Should health care be for-profit?
Re: the article “Health insurers’ profits not fat” (Oct. 26). In terms of our national health care debate, the article begs the question even further as to whether Americans require health reform to be part of our Congress’ agenda, and whether the insurance industry should lose antitrust exemptions. The “fact” health insurance profits are “not so fat,” will certainly lead to higher prices for health insurance. The question is, with accounting gambits, sweet executive compensation, corporate bonuses, consulting expenses, stockholder returns, compliance expenses, should health care be a “for-profit” enterprise?
If our government can concern itself with quality of life issues such as national parks, defending democracy around the world, building transportation networks, regulating interstate industries, ensuring the welfare of the common good, shouldn’t we be entitled to health care that’s cheaper?
Regarding antitrust exemptions, the industry doth protest too much. If there’s no price fixing, they’ve little to fear. Eliminating the profit associated with health care being a for-profit industry, it must follow that universal health care should be a right for all Americans.
Washington, D.C., is so thick with health care lobbyists that it’s difficult to cross the street! A whole lot of lobbying expenses getting written off, folks! Think about it!
JOHN ESSEX
Some questions for conservatives
1. Why can’t conservatives understand that President Obama initiated stimulus and bailout plans to prevent the economy from completely going splat — whereas Bush spent billions on a deadly and useless war in Iraq?
2. Why can’t conservatives understand that they can teach creationism in schools, just not in science classes, because there’s no science in creationism?
3. Why can’t conservatives understand that a fetus is not yet a human being — only a potential one?
4. Why can’t conservatives understand that generally, they’re not labeled a racist for voting against Barack Obama — just misguided?
5. Why do conservatives condemn science and its proponents whenever they feel threatened by its findings (global warming, evolution, etc.)?
HUNTLEY DAVIS JR.
MoveOn should offer information
A letter by the Chattanooga MoveOn council coordinator claimed that 77 percent of Americans want a public health insurance option.
I have not heard of any poll that comes close to that much support for a public option. Who determined that 77 percent of Americans want a public health option? MoveOn has a right to their own opinions but not to their own facts.
The MoveOn coordinator also claims that a Tennessee senator received large donations from health insurance companies (all politicians accept donations) so I think it is only fair to ask how much the Chattanooga MoveOn coordinator gets paid along with other MoveOn officials and where the money comes from?
The MoveOn coordinator preferred that MoveOn be described as a progressive political activist organization instead of a liberal activist group. How many conservatives and how many Republicans are members of MoveOn?
RICKEY PINSON
Harrison
Ugly behavior in the Bible Belt
This letter is in response to an Oct. 21 letter. I wash my bird feeders and birdbath with a bleach water mixture, no mosquitoes. Finches, chickadees, cardinals, woodpeckers, doves, jays and many other birds perch on my feeders and eat together. Birds that come to my feeders and birdbath don’t seem to care that they don’t all look alike. I’ve not seen a one with a sign that says “two, four, six, eight, we don’t want to integrate.”
Those who loved the ’60s and earlier years when my race wasn’t allowed to sit and eat in restaurants can enjoy that time again at a Dalton, Ga., cafe. They ignored and refused to serve me and my son on Aug. 22 of this year, then served a white man who came in after us. We got up and left. The female cashier laughed as we were leaving. I felt as if I had been transported back in time, a horrible time. This is the Bible Belt?
LINDA TALLEY
Hixson
Theater needs police sting
In response to those who think the Police Department’s recent sting operation was “unethical” or “entrapment,” here’s an opposing view:
Recently, my boyfriend and I went to see a movie at the Bijou Theater. As the theater was nearly empty, I placed my purse on the floor by my feet. When the lights went on, my purse was gone. I later learned the thieves had done this several times, by crawling under the seats! My purse was found nearby, dumped upside down, with anything of value gone from it.
I lost a day’s work dealing with all the things needing cancellation and/or replacement. I had to pay the $500 deductible from my insurance. The Bijou management was aware of this but chose not to warn patrons for fear of “scaring customers.” I wish the police had done a sting there!
KIM KINSEY
Red Bank
Make better use of Erlanger bonuses
It looks to me like Chattanooga has its own AIG situation in Erlanger hospital.
I have said in the past that Erlanger needs to be sold or turned back over to the county because they could have taken that $1.7 million that they paid in bonuses to people who were already overpaid, and treated more indigent patients or given their employees a bigger raise. After all, they are the ones who do all the work.
It is a disgrace to the people of Chattanooga to have people making that kind of money at a public hospital. I think the feds need to come back and check this out because of all the federal money that is pouring into Erlanger.
A company said that Erlanger’s incentive and CEO pay was in line with other hospitals of Erlanger’s size. But are they public hospitals, and are they always asking the city and county for more money to run their hospitals?
H. BUDDY ROGERS
Red Bank
Speed hump slows Tremont traffic
Thanks to Mayor Littlefield and the Chattanooga streets department. Recent installation of a speed hump in the 500 block of Tremont Street has greatly slowed traffic and improved the safety of residents and business/professional-services clientele in this neighborhood.
BILL WRAY
How do shelters stand on abuse?
About those animal abusers who “need punishment,” (letter, Oct. 24).
Does not the Humane Society and/or McKamey animal shelter have some authority that could be of influence here?
MERILYN HALL
Lookout Mountain, Ga.
Time to change Lookout leaders
At a candidates’ meeting in Lookout Mountain, Ga., several points were brought up by city councilmen and a candidate for mayor.
One being that the police force needs basic equipment to control speeders on our small, narrow roads. I wonder why this was not budgeted for in the past.
The sewer system has a debt of about $3 million, yet does not work effectively, and residents complain about intolerable odors.
The supporters of Chapelbrow continue to push for planned unit development despite warnings from city planners that the soil is too shallow on the proposed site, and it is not a good location. This proposed development would affect everyone on the mountain.
The town center has been on hold for almost two years. While it looks like a bombed out war zone, the officials have not made decisions needed to begin any construction yet.
With all due respect to those serving, it does seem that a change is in order.
Please vote on Tuesday for Blair Ramey, Bill Bennett and Sandy Gothard for the City Council seats and for Bill Glasscock for mayor.
REBECCA LYNN
HARTMAN
Lookout Mountain, Ga.
Text Size:
Yes, Ms. Talley. This is the babble belt - and as such, the racism, prejudice and divisive social constructs you and I and many others wish would disappear from the Earth still find fertile ground. For it is the wretched fertilizer of religion that produces the bounty of human misery all around the world. Sadly, few who adopt the various forms of it can see themselves through the eyes of those they find inferior or fearful for following a different spiritual drummer.
Why can't the liberal-left understand that Obama hasn't just used more trillions to "bail out" the economy, he and his Chicago mob are busily nationalizing/socializing/placing control on all the private institutions AND passing legislation with the DNC in the dead of night-out of public and Republican view-in order to further impoverish the country? When will these same drones understand this is no longer Bush's fault?
When will the L-L's realize that science is theory and is constantly changing it's "truth". Not every scientist believes in global "warming", Darwin's theses or that humans at conception are mere protoplasmic blobs? So, to be fair, howsabout not teaching impressionable children either one or teach both and let them make up their own minds?
If Ms. Talley was indeed racially profiled in that way, well I believe individuals and businesses like that will never be successful and they should be ashamed of that behavior. However, to make it a "Bible-Belt" issue is suspect as any rational person knows that practicing Christians (and others) of any color or race absolutely should not treat folks that way and harbor those feelings. But some do.
Does it happen to all kinds of people? In CA, there is more racism from and racist acts committed by non-white, non-Christian people. So should I then state that they are all disgusting people and every one of them practices racism and hatred?
PS: Moveon is funded largely by the billionaire Socialist George Soros who has been very open about his views of restructuring America to fit HIS belief system. He and other very wealthy far-left types heavily funded Obama's campaign in 2008 and before, when he ran for a Senate seat. (this is for the non-questioning followers of his who like to accuse all Conservatives of loving and supporting "wealthy", disgustingly corrupt people and companies)
Better unwind that wad you've got your panties in, Canary. It sounds like you're delirious and your bird brain is about to lose consciousness.
Canary, Canary, Canary....
Don't write about things you know nothing about:
"When will the L-L's realize that science is theory and is constantly changing it's "truth". Not every scientist believes in global "warming", Darwin's theses or that humans at conception are mere protoplasmic blobs? So, to be fair, howsabout not teaching impressionable children either one or teach both and let them make up their own minds?"
The Theory of Evolution has no competition. It is not only supported by ALL the evidence, it is supported by all the evidence from all other sciences. Global Climate Change is a complicated issue, but almost all Climate scientists agree that the evidence points to rising temps caused by human activity, and agree on many of the more widespread effects. Teaching children "all the sides"? In science, there is only one side. Scientists debate the finer details, but children don't have the background knowledge to understand these details.
A scientific "theory" is not a guess. If you knew anything about science, you would not make this mistake.
lkeithlu,lkeithlu, I need to see your unbiased,unquesionable
"ALL" evidence that supports Evolution. I also want to see the missing link we still look for. Faith pal, it takes faith to believe all the assumptions put forth. But oh no, someone has anointed all "science" and ones who purport to be scientists as long as they take the right perspective to have it all down. There are just some things we cannnot explain. It is beyond us. Oh but I forgot, science will either figure it out or dismiss and discredit it as unimportant. In all likelihood there are as many "faith persons" involved in Evolution's claims as there are in Creationism. As far as evolution goes just as in creationism, no one was there to document and verify what intelligent scientists centuries later hypothesize particularly concerning evolution. It seems if they say it enough times their findings become automatically accepted.
Livn4life, your ignorance of science, especially biological sciences and evolution, is astounding. Until you learn about science, its methodology and practice, you have NO credibility in this area. The evidence collected over hundreds of years by thousands of scientists is vast and it supports the theory very well. Find a library, get a basic Biology text, and read. When you are ready, there are wonderful books appropriate for lay readers about the science of evolution, but your understanding of what science is appears to be so poor I'm not sure you are ready.
Sir Ikeithlie, you are the one who does NOT do your research correctly like any intelligent person, "looking at all sides and arguments before making judgements" would do. There is a wealth of scientists, biologists, climatologists, anthropologists, creation-evolutionists out there and THEIR research, that would prove you a fool. You obviously have a very closed mind so I believe you cannot be a 'real' scientist. You guys are proven wrong, again and again. I just wait two-five years (sometimes less) and laugh real hard!
PS; Someone else is also listening to you guys and laughing. At your persistent arrogance :)
Canary, honey, please tell me about the "wealth" of scientists that do this research, and where their research is published. You see, I am a scientist interested in sound science education, and for 10 years I have researched and followed the Creationists, Intelligent Design Theorists and all others who seek to change the paradigm of biological evolution and the related sciences. There is NOTHING. No research, no publications, no data that supports any "theory" that they believe challenges evolution. When I say you are ignorant of science, it comes from your statements regarding science. To someone in the field, your remarks are so bizarre that I don't even know where to begin addressing them. Let's start with your sources: point me in the direction of research that is published in peer-reviewed journals that contradicts evolution. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence; a paradigm shifting discovery is extraordinary indeed in the scientific community. Or, give me the names and institutions of these scientists that are doing this work. If you dismiss peer review as unnecessary, then truly you are uneducated in the sciences.
You keith-continue-to-spout-your-lies. I do not dismiss peer review and if you are who you say you are and IF you have studied and researched all of the 'facts', publications and data out there as you claim, then we wouldn't be having this disagreement. You would know full well that the jury is still 'out' in all areas and disciplines of 'science' as Livn4life pointed out and you would not feel the need to denigrate OUR beliefs and evidence of our faith, etc.
I choose to believe those scientists who are just as viable and published as your cronies, yet they are much more honest. They are not afraid of dissenting opinions and thoughts. They eagerly come together and debate these issues frequently and worldwide. To use your so-called 'knowledge' to debase and prevent others opinions from being known is a common tool of Marxists and the Left, here in the US, in our Gov't now, and in our so-called places of "learning". Take your agenda sir and move to Iran or Russia. You will be welcomed with open arms (for awhile at least).
Woof! Such venom! I just asked for the studies or the scientists. Does this mean you don't know? By the way, we were talking science, not religion. Do you know the difference?
I have researched the "facts", the publications, etc. In addition, I have the training and education to understand some of it (not all of course, but I know where to find the sources used by people in the particular field of study)
So, if you have the information, how about sharing it? You made the paradigm-shifting claim.
While you're at it, let me know the forums where "they come together to debate the issues frequently and worldwide". The names of the organizations will do- I can get the dates and locations, plus any statements or publications they produce.
Take your time.
Oh, and one more thing. One does not have to respect the opinion of someone else when they base their opinion on falsehoods. There is nothing "Marxist" about that. Hence, I am asking you to produce the facts. That's quite American, in my opinion.
Think you're so smart, eh? I'm not a scientist, thank the Lord but I wasn't born yesterday either. You attempt to pull me and others into so-called 'debate' that will never be 'won' Instead, why don't you have the cojones to debate your Peers on the other side? They meet frequently and in many cities. Go for it :) I suspect, with you as with all Marxists today, a form of cowardice exists.
I leave the rest of you with some thoughts from a much wiser, greater and honest Scientist than the one on this page who purports to be smarter than the rest of us. While I don't agree with everything Einstein said or believed (he attributed the inner, human spirit to "Nature" and later on in his life, spoke of "God" more often. Yet, he admitted with HUMILITY that he did not know everything as a man and as a scientist. He was a true, creative Thinker for a human:)
What separates me from most so-called atheists is a feeling of utter humility toward the unattainable secrets of the harmony of the cosmos. (Albert Einstein to Joseph Lewis, Apr. 18, 1953)
We know nothing about [God, the world] at all. All our knowledge is but the knowledge of schoolchildren. Possibly we shall know a little more than we do now. but the real nature of things, that we shall never know, never. (The Expanded Quotable Einstein, Princeton University Press, Page 208)
I see a pattern, but my imagination cannot picture the maker of that pattern. I see a clock, but I cannot envision the clockmaker. The human mind is unable to conceive of the four dimensions, so how can it conceive of a God, before whom a thousand years and a thousand dimensions are as one? (The Expanded Quotable Einstein, Princeton University Press, 2000 p. 208)
Hmmmm... maybe you didn't understand my question. I'm not so smart, but I do try to learn as much as I can before forming an opinion. This area is one I have worked very hard on for 30 years now, so I do know quite a bit (unlike politics-don't know much there, nor about economics. I don't write a lot on line about these things because I haven't learned enough yet)
Are you telling me you don't know the scientists, the studies or the forums? Or do you need more time to gather the info?
I don't want to pull you into a debate, I just want you to support what you say. Internet links are okay too. As far as debating the "peers" on the "other side", scientists have done just that, and when the debate centers on evidence, they always win.
On what basis, by the way, do you call me a Marxist? Have a revealed my political or economic ideas to you? Do you know what a Marxist is? Or do you just call everyone who disagrees with you a Marxist?
Einstein:
The most beautiful and most profound experience is the sensation of the mystical. It is the sower of all true science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead. To know that what is impenetrable to us really exists, manifesting itself as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty which our dull faculties can comprehend only in their primitive forms - this knowledge, this feeling is at the center of true religiousness.
( Albert Einstein - The Merging of Spirit and Science)
A knowledge of the existence of something we cannot penetrate, of the manifestations of the profoundest reason and the most radiant beauty - it is this knowledge and this emotion that constitute the truly religious attitude; in this sense, and in this alone, I am a deeply religious man. (Albert Einstein)
I want to know how God created this world. I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know his thoughts. The rest are details. (The Expanded Quotable Einstein, Princeton University Press, 2000 p.202)
What I see in Nature is a magnificent structure that we can comprehend only very imperfectly, and that must fill a thinking person with a feeling of "humility." This is a genuinely religious feeling that has nothing to do with mysticism.
I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our own being. (Albert Einstein)
Tell you what: I'll assume you need more time. I'll wait a couple of hours before I comment again. Please, if you would, bring to this forum the scientists, institutions, journals and forums where the evolution paradigm is currently being shifted by evidence collected and reported by said scientists, etc.
I await your convincing evidence. See you in a couple of hours.
Pity the poor man-with all his 'education' he still doesn't get it. For someone who does "research" he doesn't read so well. He spouts the typical Marxist line of thinking and intimidation tactics so...? Pity, he doesn't even know what he is.
Can we visualize a 3D universe which is finite yet unbounded? (Albert Einstein, 1954)
Physics constitutes a logical system of thought which is in a state of evolution, whose basis (principles) cannot be distilled, as it were, from experience by an inductive method, but can only be arrived at by free invention. The justification (truth content) of the system rests in the verification of the derived propositions (a priori/logical truths) by sense experiences (a posteriori/empirical truths). ... Evolution is proceeding in the direction of increasing simplicity of the logical basis (principles). .. We must always be ready to change these notions - that is to say, the axiomatic basis of physics - in order to do justice to perceived facts in the most perfect way logically. (Albert Einstein, Physics and Reality, 1936)
The area of scientific knowledge has been enormously extended, and theoretical knowledge has become vastly more profound in every department of science. But the assimilative power of the human intellect is and remains strictly limited. Hence it was inevitable that the activity of the individual investigator should be confined to a smaller and smaller section of human knowledge. Worse still, this specialization makes it increasingly difficult to keep even our general understanding of science as a whole, without which the true spirit of research is inevitably handicapped, in step with scientific progress. Every serious scientific worker is painfully conscious of this involuntary relegation to an ever-narrowing sphere of knowledge, which threatens to deprive the investigator of his broad horizon and degrades him to the level of a mechanic ...
It is just as important to make knowledge live and to keep it alive as to solve specific problems. (Albert Einstein, 1954)
The population of the civilized countries is extremely dense as compared with former times; Europe today contains about three times as many people as it did a hundred years ago. But the number of leading personalities has decreased out of all proportion. Only a few people are known to the masses as individuals, through their creative achievements. Organisation has to some extent taken the place of leading personalities, particularly in the technical sphere, but also to a very perceptible extent in the scientific. (Albert Einstein, 1934)
The development of science and of the creative activities of the spirit in general requires still another kind of freedom, which may be characterised as inward freedom. It is this freedom of spirit which consists in the independence of thought from the restrictions of authoritarian and social prejudices as well as from unphilosophical routinizing and habit in general. This inward freedom is an infrequent gift of nature and a worthy objective for the individual.
..schools may favour such freedom by encouraging independent thought. Only if outward and inner freedom are constantly and consciously pursued is there a possibility of spiritual development and perfection and thus of improving man's outward and inner life. (Albert Einstein, 1940)
To see with one's own eyes, to feel and judge without succumbing to the suggestive power of the fashion of the day, to be able to express what one has seen and felt in a trim sentence or even in a cunningly wrought word- is that not glorious? Is it not a proper subject for congratulation? (Albert Einstein, 1934)
Amen. I thank the Lord God who created you Albert Einstein, A Jew, blessed with the blessings of your ancestor Abraham. Even without out knowing and understanding the Adonai of your ancestors and His wisdom, you were inspired by the spirit He gave you to become the greatest thinker, scientist, mathemetician, and physicist we have had since the Renaissance.
Rest in shalom.
Well, lots of pretty quotes from Einstein are nice, but they do not pass for the "scientists, institutions and literature" that you claim shift this paradigm, or forums where these scientists "debate frequently and worldwide". Einstein was a physicist (a cosmologist in his later years) but he was not a biologist, paleontologist, geneticist, geologist or anthropologist. He was a famous scientist making philosophical musings about the "whys" of the universe. He died before DNA, Plate tectonics or space travel. These philosophical musings, though rich and interesting, are not scientific. They say nothing of evolution, nor do they suggest a shift in paradigm.
I am beginning to suspect that you may have no evidence, scientists, studies or literature to offer up, and these so called debate forums exist only in your imagination. Am I correct?
Well, Canary, I have to conclude that you have no support for your claims. Let me explain in a very basic way how science works. Scientists gather information, and they publish their findings, including what they think the study demonstrates. They base their conclusions not only on their own findings, but they must be sure that their work is consistent with the work of everyone else in the related field. They offer their work up to the biggest critics. If others find that the scientist is unfamiliar with the rest of the work in the field, or makes unwarranted claims, or is sloppy or imprecise, they are called on it. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence; if a scientist wants to offer an alternative explanation to accepted science, his or her explanation must be consistent with ALL data, not just their own. This resistance to change keeps crackpot ideas from gaining a hold before the lack of evidence sweeps them away. Novel ideas are always rejected at first, but if they are correct, the evidence that continues to be gathered will soon convince other scientists.
Creationists cherry-pick evidence to back their theories of a 6000 year old earth and a world-wide flood. They also make unscientific (and hence untestable) claims that the basic laws of physics and geology are suspended by God at will. That is why their ideas are rejected. Too much of the evidence does not fit their paradigm.
Intelligent Design Theorists, unlike Creationists, gather no data at all. Most of them are information or computer experts who argue from positions of incredulity. They do no research, and do not familiarize themselves with the literature. Hence they make claims regarding "Irreducible Complexity" or "Increase in information" that are simply not supported by the evidence. Some of them are dishonest charlatans, preying on a public that knows too little science to see through their charade. These are people that want the credibility in science, but are not willing to do the work. They whine and complain about "conspiracies" and "free-speech" issues. If they can't run with the big dogs, they should stay on the porch. Science and peer review is a tough world, not for the thin-skinned.
Evolution is one of the most beautiful and well-supported theories in science today, made stronger each year by work in genetics, paleontology, cell biology, bio-geography, geology, anthropology, epidemiology and ecology. I can recommend fascinating books written by prominent scientists geared towards folks like us who are interested in the science. Learn about the science. Be careful about making claims on public forums that you cannot back up.
I make claims I cannot back up on a daily basis. That is my game! Just ignore me and I will have to go away.
As you can see, I never ignore challenges to teaching sound science, including evolution. It is my goal in life to defend science teaching whenever it is questioned, especially on false grounds for religious reasons. I usually only read about most other issues, because I don't know enough to argue effectively. But I am passionate about this subject, and I consider attempts to dismiss the science or to replace it with non-science to be one of the biggest threats to our future as a nation. But hey, that's me. Have a good night.
Ikeithlu 1, Canaryinthecoalmine 0. Game over.
Think again librul, your little game of pretending to be me and using my handle is typical of you sleazes or trolls on this site. You can't answer anything in a rational way so you have to lie. The so-called 'scientist' cannot answer anything EINSTEIN said to refute the arrogant stance he himself holds so he has to denigrate the rest of us who do not agree with him. Denigrating Einstein from that narrow perch? Pitiful. Further proof that whether one has a PHD or one, like librul, a product of the drug world, you types believe heartily that you (the "elite") know so much more than the rest of us and we just don't know what's 'good' for ourselves, therefore we will indoctrinate, we will tell you guys what to think. Sheesh, Einstein is still so right about people like you two.
Gee-I see I gained no ground after all that effort. And no, everything I posted was the absolute truth, which I can back with evidence. I suspect that were Einstein alive, he'd agree with me on this one. Canary, I'm sorry your days are filled with such hate and paranoia, and you must denigrate anyone who disagrees with you, calling them terms you yourself do not understand, like Marxists. It's also unfortunate that you are not open to learning new things. Unfortunate, tragic even. Hope your neighbors know this is you and give you a wide berth.
And you are one very sick honcho who if true, has indoctrinated at least one generation with more lies.
No, If you READ Einstein and other scientists, they would heartily disagree with your kind. We don't have to answer your demands for anything. It is your ilk who are the haters and paranoid of us. You are the ones that want to silence us. Very evil you are. My community appreciates me and I hate no one. My conscience is clear, is yours? I doubt it very much.
Actually, my conscience is clear and I enjoy being ruled by reason and evidence rather than suspicion and ignorance.
Good, thoughtful comments ikeithlu.
All the sciences, i.e., physics, chemistry, biology, zoology, paleontology, astronomy, archeology, meteorology, etc., develop secular, non-theistic principles to explain the operation of the physical, material world.
Nature is a relentless, non-linear, physical process that has existed since the origin of our planet a few billion years ago and will continue for a few more billion years until the sun decays, expands, and engulfs the earth, destroying it forever.
During this time, including the present, plant and animal species arise, live, and become extinct, naturally.
Evolution is the word given for this natural process.
Evolution does not depend on Darwin anymore than gravity depends on Newton or thermodynamics on Maxwell or space-time on Einstein. Nature doesn't care about our religion or politics. It just keeps on keeping on.
Thanks, una61. A prolonged exchange with canary makes me feel like I am trying to nail jello to a tree. But I can't keep silent when I see such misinformation about science posted on a public site. It's silly, really. There are better ways to spend time, I know, but the educator in me just can't resist!
I am the all knowing king of the universe.
Canary, anyone who calls anyone "honey" in an insulting or derogatory manner, deliberately or not, or otherwise looks down on someone is simply not worth the effort. Anyone using that word, among others these days, to a stranger or a relatively unknown person is a misogynist of the first water and bears close watching...and a hand on the butt of a holstered gun. Trust me on that. Ignore him. You are empowering him. They are generally into S&M, heavily on the S.
Further, the argument that Darwin had a Theory of Evolution or something is total bunk. The supporters know nothing of how an Hypothesis becomes a Theory and becomes a physical Law, Axiom, Corollary, or whatever. One of Einstein's Hypotheses recently became a full Theory when something he predicted appeared [I forget the details, google Steven Hawkins' Bet]. Darwin's idea hasn't even approached that level.
Yes, life changes but ever so slowly. And an apple doesn't suddenly become an orange, either. Not even slowly.
Gee, rolando, there is so much BS in that post I don't even know where to start. In addition, calling canary "honey" doesn't hold a candle to the wide and varied slander he or she heaped upon me. Sames goes for you, rolando. A civil discourse doesn't include accusing someone you don't know of being into S&M. From your post I see you know about as much about science as canary. Pity; schools are definitely failing our kids. I guess perhaps I should ask you what evidence you have to back up your claims. Let's stick with the science, shall we? And let's stick with scientists in the field in question, not Hawking or Einstein.
Well, many hours later and this is the reply from rolando:
(crickets chirping)
Perhaps you have nothing to offer up as evidence?