a Christian. His own words state that
FR> he was a Christian. The Christian masters and churches at
fr> the time also stated that he was undeniably a Christian.
ed> Remember that Hitler was a ruthless politician. He could say
ed> anything he wanted, but his actions speak louder than his rhtoric.
Which is exactly true and which evidences the fact that he was a Christian.
He was doing things that Christian "leaders" had done for a dozen centuries
before him -- no difference. To demand that Hitler wasn't a Christian is
to demand that all the Christians who came before him weren't Christians
either.
Are you willing to defend that position?
ed> According to John Gunther in his book, INSIDE EUROPE,1938 ed.,:
ed> *He was born and brought up a Roman Catholic. But lost faith
ed> early and attends no religious services of any kind.
That's contrary to what Hitler said and to what Christian churches were
saying and doing at the time. Contrary to John Gunther, Adolf Hitler remained
a Christian until his suicide.
"Today, I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will
of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew,
I am fighting for the work of the Lord" (speech, Reichstag, 1936).
That's 1936, Ed. That's not "early on."
I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so"
-- John Toland (Pulitzer Prize winner), from "Adolf Hitler",
pp 507, talking about the Autumn of 1941.
Is 1941 "early on?"
Your source has got many things wrong. I can't help but wonder whether
your source is trying to deny the fact that Hitler was a Christain due to
the mistaken belief that being a Christian somehow stops someone from being
a murdering tyrant and a despot.
History teaches us otherwise. Why can't you admit it?
ed> His Catholicism means nothing to him....On being formed his
ed> government almost immdiately began a fierce religious war
ed> against Catholics, Protestants, and Jews alike.*
In 1933 two bishops met for over an hour with Hitler. In his
notes of that meeting, Bishop Berning happily remarked, "because
of [Nazism] Christianity was being promoted, the level of
morality raised, and the struggle against bolshevism and atheism
carried on with energy and success." (Catholic theologian Uta
Ranke-Heinemann, "Eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven," p. 330.)
"In January 1934 Hitler saw twelve Evangelical leaders, and
after this meeting . . . they pledged 'the leaders of the
German Evangelical Church unanimously affirm their unconditional
loyalty to the Third Reich and its leader.'" (Johnson, p. 488).
He's meeting with Christian churches, talking with Christian leaders...
That hardly sounds like he's fighting a religious war now does it?
ed> Gunther contends that Hitler biggest priority was the unification of
ed> Germany, there had to be a removal from the Reich any competition which
ed> was international like the Vatican and Judaism.
And he used the tools that Christianity provided to do it with. No argument
here. The lesson to be learned from the bloody history of Christianity
is that one may use deity beliefs as a weapon of mass destruction against
innocent people for the unification and consolidation of power and control.
I don't dispute this fact. It evidences myself correct.
ed> Hitler considered Catholicism a dangerous enemy and had a
ed> campaign against the *black moles*, as Nazis called priests.
ed> Hitler also tried to install one his own men as an army
ed> chaplain in the Lutheran Church, so to he could have
ed> some control over it. It never seemed to work, however.
Welcome to how Christianity works, Ed. Or did you perhaps think that "confession"
inside of Christian churches has something to do with gods?
ed> Some of Hitler's followers turned to Paganism.
ed> They found the Norse myths to their liking.
"They [Nazis] fiercely rejected accusations that they were
atheists. Himmler declared that atheism would not be tolerated in
the ranks of the SS" (Paul Johnson's "A History of Christianity,"
p. 486).
Looks like your source got that one wrong as well.
-=-
If you would like some _secular_ sources which offer the truth about Adolf
Hitler, please let me know and I'll type them up for you.
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: All
|Sub: I find it amazing
|Date: 14 Apr 96 10:44:11
EID:c420 208e5585
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fd9
PID: FM 2.02
I'm finding it amazing that so many Christians are unwilling to accept the
fact that Adolf Hitler was a Christian. I expected fundies to deny the
truth and yet even Al is pretending otherwise. The phenomena continues
year after year, in fact, as Christians are exposed, caught, or reported
on television.
I can't help but wonder what these people want to pretend are "TRUE Christians."
It would appear to be that a "TRUE Christian" is the person making the claim
and that everyone else is a "FALSE Christian."
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Elliott Finesse
|Sub: Science vs. Occultism
|Date: 14 Apr 96 10:51:54
EID:ff3b 208e567b
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fda
REPLY: 1:215/130 001300f7
PID: FM 2.02
Jerry Gilbreath
Marty Leipzig
>> 53. Pleochroic halos, tiny spheres of discoloration produced by the
>> radioactive decay of particles that are encased in various crystals,
>> show that the earth's crust was NEVER in a molten state.
>> Furthermore, these halos suggest that the rate of radioactive decay
>> was NOT constant, and in fact, varied by MANY orders of magnitude
>> from that observed today.
Neat! Jerry's quoting from some religious tract using words he doesn't
understand to try to defend his continued belief in mythology! Gee. We
hardly ever see that done here!
ef> Now: I have heard on the echo that you are probably a "hit-and-run"
ef> creationist, so I do not think you will have the nerve to tackle
ef> _me_ on pleochroic halos: I have personally investigated them with
ef> truck, hammer, sample bags, microscope, CRC handbook of Chemistry
ef> and Physics, and considerable time eyeballing the little darlings
ef> and reference searching.
I can prophecy that he'll state that your science is in error -- if he responds
at all. When a Creationist can deny radiometric decay and all the other
dating sciences, they can deny _anything_.
By the way: If I extract tiny bones from a traditionally volcanic mountain
range along a dry riverbed, what's the easiest way to identify the animals
that used those bones? Are there books? And would I need to know the geological
age of the mountain range to limit my search?
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: The Raven
|Sub: Shove the other one in
|Date: 14 Apr 96 10:56:12
EID:e1a0 208e5706
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fdb
REPLY: 1:363/309.0 3169f2b3
PID: FM 2.02
FR> Jim Staal claimed that "the Rice brothers" made fun of his father's
FR> death. For this lie I shall punish Staal until he apologizes.
??> Why? You are certainly capable of such a tactless and idiotic
??> maneuver. On top of it all, you are enough of a shitlip to
??> actually do it.
Well it certainly seems as though you've shoved your foot in your mouth.
Staal already apologized for his unfounded accusation.
You're not a Creationist by any chance, are you?
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Jerry Gilbreath
|Sub: Magnetic field
|Date: 14 Apr 96 11:02:09
EID:08e1 208e5844
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fdc
REPLY: 1:130/113.2 316A3CD5
PID: FM 2.02
JG> and several dating methods for the earth indicate an approximate
JG> age of about 20,000 years or less.
DW> Which dating methods.
jg> The decay of the earth's magnetic field indicates an upper limit of
jg> about 10,000 years. This is based on studies by Dr. Thomas G. Barnes,
jg> Professor Emeritus of Physics at the University of Texas. You may want
jg> to read his book, Origin and Destiny of the Earth's Magnetic Field.
Barnes is a Creationist who doesn't subscribe to scientific method. His
wishful thinking has been utterly debunked by actual scientists. (See next
message. Read it fully. Save it to disk so you don't make the same mistake
of using a debunked Creationist again.)
In actual fact Barnes _lied_ about his percieved decay of the Earth's magnetic
field and _ignored_ the fact that the field changes over the years going
up and down over the centuries. He even ignores the Earth's poll reversals.
The next message debunks that claim utterly. I fully expect you to ignore
it.
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: All
|Sub: Earth's Magnetic Field
|Date: 14 Apr 96 11:12:02
EID:93db 208e5981
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fdd
PID: FM 2.02
To: Jerry Gilbreath
jg> The decay of the earth's magnetic field indicates an upper limit of
jg> about 10,000 years. This is based on studies by Dr. Thomas G. Barnes,
jg> Professor Emeritus of Physics at the University of Texas. You may want
jg> to read his book, Origin and Destiny of the Earth's Magnetic Field.
=====================================================================
Author: Tim Thompson (tjt@jpl.nasa.gov)
Title: Creation Science and Magnetic Fields
=====================================================================
In his report on the CalTech "Evolution and Creation" seminar,
Wayne Broughton mentioned Thomas Barnes' study claiming that analysis
of the earth's magnetic field proves that the earth cannot be over
10,000 years old. I have studied Barnes' claim, and I feel qualified
to talk about it.
Barnes published his study in the monograph "The Origin and Destiny
of the Earth's Magnetic Field", published in 1974(?) by the Creation
Research Society. No doubt there is a more recent "updated" edition,
but I have not seen one. Everything I say is based on the first
edition.
Thomas Barnes is emeritus professor of physics and planetary
science, University of Texas at El Paso. He has a B.A. in physics from
Hardin-Simmons College (now University), in Abilene, Texas, and an
M.A. in physics from Brown University. His doctorate is an honorary
degree, conferred by Hardin-Simmons University. He's an old timer, as
I recall his B.A. dates from the early 30's. He is the author of a
college textbook on electricity and magnetism. I cannot recall the
title, but I have seen it, and it looks like any other ordinary upper
division type E&M text, lots of Maxwell's equations, nothing peculiar
that I saw. This would lead on to believe that he should know what
he's talking about.
A brief outline of Barnes's claim goes like this:
1. Only the dipole component of the Earth's magnetic field is
generated in the core. All other components are either
ionospheric, telluric currents, or magnetic rocks.
2. Cowling's Theorem specifically prohibits the dynamo
maintenance of the Earth's magnetic field.
3. The dipole component of the Earth's magnetic field is
generated by circular currents in the core.
4. The dipole component is decaying along an exponential
5. The extrapolated exponential shows unacceptably high field
strengths upwards of 10,000 years ago.
Barnes never produces a satisfactory explanation of the first
claim. In his terminology, it's obvious that evolution scientists are
confusing "signal" (the dipole component), and "noise" (everything
else). Personally, I find it hard to believe that exploration
geophysicists would overlook a field of magnetic rocks big enough to
affect the quadropole moment of the earth's magnetic field. Also, the
spherical harmonic expression of the earth's magnetic field, as
produced by Gauss himself, clearly seperates field sources above and
below the earth's surface. That means the ionospheric components are
eliminated right from the start (they have been shown to average out
over long time periods anyway). Likewise, telluric currents should
average out over long time periods. And, of course, rocks don't move
much faster than the continents they ride on.
Cowling's theorem (Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical
Society, vol. 94, pp 39-48, 1934), by Thomas G. Cowling, proves that
dynamo generation will not support an axially symmetric field, nor one
that is similar, in the mathematical sense. Indeed, this would apply
to a pure dipole. Since the Earth's field is neither dipolar, nor
similar, Barnes must make claim number 1, in order to make any sense
at all. Barnes glosses over his first claim as if it were almost
trivial, and spends a great deal of time on Cowling's theorem. He is
quite ostentatious, in fact, and proud of his adherence to hard
mathematics, unlike the sloppy evolution scientists.
The whole thing is a setup. If he can't prove that ONLY the dipole
component is generated in the core, then his reliance on Cowling's
theorem is irrelevant. Neither proof, nor evidence are offered. In
fact this weakness destroys the entire concept at once. All the rest
of the work hinges on the acceptance of "dipole only" in the core.
The fun part is where he talks about exponential decay of the
field. Barnes fits an exponential function via least-squares, on a
CDC 6600, to 150 years of dipole data. I note in passing, his attitude
clearly implies that using the then giant CDC computer virtually
guarantees that his results can hardly be wrong. In comparing this
exponential fit of his to a standard linear fit, the probable errors
in the fitting coefficients are a few percent better for his
exponential. He immediately assumes the linear fit is wrong, the
exponential is right, and proceeds to the next step.
Having satisfied himself of the exponential fit, to 150 years of
data, he then extrapolates the curve back 10,000 years, derives an
enormous magnetic field strength, denounces it as ridiculously large
(at least that much is true), and then dismisses the idea that the
earth can be more than 10,000 years old.
Q.E.D.
I found the book in the library at Cal State L.A., along with a
number of other creation science texts. A lot more could be said.
Barnes fills pages with irrelevant ramblings, including his ability to
re-write equations found in older works (Horace Lamb, and Maxwell) in
more recent notation.
I think I have covered what is relevant, enough to show that
Barnes's work lacks merit, and substance. I see no reason to believe
that the earths' magnetic field implies that the earth canot be over
10,000 years old.
However, like any good research, Barnes's work has sparked further
inquiry. If you don't have a sense of humor, quit now and don't read
any further.
I draw your attention to the paper "The Creation of Planetary
Magnetic Fields", by D. Russell Humphreys, Quarterly Journal of the
Creation Research Society, vol. 21, December, 1984. Recieved 3
January, 1984, revised 14 August, 1984. This is a refereed, scientific
journal. It says that Humphreys has a PhD in physics, and is (was) a
physicist at Sandia National Laboratories. Here is the abstract of the
paper:
"God could have started magnetic fields in the solar system in a
very simple way: by creating the original atoms of the planets with
many of their nuclear spins pointing in the same direction. The small
magnetic fields of so many atomic nuclei add up to fields large enough
to account for the magnetism of the planets. Within seconds after
creation, ordinary physical events would convert the alignment of
nuclei into a large electric current circulating within each planet,
maintaining the magnetic field. The currents and fields would decay
steadily over thousands of years, as Barnes has pointed out. The
present magnetic field strengths of the Earth, Sun, Moon, and planets
agree very well with the values produced by this theory and a
6000-year age for the solar system. The theory is consistent with all
the known data and explains many facts which have puzzled
evolutionists."
Humphreys presumes that God made the sun, and all of the planets
out of water, which has a strong dipole. Line up enough dipoles, get a
big field, then God changes everything from water to the silicate/iron
type stuff we see now, leaving behind decaying magnetic fields.
For those of you who still think scientific creationism is
scientific, I leave you with a paragraph from Humphreys' "conclusions"
section:
"The Bible is scientifically accurate. A straightforward reading of
Scripture supplied the essentials of this theory: the possibility of
initial alignment, the water composition, and the short time scale.
The fact that the theory fits the facts shows that the scientist can
rely on the Bible for new insight into the natural world."
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Jerry Gilbreath
|Sub: Science vs. Superstition
|Date: 14 Apr 96 11:12:37
EID:3b02 208e5992
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fde
REPLY: 1:130/113.2 316A3CD5
PID: FM 2.02
There. If you need further debunking of Barnes, let me know and I'll provide
it. As it stands, I expect you to not make the same mistake again.
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Jerry Gilbreath
|Sub: Science vs. Superstition
|Date: 14 Apr 96 11:16:59
EID:3b02 208e5a1d
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fdf
REPLY: 1:130/113.2 316A3CD6
PID: FM 2.02
jg> Another method is the accumulation of meteoric dust. Remember the big
jg> pods on the legs of the first lunar lander? They found that there was
jg> NOT millions of years of dust accumulation on the moon as was once
jg> thought.
There's another debunked Creationist lie. (See the next message, copy it
to disk, and don't make the same mistake again.)
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: All
|Sub: Moon Dust
|Date: 14 Apr 96 11:18:20
EID:8930 208e5a4a
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fe1
PID: FM 2.02
Jerry Gilbreath
jg> Another method is the accumulation of meteoric dust. Remember the big
jg> pods on the legs of the first lunar lander? They found that there was
jg> NOT millions of years of dust accumulation on the moon as was once
jg> thought.
From: Ron Dippold
Subject: Re: Moon Dust Argument
- Lunar dust--only 1 to 3 inches, not 54 feet.
The calculation you refer to is given by Henry Morris on pp.
151-153 of _Scientific Creationism_. It is based on a grossly
erroneous figure of 14 million tons of meteoritic dust per
year, quoted by Petterson in 1960.
Morris misinterpreted Petterson's article. Petterson published a
figure of 15 (not 14) million tons per year as an _upper limit_.
In other words, Petterson said that the value is _not more than_
15 million tons per year. He was not able to measure an actual value.
Morris erroneously chose to interpret it to mean it was _equal_
to 14 million tons per year. Accurate values were measured in
the late 1960's. The actual value is -much- lower than 15 million
tons per year.
Dalrymple gives the value of 22,000 tons per year, nearly 700
times smaller than your figure. That changes your 54 foot figure
into about 2 cm, which is quite consistent with the amount of
surface soil the astronauts found on the Moon (it was considerably
more than 1-2 mm).
My copy of "Everyman's Astronomy" indicates that the earth
collects about 9000 kg per day from meteors of visual magnitude
5.0 or brighter. Assuming a typical rock density of 3 g/cc, this
corresponds to an accumulation rate of one inch per 10 billion
years.
Unfortunately no data is presented for fainter meteors. I wouldn't
be surprised to find accumulation rate of one inch per 10 billion
years. Unfortunately no data is presented for fainter meteors. I
wouldn't be surprised to find that the actual rate is one or two
orders of magnitude higher, but "1 inch in 8000 years" is off by
six orders of magnitude.
A dust accumulation rate of "one inch per 8000 years" should
create a spectacular yearround meteor shower, and cause severe
pitting of the space shuttle windshields in just a single orbit.
My quick estimates give values far higher than have been actually
observed.
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Jerry Gilbreath
|Sub: Science vs. Superstition
|Date: 14 Apr 96 11:19:33
EID:3b02 208e5a70
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fe2
REPLY: 1:130/113.2 316A3CD6
PID: FM 2.02
Do you get the feeling that every Creationist lie you unthinkinly mouth
has been utterly debunked a thousand times over? Well you should. Unless
you're a Creationist who believe it's perfectly acceptable to continue to
lie reguardless of how many times the truth is proven.
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Jerry Gilbreath
|Sub: Science vs. Supersition
|Date: 14 Apr 96 11:26:54
EID:8aac 208e5b5b
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fe3
REPLY: 1:130/113.2 316A3CD6
PID: FM 2.02
jg> Another method takes into account the shrinking size of the sun.
That one's also been debunked a thousand times. (See the next message,
save it to disk, and don't make the same mistake again.)
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: All
|Sub: The Shrinking Sun
|Date: 14 Apr 96 11:27:41
EID:2350 208e5b74
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fe5
PID: FM 2.02
Jerry Gilbreath
From: Carl Wilson
To: Jack Brannan Msg #108, 93-04-02 20:11:14
Subject: Re: Helium
-=> Quoting Jack Brannan to Carl Wilson <=-
JB> Carl I lost your original message on this, I wanted
JB> to reply to it. I have a question for you, you claim
JB> creationists are always misrepresenting facts (you and
JB> your fellow evolutionists), why have you done so here.
JB> No creationist has ever given a figure of 1% per year,
JB> creationists use the same data you do.
When I first saw the "Shrinking Sun Theory" some years ago,
(as told to me by a creationist on a BBS) a rate of
approximately 1% per year was given. A book titled, "Our
Turbulent Sun" was the source of this idea. In chapter 6,
"The Shrinking Sun", creationists took statements like the
following:
"The amount of apparent shrinkage was extraordinary."
"If the sun were to continue shrinking at the rate of 2
seconds or arc per century, it would disappear in 960
centuries."
They then used this and similar statements to come up with
the "Shrinking Sun Theory" to prove a young earth.
But, for some reason, they didn't see statements like the
following in the same chapter:
"No one, least of all Eddy and Boornazian, [the individuals
doing this research] thought that this [sun disappear in
96,000 years] was going to happen."
"The shrinkage was assumed to be taking place in the sun's
outer layer's, not the entire solar mass. Were it otherwise,
[entire mass shrinking] the shrinkage would have produced
more than 200 times the observed luminosity of the sun!"
JB> What is the figure given by mainstream science? No one
JB> disputes the shrinkage, only the rate and it is given as
JB> 1% per CENTURY as a high end figure, many think the figure
JB> is about 1/7th of this.
Actually, almost everyone disputes the shrinkage. Most
astronomers agree, that if anything, the sun is a bit
larger (about 6%) than it originally was. There may be
*temporary* shrinkages, but not a steady, permanent one.
Even the astronomer [Eddy] that thought that the sun was
shrinking said the following at the end of the chapter:
"I now feel that we were probably wrong."
And, "The Data looked like you could trust it."
He then goes into a lengthy discussion of how the data
was corrupted. The chapter closes with this last paragraph:
"It may be ten years before a long-enough record is compiled
to see a trend in any of these measurements. Then we may
know whether the studies of the past two years showing a
small decline in solar diameter have been a fascinating
but futile exercise of attempting to tease too much
information out of too-imprecise sets of measurements, or
whether the sun really is TEMPORARILY {caps mine} shrinking.
So whether the "Shrinking Sun Theory" rate is 1% per year or
per century, it really doesn't matter. The whole thing is based
on quoting a book out of context. Besides, the creationist that
told me about this should have had his "facts" straight when he
told me "1% per year".
JB> I have a question for you, you claim creationists are
JB> always misrepresenting facts (you and your fellow
JB> evolutionists), why have you done so here.
You were saying?
... Creationists either ignore the facts, or are ignorant of the facts.
From: Carl Wilson
To: Jack Brannan Msg #115, 93-04-02 23:37:30
Subject: Re: HELIUM
-=> Quoting Jack Brannan to Henry Shaw <=-
JB> The exact figures given by creationists are supplied by
JB> data from mainstream science which shows a shrinkage rate
JB> during the last 100 plus years of 1% per CENTURY, not
JB> yearly. Creationist literature also says quite plainly
JB> this figure is contested and may be as low as 1/7 of that
JB> rate. Data from the past 400 years has also been
JB> used (eclipse) to confirm shrinkage. This study was
JB> published on Physics Today, which is not a creationist
JB> journal.
And you still ignore the fact that there is NO evidence of
constant shrinkage since the formation of the solar system.
THAT is the key to the SciCre, young earth theory known as the
"Shrinking Sun Theory". If you *really* think there is all
this evidence that the sun's been shrinking at a constant rate
during its entire lifetime, then read the astronomy books
yourself and post your findings here. While the idea that the
sun may be going through a *cyclic* shrinkage *might* be
supported by some, you would be very hard pressed to find a
single astronomer or astrophysicist that would claim a *constant*
shrinkage since the sun formed. And without the constant
shrinkage, your "young earth" based on the "Shrinking Sun
Theory" falls to pieces.
And I also find it very unlikely that precise measurements of
the needed accuracy were being performed 400 years ago. Tycho
Brahe (1546-1601) was reputed as being able to take the most
accurate measurements of celestial body positions of any
astronomer of his day. He was able to take measurements
accurate to about 1 minute of arc. Very good considering. To
be able to measure a shrinkage of 1% per century, you would
have to be able to take measurements showing a change of a few
*seconds* of arc. And if the actual shrinkage is really 1/7
of that, these 16th century astronomers were taking measurements
that late 19th century astronomers would envy.
... "Scientific Creation": Just religion in disguise..
---
* Origin: Creationist: Why yes, Rome _was_ built in a day. (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Jerry Gilbreath
|Sub: Science vs. Superstition
|Date: 14 Apr 96 11:28:12
EID:d770 208e5b86
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fe6
REPLY: 1:130/113.2 316A3CD6
PID: FM 2.02
So far you're batting 000. Can't you Creationists come up with anything
new?
---
* Origin: Creationist: Why yes, Rome _was_ built in a day. (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Jerry Gilbreath
|Sub: Science vs. Superstition
|Date: 14 Apr 96 11:36:24
EID:d770 208e5c8c
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fe7
REPLY: 1:130/113.2 316A3CD6
PID: FM 2.02
jg> Another depends on the rate at which alpha
jg> decay of uranium in granite releases helium.
Woops! Not only did you mistates your master's occultism, this one's also
been debunked a thousand times before. (See next message, read it, save
it to disk, and don't make the same mistake again.)
---
* Origin: Creationist: Why yes, Rome _was_ built in a day. (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: All
|Sub: Helium Escape
|Date: 14 Apr 96 11:36:49
EID:b726 208e5c98
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fe8
PID: FM 2.02
Jerry Gilbreath
Argument IV quotes some CRC handbooks for the following
data: temperature at top of atmosphere, escape velocity,
and the atomic weight of helium, and uses Maxwell's
distribution to calculate that under the most extreme
conditions only 1.4E-7 of the He atoms could escape. The
unstated inference is that, since we don't all sound like
Donald Duck, the earth is too young for a lot of helium
to have accumulated.
This last argument was too blatantly wrong to ignore so
I wrote them the following letter:
Dear Sir:
The CRSQ 24(3), page 153, appendix IV has an error
concerning the escape of helium from the atmosphere.
Although at given time only a few atoms are fast enough
to escape, they are constantly re-equilibrating so that
other helium atoms are soon going fast enough to escape.
Using the Rubber Company tables without having had an
introductory thermo course illustrates Keats's comment
about a little learning.
Sincerely yours,
Wm. Randolph Franklin
Associate Professor
They published my letter in vol 25, n 1, June 1988, pp54-55,
with a reply by Benton. He said that the theory "implicitly
assumed continuous replenishment". Then he contradicted
himself: "Because helium is continuously produced and very
little of this escapes (only 1.4 in 10 million), one may infer
that for practical purposes, the helium now present in the
atmosphere is essentially the accumulation of that which
has been produced, plus whatever original helium there may
have been."
The editor also deleted my title (Assoc Prof) from my letter
but included Benton's (PhD).
Comments:
1. When I wrote my letter, I thought he was just overeager
and ignorant -- not knowing about the re-equilibration and
that it takes place fast -- nothing really wrong with that.
2. After reading his response, I have to conclude that,
assuming that he was not deliberately being deceptive with
this argument, he and I really reason about physics in quite
different modes.
3. The editor either does not closely examine the arguments
of papers he publishes, or his reviewers let him down.
4. For people who "appeal to reason," some creationists
are quite sensitive to titles. My next letter, if any, to
them will end
Wm. Randolph Franklin (BSc Trawna, AM & PhD Harvard,
former Visiting Prof UC Berzerkley,
Assoc Prof Rainsallyear Poly,
NSF Presidential Young Investigator)
(The above titles are for the purposes of intimidation only
and are not meant to be construed as agreement with these
opinions by the named organizations).
Wm. Randolph Franklin, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
---
* Origin: Creationist: Why yes, Rome _was_ built in a day. (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Jerry Gilbreath
|Sub: Science vs. Superstition
|Date: 14 Apr 96 11:37:08
EID:d770 208e5ca4
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fe9
REPLY: 1:130/113.2 316A3CD6
PID: FM 2.02
Go back to your masters and ask for a refund.
---
* Origin: Creationist: Why yes, Rome _was_ built in a day. (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Lynda Bustilloz
|Sub: Hardly wants a "kill?"
|Date: 14 Apr 96 11:47:11
EID:4744 208e5de5
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fea
REPLY: 1:109/601.0 3169bb2c
PID: FM 2.02
MH> I find I stand in some confusion over how to respond. I feel no joy
MH> in a "kill," as there is no victory won here. Anyone who thinks there
MH> is is misguided.
lb> Actually, I wasn't thinking any from the christian camp
lb> *WOULD* consider it a kill, as the stated mission of
lb> christianity is to bring people in, not turn them out.
lb> I'm a bit bemused that you felt that particular line
lb> pertained to you...
"...as there is no victory won here..." Since you're breaking free from
an oppressive, anti-woman, dogmatic men's-only club, I would call that a
definite victory.
---
* Origin: Creationist: Why yes, Rome _was_ built in a day. (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: DAVID RICE
|Sub: Adolph Hitler: Christian
|Date: 14 Apr 96 12:13:55
EID:5d42 208e61bb
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896feb
PID: FM 2.02
Elliott Finesse
FR> Adolf Hitler was no different than the thousands of
FR> tyranical, murdering Christians which came before him
EF> True, with one exception: Hitler wasn't a Christian.
dr> Historians, of course, know otherwise: Hitler was
dr> a Christian. He stated so many, many times.
Not to mention the fact that we have documents from official Christian church
masters who were in absolute agreement with what Adolf Hitler was doing.
I expect fundies to deny the truth. Elliott would appear to be a heathen,
however.
---
* Origin: Creationist: Why yes, Rome _was_ built in a day. (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: DAVID RICE
|Sub: Waco Rememberance
|Date: 14 Apr 96 12:22:07
EID:6903 208e62c3
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fec
PID: FM 2.02
>>CO> the other hand the bd's were asking for it. when people
>>CO> knowingly allow children to be abused, they are
>>CO> themselves partners in that crime. And they seemed to
>>CO> want to emmolate themselves, much in the traditions of
>>CO> Buddhist Monks during Vietnam.
dr> Never, as far as I have read and heard from David "Koreth,"
dr> did he consider himself "the second comming of Jesus" or a
dr> "Christ." He did state he was a "lamb of god," i.e. one of
dr> the profits, as in the traditional Hebrew / Jewish manner.
He employed rhetoric which Christians use to describe the "Jesus" mythos,
though. He _did_ claim that he'll be back, however, and many Christians
believe that he has, in fact, returned.
FR> There was no child abuse at the Davidian
FR> compound. That was a government lie.
dr> That sort of depends on what one considers "child abuse."
One of the claims used to inflame the masses was one of sexual child abuse.
dr> The Davidians appeared no less a danger to children as
dr> Church of Christ churches, or Assemblies of God churches.
Or Jehova Witnesses or Mormons, for that matter. Or Catholics, Protestants
et al.
dr> It is said that David "Koreth" considered himself "married"
dr> to the girl children, though no sign of sexual abuse was
dr> discovered. If that in itself is a crime, then Neil Sadaka
dr> should be locked up for all those teeny-bopper songs he's
dr> written and sung. :-)
The state of Texas has laws anyway which allows a parent to decide whether
a minor may marry.
FR> What the Davidians _were_ doing was using their children
FR> as hostages and putting them into fatal danger -- something
FR> each and every one of the Davidians should have been
FR> Locked-up for doing.
dr> Perhaps "hostage" fits, perhaps it does not. From their
dr> perspective, they were defending their children from Satan
dr> (i.e. Satan's power on Earth, the U.S.A. government). Their
dr> Christian beliefs required an anti-Christ-controlled power,
dr> and they believed that power would apply itself against god's
dr> last holdout on Earth: the Davidians.
The BATF and FBI treated the Christians inside as hostages when in fact
they were inside the compound on their own free will and allowed to leave
and come as they wished.
And yeah, the BATF certainly proved David Koresh was right.
dr> If the BATF had said "Send up your children," I cannot
dr> imagine the Davidians believing anything less than that evil
dr> would befall their children if they had done so. From the
dr> perspective of the Davidians, sending their children out to
dr> the BATF may have been equal to Jews sending their children
dr> out to the Nazis.
Which is why I equated the Davidians with the slaughter/suicide at Masada.
dr> Why the fuck the BATF and Janet Reno refused to understand
dr> this problem is anyone's guess.
Their number 1 goal was to reinstate the BATF as a useful organization safeguarding
the public from gun nuts and terrorists. No one wanted the BATF men and
equipment -- the FBI was asked and they turned them down. The DEA agreed
to accept the equipment yet didn't want the men or offices because the BATF
were and continue to be fuck-ups.
FR> What kind of lunatic fucks would store half a million
FR> rounds of ammunition and bomb-making materials next door
FR> to where 30 + children sleep at night?
dr> I live 40 miles upwind of a nuclear reactor (San Onofry).
dr> What kind of lunatic fucks would build a nuclear reactor
dr> 20 miles upwind of a major city (San Diego)?
Well there's that, yes. }:-} BTW: When _are_ we going to take care of
that?
---
* Origin: Creationist: Why yes, Rome _was_ built in a day. (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: DAVID RICE
|Sub: Gods in Evolutionary Theory
|Date: 14 Apr 96 12:26:06
EID:ad0e 208e6343
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fed
PID: FM 2.02
FR> What _IS_ it with Creationists who want to pretend
fR> they're not Creationists? They know that Creationists
fR> are nothing if not dishonest yet they want to slide
FR> under that fact by demanding they're not Creationists
FR> while at the same time spouting the Creationist
FR> occultism lie for lie.
dr> It's the same with Fundamentalists who claim there were
dr> "atheists" untill "the evidence" convinced them they were
dr> wrong. The same emotional illness is involved.
Or the "born against" Christianics who pretend they were "Satanists" when
they were Wiccans or Pagans and come up with all kinds of lies to try to
fit in with their new cult.
dr> It's also the same illness that causes Fundamentalists to
dr> claim dead non-believers were really believers just before
dr> they died.
Ah, yes. Death bed "confessions." They put words into Robert Ingersol's
mouth years after he died, too. And Einstein. And Darwin (who was always
a Christian and a Creationist.)
>>DR> Since no one knows the properties of the gods
>>DR> (electrical charge, chemical bonds, viscosity,
>>DR> temperature, etc.), it seems utterly impossible
>>DR> to me to include them in Evolutionary Theory.
>>DR> Maybe John can do so.
dr> But I doubt it.
Leave that attempt up to Lee W. }:-}
FR> I'll see how he works Peter Pan into mathematics first,
FR> I think.
dr> I spent the previous five minutes pondering how gods could be
dr> added to Evolutionary Theory, but I cannot come up with any
dr> way to do so.
Well, not rationally, any way.
---
* Origin: Creationist: Why yes, Rome _was_ built in a day. (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: DAVID RICE
|Sub: Quote: ROTFL!
|Date: 14 Apr 96 12:31:43
EID:2701 208e63f5
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fee
PID: FM 2.02
>>DR> Talk about FUNNY: get a load of this shit---
>>>BJ> Hello Sean. You sound like a very learned man, and yet
>>>BJ> you still don't believe in Jesus Christ.
dr> "Hello Sean. You sounds like a very safe, sane man, and
dr> yet you still don't blast your brains out with a shotgun."
"Hi, Sean. You sound like a very learned man and
yet you still don't rape alter boys and hate blacks."
---
* Origin: Creationist: Why yes, Rome _was_ built in a day. (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Mark Craig
|Sub: Divine Retribution
|Date: 14 Apr 96 12:32:25
EID:a8ba 208e640c
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896fef
REPLY: 1:123/318.0 316ab075
PID: FM 2.02
mc> God is not mocked Trinity! Jim Bakker and Jimmy Swaggart tried
mc> to make a fool out of God, and look what happened to them.
They succeeded in showing what Christianity is all about.
---
* Origin: Creationist: Why yes, Rome _was_ built in a day. (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Martin Goldberg
|Sub: Bill Wolff
|Date: 14 Apr 96 12:34:57
EID:b714 208e645c
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896ff0
REPLY: 1:124/9005.221 6515cac7
PID: FM 2.02
BW> Lie Marty.
mg> Do you honestly think that we are as stupid as you Billy. You are a
mg> wannabe evolutionist who wlazted in here telling lies and getting
mg> caught. No amount of quoted material will save you now, Moron. You
mg> ahve committed your libel on Dr. Sagan.
Well he _could_ admit he's a Creationist liar (redundant, I know) and he
_could_ agree that he is incapable of telling the truth. 'Course I still
wouldn't believe him -- he's _STILL_ trying to put words into Carl Sagan's
mouth.
Just like fundies when they put death-bed "confessions" into atheist's mouths.
---
* Origin: Creationist: Why yes, Rome _was_ built in a day. (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Martin Goldberg
|Sub: evidence...
|Date: 14 Apr 96 12:36:59
EID:baa8 208e649d
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34896ff1
REPLY: 1:124/9005.221 6515cfc4
PID: FM 2.02
GW> That's not very nice... pilgrim. I would personally like to
GW> invite you to attend my class on Tae Kwon Do that starts Jun
GW> 19 at the Kettering college. I'll be teaching.
mg> Isn't this nice. No evidence, so he posts a threat.
Damn! I missed it! I should read all of a Creationist's postings, I suppose,
yet it's pointless since they don't make any new claims.
---
* Origin: Creationist: Why yes, Rome _was_ built in a day. (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Katherine Wintersnight
|Sub: Adolph Hitler WAS a Christian. Get OVER IT!
|Date: 14 Apr 96 17:47:49
EID:5116 208e8df8
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 34917893
REPLY: 1:381/123@fidonet.org 84e8bf04
PID: FM 2.02
JG>AND women must learn respect for one another. The scars that a woman
has
JG>learned to leave upon men, are not physical, they are mental and so there
JG>are no polaroid snapshots that can be presented in a trial. And of course
JG>society still laughs at a man who allows a woman to abuse him. Women
also
JG>must bear the curse of their own aggressiveness, and sadly their children
JG>must also bear the curse of a woman who has chased her husband out of
the
JG>home and marriage through constant verbal abuse, free from the previous
JG>threat of physical defence once used by men. Some men on the other hand
kw> This is pathetic. A man who can only defend himself with his fist is
kw> not a man. He is not even an animal (I would not so insult animals).
kw> These are the attitudes that earn so many christian men the scorn and
kw> pity of others. How weak a man you describe, that a hurtful comment
is
kw> enough to 'scar his mind'. How broken by his 'god' and his religious
kw> masters he is.
[...cuts...]
That was well said. When I observe "family arguments" -- television's way
of depicting wife beatings and attempted murder -- I can't help but feel
those who would beat their wives or their husbands are something less than
human. I find it no different than parents who murder their children.
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: All
|Sub: Human rights is a secular idea
|Date: 15 Apr 96 21:08:33
EID:ec53 208fa910
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 351520b2
PID: FM 2.02
>> God damn your god damned old hellfired god damned soul to hell
>> god damn you and goddam your god damned family's god damned
>> hellfired god damned soul to hell and good damnation god damn
>> them and god damn your god damned friends to hell.
>> -- Letter to Abraham Lincoln, signed Pete Muggins, 1860
> You're kidding; this is a real quotation of a
> letter sent to Abraham Lincoln?
> Mike T
Mike,
In James A. Haught's book 'Holy Horrors' (Haught was then associate
editor of the Charleston Gazette) he writes:
"In another area of human rights, many Christian clergymen advocated
slavery. Historian Larry Hise notes in his book 'Pro-Slavery' that
ministers 'wrote almost half of all defenses of slavery published in
America.' He lists 275 men of the cloth who used the Bible to prove
that white people were entitled to own black people as work animals."
This follows a supporting testimony by the scholar Arthur Schlesinger
Jr. in a 1989 speech:
"As a historian, I confess to a certain amusement when I hear the
Judeo-Christian tradition praised as the source of our present-day
concern for human rights, that is, for the valuable idea that all
individuals everywhere are entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit
of happiness on this earth. In fact, the great religious ages were
notable for their indifference to human rights in the contemporary
sense. They were notorious not only for acquiescence in poverty,
inequality, exploitation, and oppression, but also for enthusiastic
justification of slavery, persecution, abandonment of small children,
torture, and genocide.
"During most of the history of the West ... religion enshrined
and vindicated hierarchy, authority, and inequality, and had no
compunction about murdering heretics and blasphemers. Until the end
of the 18th century, torture was normal investigative procedure in
the Catholic church as well as in most European state...
"Human rights is not a religious idea. It is a secular idea, the
product of the last four centuries of Western history. Tocqueville
persuasively attributed the humanitarian ethic to the rise of the
idea of equality... It was the age of equality that brought about the
disappearance of such religious appurtenances as the auto-da-fe
and burning at the stake, the abolition of torture and of public
executions, the emancipation of the slaves... The basic human rights
documents - the American Declaration of Independence and the French
Declaration of the Rights of Man - were written by political, not by
religious, leaders."
I cannot recall where I read a reference to Abraham Lincoln's
claim that the older and more experienced he became the less faith he
had in Christianity being a force of good intentions, but it
certainly would appear plausible that the political symbol of
emancipation of American slaves would receive abundant
amounts of hate-mail from the righteous. I am likewise sure that, as
Taner Edis and Larry Hise demonstrate, it is well documented.
Faithfully yours,
Donald Buckley
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: All
|Sub: What sex are you?
|Date: 15 Apr 96 21:25:04
EID:24c4 208fab22
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 35156989
PID: FM 2.02
"So... Which sex are you?"
"I don't know. My doctor hasn't told me yet."
_______________________________
(c) 1996 Baltimore Sun. All rts. reserv.
WHAT ARE YOU: MALE, MERM, HERM, FERM OR FEMALE?
BALTIMORE MORNING SUN (BS) - Sunday March 17, 1996
By: William O. Beeman
Edition: F Section: Perspective Page: 1F
Word Count: 1,054
TEXT:
ARE THE CATEGORIES "man" and "woman" so obviously clear that
they need no further explanation?
Legislators throughout the nation trying to prevent the recognition of
"gay marriage" contracted in other states obviously think so. They have
introduced legislation that would grant official recognition only to
marriages between "a man and a woman."
Perhaps Mr. Burns and the other legislators who are pushing these bills
don't realize it, but their passage would unwittingly nullify or prevent
millions of supposedly heterosexual marriages.
Why? Because the marriage partners will not meet the medical definition
of being "a man and a woman." To make matters worse, most of these couples
will not know that they are illegally married.
Between 3 million and 10 million Americans are neither male nor female
at birth. Additionally, as adults they may be genetically of the opposite
gender from that which they and their parents believe them to be.
The medical term for persons of ambiguous gender is "intersexual."
Estimates of the numbers of persons who may be born intersexual ranges from
1 percent to 4 percent of all children born today, according to Dr. Anne
Fausto-Sterling of the Division of Biology and Medicine at Brown
University.
The difficulty in determining clear-cut specification of gender arises
because there are at least three ways to define it. Two are biological and
one is cultural.
The first biological definition defines gender in terms of chromosomes.
Males have an X and a Y chromosome. Females have two X chromosomes. The
second biological definition assigns gender in terms of male and female
genitalia.
In the third, "cultural" definition, males are people who lookand act
"male," and females are people who look and act "female." Americans
generally want everyone to fit the third, cultural definition, even when
people have biological characteristics that are not strictly in accord with
a two-gender system.
One cause of intersexuality seems to be the posession of an abnormal
number of chromosomes only one or more than two. A second cause stems from
the fact that all humans, no matter what their chromosomal makeup, have
the
biological capacity to develop either male or female genitalia and
secondary sexual characteristics while in the womb. Developmentally, some
babies are born with male or female chromosomal makeup and with both male
and female genitalia, or with some of the genitalia of the opposite
chromosomal sex.
Dr. Fausto-Sterling points out that there is a smooth continuum between
100 percent biologically male and 100 percent biologically female with many
possibilities in between. She calls those with both testes and ovaries
"herms." Those with testes and some female genitalia but no ovaries are
"merms." Those with ovaries and some male genitalia but no testes are
"ferms." This gives the possibility of five rough biological groupings:
male, merm, herm, ferm and female.
Most intersexual Americans are unaware of their true biological gender
because under current medical practice, physicians reassign the gender of
intersexual infants at birth. Such infants are surgically altered and given
hormonal treatments so that they will fit into one of the two "cultural"
categories male or female. The test is usually not chromosomal, but rather
based on the "viability" of the genitalia to eventually appear normal.
Often the parents are not fully informed about what is happening to
their children.
Dr. Fausto-Sterling calls this medical reassignment a "surgical
shoehorn" designed to force intersexed infants into rigid cultural
categories that have little to do with biological reality.
As a result, there are perhaps millions of XX males and XY females
living in the United States today. These are cultural males with male
genitalia who are genetically female, and cultural females with female
genitalia who are genetically male. The film star Jamie Lee Curtis is one
well-known individual who is genetically male, but phenotypically female.
The legislators have obviously not consulted with scientists in their
zeal to eliminate "gay marriage."
William O. Beeman is an associate professor of anthropology at Brown
University.
Pub Date: 3/17/96
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Katherine Wintersnight
|Sub: Gods in your pockets?
|Date: 17 Apr 96 06:27:21
EID:2ebe 2091336a
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 36066aa5
REPLY: 1:381/123@fidonet.org f671f2b7
PID: FM 2.02
FR> My guess is that the gods in his pockets run out of ink
fr> quickly when they're constantly writing their words and
fr> signing orders for the execution of whole cities of people
fr> and stuff.
kw> Either that, or the gods hiding in his pocket are stealing the pens
to
kw> limit the spread of hurtful, heathen writings. Poor things, I guess
kw> they never heard of computers (or perhaps they are the driving force
kw> behind Win95?). Now, just what is it that Yahweh is doing with Dan's
kw> socks? Do you think that he (or maybe it's Jesus) has a fetish?
Hey! The Christian gods will NOT be mocked!
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Jim Germiquet
|Sub: Adolph Hitler Was a Christian.
|Date: 17 Apr 96 06:29:37
EID:61cd 209133b2
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 36066aa6
PID: FM 2.02
FR> You're ignoring the foundation of the Christanic death cult as well
as
FR> the history of the death cult entirely. A Christian is known by their
FR> hatred and resentment of all that is good. A Christian is known by
FR> their justification of ANY tyranny by using their deity constructs.
A
FR> Christian is known by every single expression of evil that men can and
FR> will do.
jg> Some very SELECTIVE reasoning is obviously being used here, and denies
jg> all that good that has been done in the name Of Jesus Christ, including
You're ignoring entirely why the Christanic death cult was created, what
it was created for, and how it's been used and continues to be used.
History shows us that religion is a tool. You're a prime example of what
that tool does to people.
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Jim Germiquet
|Sub: Jim Germiquet is ONE evil pig
|Date: 17 Apr 96 06:31:22
EID:a6cd 209133eb
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 36066aa7
PID: FM 2.02
FR> Denying what your death cult stands for merely allows people like you
FR> to repeat it -- drive that body count up, Jim, and then demand that
the
FR> innocent people you raped and slaughtered were better off dead.
FR> Demanding that rape and slaughter were "normal" entertainments enjoyed
FR> by your fellow death cultists merely proves my point.
jg> These messages have got to be drug induced :-) Sounds
jg> like paranoia running rampant. Do you use speed ?
My guess is you can't deny the truth so you try to concoct yet another fantasy
in your mind to try to escape it.
In actual fact YOU are the one who said it's a good idea to murder surviving
family members when the father is killed. That's the Christanic death cult
programming you've recieved talking.
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: The Easter Bunny
|Sub: Watch Jesse Christ Jones
|Date: 17 Apr 96 06:36:35
EID:6b8e 20913491
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 36066aa8
REPLY: 1:363/309 57098b24
PID: FM 2.02
>> Watch Jesse Christ Jones try to pretend that Easter has
>> something to do with his cult. A BUCK! says he'll try to
>> pretend that the Fertility Goddess has nothing to do with it.
teb> i am glad this only comes once a year; the
teb> goddamn eggs were tearing my ass up...
I always wanted to ge with you one year and video tape this thing then do
a write-up for some major biology journals. }:-}
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Dan Ceppa
|Sub: 1 god plus 1 god plus
|Date: 17 Apr 96 06:37:14
EID:bf9a 209134a7
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 36066aa9
REPLY: 1:350/401.0 895B0E1E
PID: FM 2.02
JS> Actually, it has been a couple of months, but who's counting? Fred
JS> won't let me leave...and I would hate to disappoint him. I am, however,
JS> attempting to take a bit of a different approach than I did in the
JS> last 5 months of 1995.
dc> What are you going to do? Attempt to sound intelligent?
He's going to post sober.
---
* Origin: Drug or drinking problem? Call 1-800-662-HELP (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Carl Linde
|Sub: Rules of conference
|Date: 17 Apr 96 06:43:41
EID:666e 20913574
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 36066aaa
REPLY: 1:130/113.2 316B3564
PID: FM 2.02
cl> In regards to the language that some of these people (and I
cl> use the term loosely, VERY loosely) use, only shows that their
cl> vocabulary is indeed limited and not of sound moral character!!!
Yet another one who wants to play "let's pretend."
Words aren't magic, Carl. They can't hurt you. You are trying to pretend
that there are some words which, when used, evidence the intelligence and
morality of the individual.
That's as idiotic as "reading" the bumps on someone's head and pretending
to determine their intelligence and morality from it.
If you want to pretend words are magic, take it to I_UFO. Thanks in advance.
---
* Origin: That's mighty atheist of you! (1:102/890)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 218/801
PATH: 102/890
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Grant Farrington
|Sub: Tithe: Bilk the ignorant. Stupidity tax.
|Date: 21 Apr 96 07:18:07
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 38072904
REPLY: 3:640/201.3 316bc2dd
PID: FM 2.02
FR> Which merely serves to prove my point. No one can learn the origins
FR> of the classical Christanic mythologies and remain a believer in same.
gf> This is one of the big problems IMO. There's so much "control code"
gf> built into the Bible to keep believers away from searching out the
gf> truth. Everything they do, all study ect is all handed down by thier
gf> masters.
How better to maintain control and bilk the ignorant?
I just watched 18 minutes of a Christanic master at work on the telebitchen.
This guy was shameless! As I was changing channels I heard the word "tithe"
and stopped to watch this guy "explain" why their gods want them to give
money to them. The guy went skimming through the Christanic mythologies
to "justify" his claim on their money.
If I hadn't seen it with my own eyes I would not have believed it. Also
I can't help but be amazed that such bunko isn't made against the law and
these scam artists fined and locked up.
gf> Reading anything else, like science journals for instance, is
gf> deemed bad as everyone knows this is Satan's world so everything
gf> not connected to worshiping Jehovah is of Satan.
We've all noticed that here, yeah. I think that if Christanic masters could
get away with it, they would ban reading and writing as "tools of the devil"
and go back to banning the public's ownership of the Christian mythologies
so they can "keep the lay people from false interpretations."
gf> I haven't met a believer yet who thought that science wasn't bad. How
gf> could they think anything else ? Science ridicules most of what the
gf> Bible says.
I've met a few. Damn few.
~*~ I see faith in your eyes, never you hear the discouraging lies. I hear
faith in your cries. Broken is the promise. Betrayal. - METALLICA
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Terry Liberty-Parker
|Sub: Right wing extremists
|Date: 21 Apr 96 07:19:15
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 38072905
REPLY: 1:382/804.0 16be5166
PID: FM 2.02
> In this update: Yet Another CDA Lawsuit: Fred Cherry v. Janet Reno
> Deception and deceit from DoJ's Jason Baron
> URLs for the DoJ's dirty picture list
> The true identity of Grey Flannel Suit
Boy there's a conspiracy behind every street corner with you right-wing
extremists lunatics, huh?
~*~ Another disenfranchised quasibiped from the MTV school of debate.
- Marty Leipzig
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Mark Barnett
|Sub: ANGEL FUNDY
|Date: 21 Apr 96 07:22:55
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 38072906
REPLY: 1:3819/163 316B4528
PID: FM 2.02
mb> Thanks that is the best compliment I have had today.
FR> Yep, you're in the same death cult that
FR> Adolf Hitler was. Feels good, huh?
mb> Well their are always some miss giuded people in anything.
"Some?" Take a look at the history of the Christanic death cult, Mark.
Hitler did exactly what the tool of Christianity was created for. Nearly
ALL of European Christianity were signatories to statements of agreement
on what Hitler was about.
If you _learn_ a little about the death cult, you couldn't morally persist
in pretending to believe in it.
mb> Take a look at some of the scientist in the world,
mb> not all of them are real nice.
Oh? Like who? Give me two names. Thanks.
mb> In any group you can find some bad apples.
In Christianity you find a deadly ideology which seeks to include thwe unaffected
in their followers delusions.
mb> Your Brother in Christ,
Case in point. Here we see why the Christanic death cult has the history
it does. Your wish to include your intellectual superiors in your deadlty
delusions is historically the single most deadly aspect of the cult.
~*~ "The residential apartment complex's first floor was leveled in the
earthquake...crushing many penises in the process." - Steve Rose
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Mark Barnett
|Sub: Angel Fundy
|Date: 21 Apr 96 07:25:03
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 38072907
REPLY: 1:3819/163 316B4529
PID: FM 2.02
>>> but no promises he thinks I have fell in
>>> with the devil because I talk to you all.
FR> That's pretty ignorant, I hope you realize.
mb> That I can agree with.
FR> Welcome to all that the Christanic death cult has to offer its sheep.
mb> Well I will have to disagree with this statment.
mb> Not all Christian leaders are that unfair.
They most certainly are. You seem to be laboring under some missguided
delusion that Christanic masters oppress and control you for your own good.
Each time you dig into your pocket to give your death cult masters money,
try remembering what is foremost in the minds of your masters.
~*~ But lets face it, if politicians weren't allowed to lie, half the
time they'd have trouble saying their own names. - Paul Feonic
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Mark Barnett
|Sub: ANGEL FUNDY
|Date: 21 Apr 96 07:28:22
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 38072908
REPLY: 1:3819/163 316B452A
PID: FM 2.02
FR> Try reading it once. Then get back to us with
FR> evidence that there are deities. Thanks in advance.
mb> I am about a third of the way throught it in a read it in a year plan.
FR> Don't you think it's rather silly to read a book of mythology
FR> going in alrea believing it's describing deities that you want
FR> to exist? Aren't you capabl of understanding that doing so is
FR> no different than picking up a Wonder Woma Comic book and
FR> trying to find a reason to believe that Wonder Woman exists?
mb> not realy the same thing.
Denial of the truth is pretty silly when you can't come up with some _reason_
why you're denying it, Mark. There must be _SOME_ reason why you couldn't
come up with an example on how Wonder Woman and your master's deity constructs
are "not the same thing."
Now why is that?
FR> Why not read some SCIENCE books, Mark?
mb> Read sevral and am only 6 hour sort of my computer
mb> programing degree. thanks for the tip.
Your statement shows that you know nothing of science. You seem to want
to pretend that computer programing requires science. It doesn't.
At least now we see why you believe in invisible Alpha Male constructs.
~*~ We are all in need of salvation. I may not know you, but knowing you
are an atheist, I know you need to be saved. It must be extremely
difficult to be an atheist? - Scott Shiflett, HolySmoke
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Mark Barnett
|Sub: Angel Fundy
|Date: 21 Apr 96 07:30:12
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 38072909
REPLY: 1:3819/163 316B452B
PID: FM 2.02
FR> In any event, the myth's origins were taken from the
FR> Gilgamesh epic. The Chinese would have noticed their
FR> own extermination had the legend been true.
mb> That is realy an intersting statment.
Do you admit that it's correct? Or do you wish to want to pretend that
the Chinese reallty don't have a written history that goes back over 11,000
years? Do you wish to pretend that they _were_ wiped out in the Glilgamesh
flood only they actually survived and no one noticed?
~*~ Hey, man, that's straight from satan's hell. - Phil Morrison
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Mark Barnett
|Sub: ANGEL FUNDY
|Date: 21 Apr 96 07:31:07
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 3807290a
REPLY: 1:3819/163 316B4525
PID: FM 2.02
PS> Now then, if by some accident, all of the water on earth were
ps> to be in liquid form and dumped onto the surface of the earth,
ps> you'd still need two entire more hydrospheres of water to do
ps> the job the flood describes.
mb> ok if you say so I have not looked that up.
Is that an admission that the mythology _is_ myth?
~*~ ARE THE MAJORITY OF YOU PEOPLE BABY RAPERS only held back from your
demented idealisms of torture and mayhem because of the constraints
ordained in the constitution? - David Stoddard
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Mark Barnett
|Sub: Angel fundy
|Date: 21 Apr 96 07:32:29
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 3807290b
REPLY: 1:3819/163 316B4527
PID: FM 2.02
KDM> The Big Bang? Sorry, there's evidence for that.
mb> very shakey evidence.
You have admitted that you don't understand science, Mark.
I would gather you couldn't explain the 3 degree Kelvin background radiation
and why it's not isotrophic across the visible universe, huh?
~*~ "The Christian glories in the death of a pagan, because
thereby Christ himself is glorified." -- Saint Bernard of Clairvaux
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: J.J. Hitt
|Sub: Your Daily Alien
|Date: 21 Apr 96 07:41:05
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 3807290c
REPLY: 1:106/9788.2 651cbc59
PID: FM 2.02
> Paleoanthropology Division
> Smithsonian Institute
> 207 Pennsylvania Avenue
> Washington, DC 20078
[..cuts...] Love it!
There's something good coming from Mooth's mindless Christian rants. }:-}
~*~ "Who fought the Gorgon Medussa?" -- Marshall Shapiro
"Perseus. But some of his buddies got stoned in the
process." -- Marty Leipzig
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: J.J. Hitt
|Sub: Fertility rituals!
|Date: 21 Apr 96 07:44:07
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 3807290d
REPLY: 1:106/9788.2 65204cfd
PID: FM 2.02
FR> Well, tonight's the night that we hide reproductive
FR> organs around the place for our offspring to search
FR> for in the morning.
jjh> Since when is an egg an "organ"?
Isn't it? Aren't pine cones and watermellon seeds reproductive organs?
jjh> Or do you hide chocolate dildos around the house?
}:-} Well we all engage in fertility rituals a little differently.
~*~ Maybe He did say something and it just was not recorded. - Steve Bedard
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Jerry Eakle
|Sub: religions
|Date: 21 Apr 96 07:45:36
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 3807290e
REPLY: 1:213/742.0 316b6d68
PID: FM 2.02
> Ok I am here to stir up some holy smoke. I am a reformed atheist. I
> was when I was younger a christian until Junior High School or Middle
> School depending on where your at. I then became a atheist I have no
> idea why other than I believe in Evolution.
Accepting the fact of evolution and not holding belief in deity constructs
are two different things, though. Most Christanics in the United States,
for instance, accept the fact of evolution. I would also hazard a guess
that most of the paleontologists and biologists in the United States are
also Christians.
~*~ When you die, it doesn't just disappear... that'd be contrary
to physics! - Ariadne
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: George Mooth
|Sub: Your Daily Death Cult
|Date: 21 Apr 96 07:51:10
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 3807290f
PID: FM 2.02
> WHO HOLDS THE ROPE?
> Read: Hebrews 13:1-6
WHO IS A TRUE CHRISTIAN?
Read: World History
Most of the mainstream denominations in Germany expressed
support for Hitler and for his regime at some time or other.
The Catholic Bishops conference in 1933 "expressed joy that through
the new state Christianity had been promoted, morality improved, and
and the struggle against Bolshevism and godlessness condicted with
energy and success"
In the same year, 1933 "The Catholic Students Union hails the
National Socialist revolution as the greatest spiritual breakthrough
of our time".
~*~ The milieu here is like a gang rape by a bunch of maladjusted
teenaged boys whose hormones have gone mad. - Jesse C. Jones (Heathens)
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: George Mooth
|Sub: Your Daily Death Cult
|Date: 21 Apr 96 07:51:55
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 38072910
PID: FM 2.02
> ABOVE THE CIRCUMSTANCES
> Read: Habakkuk 3:17-19
ABOVE ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR DEATH CULT
Read: World History
In 1934, responding to an enquiry from the Ministry for Church
affairs, the Catholic Seamen's Mission listed the books and papers
they provided to seamen. The list included Hitler's own anti-
semitic Mein Kampf, and the newspaper Volkischer Beobachter.
In 1936, the Bishops of Hannover, Wurtemburg and Bavaria signed
a statement that said in part "We, together with the Reich Church
Committee, stand behind the Fuhrer in the life-struggle of the
German people against Bolshevism. In this struggle, the Church
mobilizes the forces of christian belief against unbelief."
~*~ The king is coming! - LEONARD BERNIER
And the queen isn't. How typical. - David Rice
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Sue Armstrong
|Sub: Be "kind" to Creationists like Hardly
|Date: 21 Apr 96 07:56:01
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 38072911
REPLY: 1:246/15.0 316be2c8
PID: FM 2.02
FR> "Well, a kind is kind of like a dog and a wolf but more like a coyotee
FR> is kind of like a kind between itself and a fox only then you also
FR> include cats in with the dogs to get a kind."
sa> You missed the nitwit on Evolution last year (I think it
sa> was Tony Ermie) who tried to claim that all plants belonged
sa> to one "kind".
That's so _cute_! I'm so happy that these nuts won't be in competition
with my sons when they enter the job force. 'Course our taxes have to go
tos upport these people who have fallen behind but _hopefully_ after a few
more generations have died out, belief in the flood mythology and the ideological
self-ignorance will die out as well.
Sadly I can't count on it.
~*~ Yes, that's radiant heat. What does that have to do
with infrared? - ARTEMIS
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Dan Ceppa
|Sub: Hardly doesn't care about the truth
|Date: 21 Apr 96 07:57:19
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 38072912
REPLY: 1:350/401.0 895C0E38
PID: FM 2.02
Michael Hardy
MH> (As you might infer, neither your opinion
MH> nor Marilyn's matters beans to me.)
Since when has the truth _ever_ mattered to a fundy?
~*~ Please take a number in the Martyr line and
respond when your name is called. - Steve Rose
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Dan Ceppa
|Sub: Jesse Christ Jones couldn't drink from that well
|Date: 21 Apr 96 08:01:12
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 38072913
REPLY: 1:350/401.0 895C0E31
PID: FM 2.02
JJ> How ironic to receive this hateful diatribe on this Easter
JJ> Day, when Christians celebrate the Resurrection of Jesus the Christ!
dc> Your late with _your_ diatribe, Jesse. All us heathens
dc> were worried that something may have happened to you.
Jesse Christ Jones couldn't drink from that well. I had poisoned it before
he could. If he had posted his rant on schedule he would have done _exactly_
what I said he was going to do so to prove me wrong in something (since
he can't in real life) he tried to keep his mouth shut.
'Didn't work. A fundy can be played like a puppet. You just learn which
strings to pull and when to pul them and you can make them dig into their
pockets and have over their money or you can make them walk right off a
cliff. You can also manipulate them into remaining silent -- just as I did.
~*~ I personally would prefer to see the human race go via nuclear war
than
by the takeover of homosexuality... then I wouldn't have to be witness
to this erosion of our society that is now occuring. - George Pope
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Thomas Biniasz
|Sub: Your god failed
|Date: 21 Apr 96 08:04:23
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 38072914
REPLY: 1:350/401.0 895C0E25
PID: FM 2.02
TB> But with God all things are possable.
Which gods? The ones in the classical Christianic mythologies?
If so, perhaps you had best replace your paper idol with something a little
more powerful. Your deity constructs couldn't even defear chariots built
of iron. Doubt it? Look it up in your paper idol.
So much for your gods.
~*~ That proliferative query is as ambiguious as your probable parentage.
- Fredric Rice
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Dan Ceppa
|Sub: Science vs. Occultism
|Date: 21 Apr 96 08:06:00
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 38072915
REPLY: 1:350/401.0 895C0E29
PID: FM 2.02
Jerry Gilbreath
JG> The decay of the earth's magnetic field indicates an upper limit of
JG> about 10,000 years. This is based on studies by Dr. Thomas G. Barnes,
dc> Please explain why the "decay" also shows a reversal in the magnetic
dc> field in which the force, when in line with the poles, shows up
dc> the strongest?
Barnes is a Creationist who has no idea what scientific method is. Did
you see the postings I offered which utterly debunked these claims?
~*~ Hell! Jesus isn't even as popular as WordPerfect! - J.J. Hitt
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Andrew Masten
|Sub: LACK OF ANY EVIDENCE WHAT
|Date: 21 Apr 96 08:09:58
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 38072916
PID: FM 2.02
FR> The directly observed fact of evolution doesn't disappear just because
FR> cultists want to wish it all away. There IS no debate among biologists
FR> of the FACT of evolution. The mode and tempo of evolution, however,
is
FR> discussed.
FR> Evolution is no mre subject to debate than gravity is.
am> No, Frederick.
Yes, Andeyrew.
am> Gravity is a repeatable, falsifiable and refutable theory.
No it's not, Creationist. Gravity is a directly observed phenomena just
like evolution is. There are two competeing theories which describe gravity,
just as there are some three or four competing theories which describe evolution.
But you're not interested in truth.
am> A far cry from theories of evolution.
You changed the subject. (How typical of a Creationist.)
> 17 EVIDENCES AGAINST EVOLUTION
Great! We'll take them one at a time! (Next messages.)
~*~ One does not have to be stupid to believe. - Kim Kelley
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Andrew Masten
|Sub: Moon Dust occult claim: debunked
|Date: 21 Apr 96 08:12:58
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 38072917
PID: FM 2.02
> 1. MOON DUST
> Meteoritic dust falls on the earth continuously, adding up to
> thousands, if not millions, of tons of dust per year. Realizing
> this, and knowing that the moon also had meteoritic dust piling
> up for what they thought was millions of years, N.A.S.A. scien-
> tists were worried that the first lunar ship that landed would
> sink into the many feet of dust which should have accumulated.
> However, only about one-eight of an inch of dust was found, indi-
> cating a young moon.
Status: Debunked.
From: Ron Dippold
Subject: Re: Moon Dust Argument
ajs9462@sigma.tamu.edu (SIMON, ANTHONY JOE) writes:
From the (a) FAQ
} - Lunar dust--only 1 to 3 inches, not 54 feet.
The calculation you refer to is given by Henry Morris on pp.
151-153 of _Scientific Creationism_. It is based on a grossly
erroneous figure of 14 million tons of meteoritic dust per
year, quoted by Petterson in 1960.
Morris misinterpreted Petterson's article. Petterson published a
figure of 15 (not 14) million tons per year as an _upper limit_.
In other words, Petterson said that the value is _not more than_
15 million tons per year. He was not able to measure an actual value.
Morris erroneously chose to interpret it to mean it was _equal_
to 14 million tons per year. Accurate values were measured in
the late 1960's. The actual value is -much- lower than 15 million
tons per year.
Dalrymple gives the value of 22,000 tons per year, nearly 700
times smaller than your figure. That changes your 54 foot figure
into about 2 cm, which is quite consistent with the amount of
surface soil the astronauts found on the Moon (it was considerably
more than 1-2 mm).
My copy of "Everyman's Astronomy" indicates that the earth
collects about 9000 kg per day from meteors of visual magnitude
5.0 or brighter. Assuming a typical rock density of 3 g/cc, this
corresponds to an accumulation rate of one inch per 10 billion
years.
Unfortunately no data is presented for fainter meteors. I wouldn't
be surprised to find accumulation rate of one inch per 10 billion
years. Unfortunately no data is presented for fainter meteors. I
wouldn't be surprised to find that the actual rate is one or two
orders of magnitude higher, but "1 inch in 8000 years" is off by
six orders of magnitude.
A dust accumulation rate of "one inch per 8000 years" should
create a spectacular yearround meteor shower, and cause severe
pitting of the space shuttle windshields in just a single orbit.
My quick estimates give values far higher than have been actually
observed.
~*~ One naive Christian does not make all Christians fools, Scot.
- Charlie J. Ray
Nor does one man like Adolph make all NAZIs bad people. - Dan Ceppa
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Andrew Masten
|Sub: LACK OF ANY EVIDENCE WHAT
|Date: 21 Apr 96 08:13:14
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 38072918
PID: FM 2.02
> 1. Moon Dust
That one was easy to debunk. Next?
~*~ And when you go to hell, i'll get the last laugh!
- Christopher Calabrese
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Andrew Masten
|Sub: Magnetic Field occult claim: Debunked
|Date: 21 Apr 96 08:16:11
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 38072919
PID: FM 2.02
> 2. MAGNETIC FIELD
> The earth's magnetic field is decaying rapidly, at a constant
> (if not decreasing) rate. At this rate, 8000 years ago the
> earth's magnetism would have equaled that of a magnetic star, a
> highly unlikely occurrence. Also, if electric currents in the
> earth's core are responsible for the earth's magnetism, the heat
> generated by these currents 20,000 years ago would have dissolved
> the earth.
Status: Debunked
Barnes and the Earth's magnetic field
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
From: tjt@Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Tim Thompson)
Message-ID: <26l3eq$kmc@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov>
Reply-To: tjt@Jpl.Nasa.Gov
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Here is a copy of the post I put up when the question of the Barnes
version of the history of the Earth's magnetic field came up last
February. Hope this tells you what you want to know.
==================================================================
In his report on the CalTech "Evolution and Creation" seminar,
Wayne Broughton mentioned Thomas Barnes' study claiming that analysis
of the earth's magnetic field proves that the earth cannot be over
10,000 years old. I have studied Barnes' claim, and I feel qualified
to talk about it.
Barnes published his study in the monograph "The Origin and Destiny
of the Earth's Magnetic Field", published in 1974(?) by the Creation
Research Society. No doubt there is a more recent "updated" edition,
but I have not seen one. Everything I say is based on the first
edition.
Thomas Barnes is emeritus professor of physics and planetary
science, University of Texas at El Paso. He has a B.A. in physics
from Hardin-Simmons College (now University), in Abilene, Texas,
and an M.A. in physics from Brown University. His doctorate is
an honorary degree, conferred by Hardin-Simmons University. He's
an old timer, as I recall his B.A. dates from the early 30's. He
is the author of a college textbook on electricity and magnetism.
I cannot recall the title, but I have seen it, and it looks like
any other ordinary upper division type E&M text, lots of Maxwell's
equations, nothing peculiar that I saw. This would lead on to
believe that he should know what he's talking about.
A brief outline of Barnes's claim goes like this:
1. Only the dipole component of the Earth's magnetic field is
generated in the core. All other components are either
ionospheric, telluric currents, or magnetic rocks.
2. Cowling's Theorem specifically prohibits the dynamo
maintenance of the Earth's magnetic field.
3. The dipole component of the Earth's magnetic field is
generated by circular currents in the core.
4. The dipole component is decaying along an exponential
5. The extrapolated exponential shows unacceptably high field
strengths upwards of 10,000 years ago.
Barnes never produces a satisfactory explanation of the first claim.
In his terminology, it's obvious that evolution scientists are confusing
"signal" (the dipole component), and "noise" (everything else). Personally,
I find it hard to believe that exploration geophysicists would overlook
a field of magnetic rocks big enough to affect the quadropole moment
of the earth's magnetic field. Also, the spherical harmonic expression
of the earth's magnetic field, as produced by Gauss himself, clearly
seperates field sources above and below the earth's surface. That means
the ionospheric components are eliminated right from the start (they
have been shown to average out over long time periods anyway). Likewise,
telluric currents should average out over long time periods. And, of
course, rocks don't move much faster than the continents they ride on.
Cowling's theorem (Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society,
vol. 94, pp 39-48, 1934), by Thomas G. Cowling, proves that dynamo
generation will not support an axially symmetric field, nor one that
is similar, in the mathematical sense. Indeed, this would apply to a
pure dipole. Since the Earth's field is neither dipolar, nor similar,
Barnes must make claim number 1, in order to make any sense at all.
Barnes glosses over his first claim as if it were almost trivial, and
spends a great deal of time on Cowling's theorem. He is quite
ostentatious, in fact, and proud of his adherence to hard mathematics,
unlike the sloppy evolution scientists.
The whole thing is a setup. If he can't prove that ONLY the dipole
component is generated in the core, then his reliance on Cowling's
theorem is irrelevant. Neither proof, nor evidence are offered. In fact
this weakness destroys the entire concept at once. All the rest of the
work hinges on the acceptance of "dipole only" in the core.
The fun part is where he talks about exponential decay of the field.
Barnes fits an exponential function via least-squares, on a CDC 6600,
to 150 years of dipole data. I note in passing, his attitude clearly
implies that using the then giant CDC computer virtually guarantees that
his results can hardly be wrong. In comparing this exponential fit of
his to a standard linear fit, the probable errors in the fitting
coefficients are a few percent better for his exponential. He immediately
assumes the linear fit is wrong, the exponential is right, and proceeds
to the next step.
Having satisfied himself of the exponential fit, to 150 years of data,
he then extrapolates the curve back 10,000 years, derives an enormous
magnetic field strength, denounces it as ridiculously large (at least
that much is true), and then dismisses the idea that the earth can
be more than 10,000 years old.
Q.E.D.
I found the book in the library at Cal State L.A., along with a number of
other creation science texts. A lot more could be said. Barnes fills pages
with irrelevant ramblings, including his ability to re-write equations
found in older works (Horace Lamb, and Maxwell) in more recent notation.
I think I have covered what is relevant, enough to show that Barnes's
work lacks merit, and substance. I see no reason to believe that the
earths' magnetic field implies that the earth canot be over 10,000 years
old.
However, like any good research, Barnes's work has sparked further inquiry.
If you don't have a sense of humor, quit now and don't read any further.
I draw your attention to the paper "The Creation of Planetary Magnetic
Fields", by D. Russell Humphreys, Quarterly Journal of the Creation
Research Society, vol. 21, December, 1984. Recieved 3 January, 1984,
revised 14 August, 1984. This is a refereed, scientific journal. It says
that Humphreys has a PhD in physics, and is (was) a physicist at Sandia
National Laboratories. Here is the abstract of the paper:
"God could have started magnetic fields in the solar system in a very
simple way: by creating the original atoms of the planets with many of
their nuclear spins pointing in the same direction. The small magnetic
fields of so many atomic nuclei add up to fields large enough to account
for the magnetism of the planets.
Within seconds after creation, ordinary physical events would convert the
alignment of nuclei into a large electric current circulating within each
planet, maintaining the magnetic field. The currents and fields would
decay steadily over thousands of years, as Barnes has pointed out. The
present magnetic field strengths of the Earth, Sun, Moon, and planets
agree very well with the values produced by this theory and a 6000-year
age for the solar system. The theory is consistent with all the known
data and explains many facts which have puzzled evolutionists."
Humphreys presumes that God made the sun, and all of the planets out
of water, which has a strong dipole. Line up enough dipoles, get a big
field, then God changes everything from water to the silicate/iron type
stuff we see now, leaving behind decaying magnetic fields.
For those of you who still think scientific creationism is scientific,
I leave you with a paragraph from Humphreys' "conclusions" section:
"The Bible is scientifically accurate. A straightforward reading of
Scripture supplied the essentials of this theory: the possibility of
initial alignment, the water composition, and the short time scale. The
fact that the theory fits the facts shows that the scientist can rely
on the Bible for new insight into the natural world.
~*~ May Dopefish not pee in your wheaties. - Steve Quarrella
------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Thompson, Earth and Space Sciences Division, JPL.
Assistant Administrator, Division Science Computing Network.
Secretary, Los Angeles Astronomical Society.
Member, BOD, Mount Wilson Observatory Association.
INTERnet/BITnet: tjt@scn1.jpl.nasa.gov
NSI/DECnet: jplsc8::tim
SCREAMnet: YO!! TIM!!
GPSnet: 118:10:22.85 W by 34:11:58.27 N
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Andrew Masten
|Sub: That was easy, too
|Date: 21 Apr 96 08:16:32
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 3807291a
PID: FM 2.02
> 2. Magnetic Field
That was easy to debunk, too. Next?
~*~ No, I'm not a fundy. - Johnny Mckinney
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Andrew Masten
|Sub: Fossil record occult claim: Debunked
|Date: 21 Apr 96 08:19:57
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 3807291b
PID: FM 2.02
> 3. FOSSIL RECORD
> Charles Darwin stated, in his Origin of Species, "The geolog-
> ical record is extremely imperfect and this fact will to a large
> extent explain why we do not find intermediate varieties, con-
> necting together all the extinct and existing forms of life by
> the finest graduated steps. He who rejects these views on the
> nature of the geological record, will rightly reject my whole
> theory."
Status: Debunked
Evolution is a directly obvserved phenomena in sutu and in the laboratory.
The fossil record simply proves that evolution has been and continues to
be going on for a couple of billion years.
Also, as any _scientist_ could tell you (as opposed to occult priesthood
who have a vested interest in the continued ignorance of their sheep) the
fossil record shows exactly what is predicted by evolutional theories.
~*~ When you cannot use facts to demonstrate that something
is true, just label it "spiritual". - Sean McCullough
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Andrew Masten
|Sub: That was easy, too.
|Date: 21 Apr 96 08:20:20
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 3807291c
PID: FM 2.02
> 3. Fossil Record
That one was easy to debunk as well. Next?
~*~ Those menacing atheists with their dangerous questions
are coming! Run for your lives! - Robert Curry
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Andrew Masten
|Sub: Occult claims of biology: Debunked
|Date: 21 Apr 96 08:24:02
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 3807291d
PID: FM 2.02
> 4. EMBRYONIC RECAPITULATION
> Darwin said that embryological evidence was "second to none
> in importance." The idea of embryonic recapitulation, or the
> theory that higher life forms go through the previous evolution-
> ary chain before birth, was popularized by Ernst Haeckel in 1866.
> It was later found that Haeckel forged the diagrams which he used
> is evidence for the theory.
Status: Debunked
Science shows that there is no such thing as a "higher life form" or a "lower
life form." That is a Cretionist belief (which, of is usually the case
with Christanic death cultist's claims, entirely unevidenced.)
Additionally, embryonic development does indeed show stages which evidence
the undeniable truth of evolution. It is a Creationist cultist claim that
developing embrionic "past life regressions" are claimed by their intellectual
superiors.
Doubt it? Provide the name of a scientist who makes the claim?
Guess what? You can't because your masters are _lying_ to you again.
~*~ You don't need "faith" to believe Richard Dawkins; you need
an education. - Don Martin
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Andrew Masten
|Sub: That was certainly easy as well.
|Date: 21 Apr 96 08:24:30
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 3807291e
PID: FM 2.02
> 4. Embryonic Recapitulation
That was certainly easy to debunk as well. Next?
~*~ Or perhaps you would just prefer a moment of silence, in which those
who may be members of Santeria can sacrifice their animals in peace?"
-- Preston Simpson
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Andrew Masten
|Sub: The rest: Debunked
|Date: 21 Apr 96 08:38:03
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 38072921
PID: FM 2.02
The rest of your master's diatribe didn't make it here however these are
all standard Creationist occult claims which have been and continue to be
debunked year after year. Let's take a look down memory lane, shall we?
> 5. Probability
Status: Debunked.
Typical Christanic death cultist claim is that probability denies the observed
fact of evolution. Typical easy debunking of same is to point out that
probability has nothing to do with the observed fact of evolution with the
additional suggestion that the death cultist flip a coin a thousand times,
write down the sequence, and then ask itself how probable that sequence
was at coming up.
That was easy.
> 6. Second Law of Thermodynamics
Status: Debunked.
Typical Chriastanic death cultist claim is that the second law of thermodynamics
state that everything tends toward disorder then they demand that since
life develops toward more complexity, the fact of evolution can be ignored
as a "Satanist" magic trick. Typical easy debunking of same is to point
out that the second law of thermodynamics refers to a closed system, not
an open system such as what we have here on Earth.
That one's really easy.
> 7. Vestigial Organs
Status: Proves evolution.
The atrophied evolutional coden sequences within each and every living (and
dead) cell shows exactly what is predicted by theories which describe the
fact of evolution. The atrophied evolutional cast-offs prove beyond dount
that hit-and-miss is being employed.
> 8. Fossil and Fossil Fuel Formation
Status: Debunked.
Christanic death cultists are still trying to pretend that "fossil fuel"
is created by the body fat of animals which have died in the past; specifically,
dinosaurs. This is easilly debunked by showing the death cultist that vegitable
matter is what is used to form fossil fuels.
Easilly debunked.
> 9. Punctuated Equilibria
Status: Good science.
Another minor variation of a theory which attempts to describe the fact
of evolution. Punk-eek sates that geologic seperation of parent gene pools
dictates the branched formation of a seperate species over time. This is
in good agreement with the fossil record.
That's another for the side of reason.
> 10. Homology/Molecular Biology
Status: Good science.
Biology of all stripes doesn't work without evolution -- it makes no sense.
The atrophied evolutionary cast-offs of the coden sequences within each
and every cell of a living creature proves conclusively that evolution has
been and continues to be a natual phenomena.
> 11. Dating Methods
Status: Good science.
Every radiocarbon and other method of dating items when used properly prove
beyond a doubt that radiocarbon and other methodologies are highly accurate
scientific tools.
> 12. Dinosaurs
Status: Good science.
Extinction is a primary aspect of the theories of evolution. The fact that
entire species of animals and plants go extinct and leave behind offspring
species debunks Creationist occultism entirely.
~*~ If you are an Atheist, then you have already joined their camp
of willing slaves. - David Stoddard
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Andrew Masten
|Sub: Sun's Diameter: Debunked
|Date: 21 Apr 96 08:39:24
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 38072922
PID: FM 2.02
> 13. Sun's Diameter
From: Carl Wilson
To: Jack Brannan Msg #108, 93-04-02 20:11:14
Subject: Re: Helium
-=> Quoting Jack Brannan to Carl Wilson <=-
JB> Carl I lost your original message on this, I wanted
JB> to reply to it. I have a question for you, you claim
JB> creationists are always misrepresenting facts (you and
JB> your fellow evolutionists), why have you done so here.
JB> No creationist has ever given a figure of 1% per year,
JB> creationists use the same data you do.
When I first saw the "Shrinking Sun Theory" some years ago,
(as told to me by a creationist on a BBS) a rate of
approximately 1% per year was given. A book titled, "Our
Turbulent Sun" was the source of this idea. In chapter 6,
"The Shrinking Sun", creationists took statements like the
following:
"The amount of apparent shrinkage was extraordinary."
"If the sun were to continue shrinking at the rate of 2
seconds or arc per century, it would disappear in 960
centuries."
They then used this and similar statements to come up with
the "Shrinking Sun Theory" to prove a young earth.
But, for some reason, they didn't see statements like the
following in the same chapter:
"No one, least of all Eddy and Boornazian, [the individuals
doing this research] thought that this [sun disappear in
96,000 years] was going to happen."
"The shrinkage was assumed to be taking place in the sun's
outer layer's, not the entire solar mass. Were it otherwise,
[entire mass shrinking] the shrinkage would have produced
more than 200 times the observed luminosity of the sun!"
JB> What is the figure given by mainstream science? No one
JB> disputes the shrinkage, only the rate and it is given as
JB> 1% per CENTURY as a high end figure, many think the figure
JB> is about 1/7th of this.
Actually, almost everyone disputes the shrinkage. Most
astronomers agree, that if anything, the sun is a bit
larger (about 6%) than it originally was. There may be
*temporary* shrinkages, but not a steady, permanent one.
Even the astronomer [Eddy] that thought that the sun was
shrinking said the following at the end of the chapter:
"I now feel that we were probably wrong."
And, "The Data looked like you could trust it."
He then goes into a lengthy discussion of how the data
was corrupted. The chapter closes with this last paragraph:
"It may be ten years before a long-enough record is compiled
to see a trend in any of these measurements. Then we may
know whether the studies of the past two years showing a
small decline in solar diameter have been a fascinating
but futile exercise of attempting to tease too much
information out of too-imprecise sets of measurements, or
whether the sun really is TEMPORARILY {caps mine} shrinking.
So whether the "Shrinking Sun Theory" rate is 1% per year or
per century, it really doesn't matter. The whole thing is based
on quoting a book out of context. Besides, the creationist that
told me about this should have had his "facts" straight when he
told me "1% per year".
JB> I have a question for you, you claim creationists are
JB> always misrepresenting facts (you and your fellow
JB> evolutionists), why have you done so here.
You were saying?
... Creationists either ignore the facts, or are ignorant of the facts.
From: Carl Wilson
To: Jack Brannan Msg #115, 93-04-02 23:37:30
Subject: Re: HELIUM
-=> Quoting Jack Brannan to Henry Shaw <=-
JB> The exact figures given by creationists are supplied by
JB> data from mainstream science which shows a shrinkage rate
JB> during the last 100 plus years of 1% per CENTURY, not
JB> yearly. Creationist literature also says quite plainly
JB> this figure is contested and may be as low as 1/7 of that
JB> rate. Data from the past 400 years has also been
JB> used (eclipse) to confirm shrinkage. This study was
JB> published on Physics Today, which is not a creationist
JB> journal.
And you still ignore the fact that there is NO evidence of
constant shrinkage since the formation of the solar system.
THAT is the key to the SciCre, young earth theory known as the
"Shrinking Sun Theory". If you *really* think there is all
this evidence that the sun's been shrinking at a constant rate
during its entire lifetime, then read the astronomy books
yourself and post your findings here. While the idea that the
sun may be going through a *cyclic* shrinkage *might* be
supported by some, you would be very hard pressed to find a
single astronomer or astrophysicist that would claim a *constant*
shrinkage since the sun formed. And without the constant
shrinkage, your "young earth" based on the "Shrinking Sun
Theory" falls to pieces.
And I also find it very unlikely that precise measurements of
the needed accuracy were being performed 400 years ago. Tycho
Brahe (1546-1601) was reputed as being able to take the most
accurate measurements of celestial body positions of any
astronomer of his day. He was able to take measurements
accurate to about 1 minute of arc. Very good considering. To
be able to measure a shrinkage of 1% per century, you would
have to be able to take measurements showing a change of a few
*seconds* of arc. And if the actual shrinkage is really 1/7
of that, these 16th century astronomers were taking measurements
that late 19th century astronomers would envy.
... "Scientific Creation": Just religion in disguise..
~*~ ...you have willingly joined the legion of Satans's angels. - Ron Ballew
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Andrew Masten
|Sub: Far too easy
|Date: 21 Apr 96 08:39:50
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 38072923
PID: FM 2.02
> 13. Sun's Diameter
Come on. Your masters really need something new. Next?
~*~ "Evidence" is a dirty word if you don't have any. - Hector Plasmic
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Andrew Masten
|Sub: The rest: Debunked.
|Date: 21 Apr 96 08:48:29
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 38072924
PID: FM 2.02
> 14. Nile River's Overflow
Status: Debunked.
Who knows what your masters have pretended to contrive here. Beyond a doubt
your master's occultism has been debunked, however. Perhaps you had best
ignore all the rest of your master's debunkings and explain this one so
that I have it one file.
> 15. Earth's Rotation
Status: Debunked
Creationist death cultists want to pretend that the rotation of the Earth
is slowing down at a rate which indicates that it couldn't have been rotating
at the huge rates it would need to were the rate to be projected backward
in time. This occult claim is easilly debunked by pointing out that the
loss of rotational velocity is due to both gravimetris breaking as well
as meteroric infall of materials as the Earth "sweeps" space. The rate of
gravimetric breaking and the fall of cosmic infall are in complete agreement
with the known age of the Earth.
> 16. Written Record
Status: Good science.
The "written record" archeology digs up proves beyond a doubt that the directly
observed fact of evolution has been and continues to go on unabaited.
> 17. The Bible
Status: Debunked.
The classical Christanic mythologies are frought with contradiction and
scientific impossibilities and inaccuracies. More: The occultism has nothing
to do with the directly observed fact of evolution.
~*~ I still can't make heads or tails or heads or
tails or heads or tails. . . out of it. - David Rice
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Andrew Masten
|Sub: Anything else?
|Date: 21 Apr 96 08:49:39
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 38072925
PID: FM 2.02
Don't your masters have _anything_ better? I would perfer something which
hasn't been debunked a thousand times this month already, Andy.
As you can see, each and every one of your master's claims was debunked
easilly. As such I expect you to not repeat your master's lies.
~*~ Now, you can go, put on a costume and dance around a tree but
for myself and my house, we will serve the Lord! - Don Geser
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Lee Woofenden
|Sub: EPISTEMOLOGY
|Date: 21 Apr 96 08:50:24
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 38072926
REPLY: 1:101/525.0 316c084f
PID: FM 2.02
>> If the subject is a material entity, yes. Science only applies to the
>> physical world. If there is anything beyond the physical world, it is
>> beyond the realm of science.
FR> Welp guess you might as well pretend pixies exist, huh?
lw> Welp, guess you might as well stop trying to argue from
lw> a scientific viewpoint about something that is beyond
lw> science's purview, huh?
Welp, looks like you're trying to pretend that "Pixic Evolution" is scientific,
huh?
~*~ "History I believe furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people
maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade
of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders
will always avail themselves for their own purpose."
- Thomas Jefferson, to Baron von Humboldt, 1813
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Lee Woofenden
|Sub: NDE occult beliefs
|Date: 21 Apr 96 08:51:31
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 38072927
REPLY: 1:101/525.0 316c0850
PID: FM 2.02
lw> Just as your materialistic bias is firmly entrenched in your
lw> mind when you read material on either side of the NDE question.
FR> That's one way to avoid the embarrassing truth: Pretend that medical
FR> science is just an unfounded opinion which can be easilly ignored.
lw> We're not talking about ignoring medical science. We're talking about
lw> refutations of theories proposed by scientists. Blackmore's has been
lw> shown not to adequately explain NDE phenomena.
That's one way to avoid the embarrassing truth: Claim the facts haven't
been "adequately explained" because they deny your occult beliefs.
Science doesn't _care_ about your occult beliefs, Lee. It's not that science
_can't_ explain your beliefs, it's that science doesn't concern itself with
claims of delusional belief.
~*~ I have a recurring nightmare about being a patient in my own ER.
- Martin Goldberg
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Elliott Finesse
|Sub: Adolph Hitler: Christian
|Date: 21 Apr 96 08:53:49
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 38072928
REPLY: 1:215/130 000fdba7
PID: FM 2.02
>>Historians, of course, know otherwise: Hitler was a Christian.
>>He stated so many, many times.
> Really? Which historians? Do you have a reference or two I can look up?
Weren't the postings I offered you enough? If not, why not?
~*~ Maybe Heisenberg has Him in a headlock... He can select the
denomination of a church or target a particular city, but not both.
- jonny vee
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: LAURA HODGKINS
|Sub: Dangle that angles
|Date: 21 Apr 96 08:58:22
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 38072929
REPLY: 1:322/746 5c9c7d3e
PID: FM 2.02
lh> Does anyone here believe there are angels, or that
lh> it is possible to have seen one's guardian angel?
People who experience hypnopompic and hypnogogic hallucinations just before
falling asleep or just as upon waking up often believe that they experience
a "visitation" from an "angel." Because sleep poisons which paralysis muscels
during sleep to keep the body from getting up and walking away temporarilly
keep an individual who experiences the phenomena from moving, they often
believe that they're being "spiritually attacked" as well.
There's a cultist in this forum who pretends to believe in angels. Mark
someone. My guess is that he's going on what his masters told him rather
than upon his contrived beliefs as the result of a hallucination.
~*~ Find God? Why? Did she leave Pluto? -- Robert Curry
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: David Worrell
|Sub: #holysmoke still going strong!
|Date: 21 Apr 96 09:00:01
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 3807292a
REPLY: 1:3615/1.11 3163cc67
PID: FM 2.02
FR> Typical sign-in times are any time after 6:00p.m. Pacific, 8:00p.m.
FR> Central, and 10:00p.m. Eastern. If you're late, don't worry! The
FR> most "empty" of us are on until morning!
dw> Hey! That's enough of that shit, Jess...er, Fredric... :)
That response of yours is sure empty! Yeah, I'm gonna file a complaint
with the empty moderator! }:-}
~*~ If only more christians read their bibles there'd be less christians.
- Derek W. Clayton
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: David Worrell
|Sub: The Religious Reich Wing Graffiti.HTM
|Date: 21 Apr 96 09:02:15
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 3807292b
REPLY: 1:3615/1.11 3163cd64
PID: FM 2.02
FR>
FR>
FR> Right Wing Graffiti
FR>
dw> I thought it was only fundies that refused to take the time to delete
dw> all the HTML code from crossposts. At least you tried to make sure the
dw> formatting stayed the same. :)
Why you... }:-}
I post HTML extentions in the event people want to include the page in their
own or wish to view it in its original. Some of the really lengthy stuff
I'll run UN-HTM.EXE on -- which I wrote specifically to remove the HTML
extentions.
dw> FYI: When saving a document with Netscape in windows, if you click on
dw> the little down arrow out beside the File Type box in the Save Dialog,
dw> you will see an option to save the document as a simple text file.
dw> Netscape will strip *most* of the HTML code for you.
I'll save text both ways.
~*~ adultery is O.K., - Charlie J. Ray
I've tried it, and I'd say it was "so-so," not "okay." - David Rice
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: ryan shaw
|Sub: a just god?
|Date: 21 Apr 96 09:04:35
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 3807292c
REPLY: 1:152/67.0 16d3f612
PID: FM 2.02
> Today her plane was caught in a rain/thunderstorm and crashed, killing
> her, her father, and the instructor that was flying along with her.
>
> Would a all-powerful and loving god allow this to happen?
Fundy justification expected:
"Obviously the little bitch deserved what she had coming."
"The gods know what they're doing even though we do not. Trust the gods."
"She's not REALLY dead! No, she's with Jeh-heeeeee-zeus now!"
~*~ Did Galileo give up the Catholic faith even in the face of persecution
and the threat of excommunication? I think not. - Charlie Ray
...instead of giving up the faith, he gave up the truth. - Don Martin
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Becke Jones
|Sub: Hitler was a Christian. Get OVER it!
|Date: 21 Apr 96 09:08:22
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 3807292d
PID: FM 2.02
FR>> No wonder the _Christian_ Adolf Hitler got away with what he did wth
FR>> people like you around to justify it like he did -- with deity
FR>> constructs.
SW> Adolf hitler wasnt a Christian, he may have called himself one
SW> but he was just as far from Christianity as you seem to be.
It's amazing that people _STILL_ want to deny the truth about Hitler. They
seem to think that Christianity some how keeps people from inflicting inhuman
tyrannies against innocent people -- in direct contradiction to the world's
history.
bj> Some Hitler quotes from the alt.atheism faq:
bj>
bj> "The folkish minded-man, in particular, has the sacred duty,
bj> each in his own denomination, of making people stop just
bj> talking superficially of God's will, and actually fulfill
bj> God's will, and not let God's word be desecrated."
[...cuts...]
He's seen the truth before.
~*~ My kids are the four-legged kind. - Marguerite Kendall
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: Lawrence Mccurry
|Sub: Holy Smoke
|Date: 21 Apr 96 09:09:38
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 3807292e
REPLY: 1:2424/104.0 895B3BC1
PID: FM 2.02
> There is only one holy smoke and my brothers and sisters are put into
> your jails everyday for smoking it...LET MY PEOPLE GO.... Tell your
> local political piggy that you want marijauna legalized Now!
> Or shall we rot in jail for growing a gift God gave to us all.
Oh you're a FINE example of the thoughtful, educated, well-reasoned individual
we want smoking pot and driving on your freeways, yes.
~*~ Your own science has found fossilized fish on the tops of HIGH
mountains. Do you think they took up mountain climbing some 70
gagillion years ago? - Greg Waggy (A New Age Creationist)
---
* Origin: There are no Christians in foxholes (1:102/890)
|From: Fredric Rice
|To: William Hsu
|Sub: Survey
|Date: 21 Apr 96 09:12:59
MSGID: 1:102/890@FidoNet 3807292f
REPLY: 1:105/40.762 30b71d24
PID: FM 2.02
> Age: Gender:
None, male
> Denomination/Church group:
None