Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (109934)	11/14/2007 7:25:17 AM
From: Giordano Bruno	Respond to of 132070

Skeeter, I'm reading Amish Grace. Their phenomenal capacity for forgiveness after the 2006 school house massacre fascinates me regardless of any religious affiliation. amazon.com

To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (109934)	11/14/2007 8:25:55 AM
From: Freedom Fighter	Respond to of 132070

skeeter, >>I've never heard this incredibly counter-intuitive result, assuming macro-evolution, discussed, let alone explained. the intuitive answer is that millions of transitional species ought to be alive and kicking today! instead, there are zero. while i will not argue either belief is provable from a scientific point of view, i am very sure that macro-evolution isn't the "lay up" many have been led to believe it is.<< IMHO, there are almost always political pressures that influence the public discussion. Beliefs and theories sometimes become politically fashionable and generally accepted as 100% truth before they should be. Unfortunately, once that happens, those that question those beliefs and theories are sometimes attacked and destroyed. In some instances the goal is not even the truth. The goal is to suppress views that don't fit the idealistic vision of what the world should be like. In other words, the goal is a lie. But to those doing the suppressing, the lie is better than the truth and will produce better results for society. Therefore it should be promoted. I don't think it's that extreme when it comes to evolution, but do you really think the scientific community and people that are seemingly very hostile to those that believe in God are going to publicly discuss weaknesses in their own theories? I don't. I'm sure they are looking to answer any remaining questions in their theories, discuss those things privately, but they don't attack their own ideas publicly. Do you think the environmentalists are going to raise questions about the relationship between global warming and CO2? I don't. They are going to attack anyone that does. In fact, until recently, that's exactly what they did. I'll be the first one to tell you I don't know a thing about evolution or global warming other than the headlines, but you don't have to know much about either to see that there are often agendas in the public discussion. Ideas are attacked and people are destroyed to suppress their ideas. Personally, I think the left is WAAAAY more guilty of this, but you see it from the right also.