<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/" > <channel> <title> Comments on: Equal opportunity creationism bashing </title> <atom:link href="https://dangerousintersection.org/2009/01/02/equal-opportunity-creationism-bashing/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /> <link>https://dangerousintersection.org/2009/01/02/equal-opportunity-creationism-bashing/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=equal-opportunity-creationism-bashing&utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=equal-opportunity-creationism-bashing</link> <description>Human Animals at the Crossroads of Science, Religion, Media and Culture</description> <lastBuildDate>Sun, 11 Jan 2009 21:02:37 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod> hourly </sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency> 1 </sy:updateFrequency> <item> <title> By: Mike Pulcinella </title> <link>https://dangerousintersection.org/2009/01/02/equal-opportunity-creationism-bashing/comment-page-3/#comment-33497</link> <dc:creator><![CDATA[Mike Pulcinella]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Sun, 11 Jan 2009 21:02:37 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=4059#comment-33497</guid> <description><![CDATA[Anyone who would post that Niburu video doesn't really belong at DI. I have suspected for some time that Karl is trolling us and this confirms it as far as I'm concerned. Anyone who thinks that a video of this sort would convince THIS crowd is either startlingly naive or simply putting us on. An aside... Why is it that all conspiracy/armageddon videos share certain characteristics, the most obvious being an overuse of declamatory text? This one is particularly bad because of the effect chosen to present the text. Boy, that is hard to read, and for those of us who read a little faster than normal, annoyingly slow! ]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anyone who would post that Niburu video doesn't really belong at DI. I have suspected for some time that Karl is trolling us and this confirms it as far as I'm concerned. Anyone who thinks that a video of this sort would convince THIS crowd is either startlingly naive or simply putting us on.</p> <p>An aside…</p> <p>Why is it that all conspiracy/armageddon videos share certain characteristics, the most obvious being an overuse of declamatory text? This one is particularly bad because of the effect chosen to present the text. Boy, that is hard to read, and for those of us who read a little faster than normal, annoyingly slow! </p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item> <title> By: Erich Vieth </title> <link>https://dangerousintersection.org/2009/01/02/equal-opportunity-creationism-bashing/comment-page-3/#comment-33415</link> <dc:creator><![CDATA[Erich Vieth]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Sun, 11 Jan 2009 17:51:49 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=4059#comment-33415</guid> <description><![CDATA[Special Notice to Karl: You are shamefully naive about "Nibiru." See <a href="http://astrobiology.nasa.gov/ask-an-astrobiologist/question/?id=2759" rel="nofollow">here</a>. It's all a hoax and you don't seem to give a crap. You'd rather spread hoaxes than do responsible research. (Anticipating your objection), NASA's <a href="http://www.nasa.gov/centers/ames/research/2007/morrison.html" rel="nofollow">David Morrison</a> is more trustworthy than your anonymous video. You might not think this fair, but Morrison, a highly trained and experienced scientist has put his name and conclusions into the public domain and defended them over a lifetime. The anonymous person(s) who created your Youtube video has no credibility, especially in light of the End Times eschatology espoused in the notes at YouTube. You have earned the very short leash I am putting you on, effective immediately. You have been working hard to clutter up this website with junk science, junk videos and junk links. You've outworn your welcome. From now on, your comments will be deleted, in their entirely, unless they are undeniably compliant with the Comments Policy of DI. Based on your track record, you have earned the burden of convincing me of each comment's worthiness. To have any chance of being published here, your future comments will need to be short (a few sentences only), and your cited sources will need to have an immediate smell of credibility. This site is no longer a place for you to pull up your cyber-chair and hold court. Out of courtesy, I will offer you this: If you have a website of your own where you talk at length about your theory of the universe and the meaning of life, I will print it at in these comments. That way, anyone who wants to hear more of your ideas will be free to do so. ]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Special Notice to Karl: You are shamefully naive about "Nibiru." See <a href="http://astrobiology.nasa.gov/ask-an-astrobiologist/question/?id=2759" rel="nofollow">here</a>. It's all a hoax and you don't seem to give a crap. You'd rather spread hoaxes than do responsible research.</p> <p>(Anticipating your objection), NASA's <a href="http://www.nasa.gov/centers/ames/research/2007/morrison.html" rel="nofollow">David Morrison</a> is more trustworthy than your anonymous video. You might not think this fair, but Morrison, a highly trained and experienced scientist has put his name and conclusions into the public domain and defended them over a lifetime. The anonymous person(s) who created your Youtube video has no credibility, especially in light of the End Times eschatology espoused in the notes at YouTube. </p> <p>You have earned the very short leash I am putting you on, effective immediately. You have been working hard to clutter up this website with junk science, junk videos and junk links. You've outworn your welcome. From now on, your comments will be deleted, in their entirely, unless they are undeniably compliant with the Comments Policy of DI. Based on your track record, you have earned the burden of convincing me of each comment's worthiness. To have any chance of being published here, your future comments will need to be short (a few sentences only), and your cited sources will need to have an immediate smell of credibility. This site is no longer a place for you to pull up your cyber-chair and hold court. </p> <p>Out of courtesy, I will offer you this: If you have a website of your own where you talk at length about your theory of the universe and the meaning of life, I will print it at in these comments. That way, anyone who wants to hear more of your ideas will be free to do so. </p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item> <title> By: Karl </title> <link>https://dangerousintersection.org/2009/01/02/equal-opportunity-creationism-bashing/comment-page-3/#comment-33401</link> <dc:creator><![CDATA[Karl]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Sun, 11 Jan 2009 17:13:45 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=4059#comment-33401</guid> <description><![CDATA[Everyone really so certain the earth's not been subject to a world wide flood in the recorded history of mankind? Something has snaked its way through our solarsytem in the past that has been very inhospitable, looks like something has been found our there that might be responsible for all of this catastrophism. A brown drawf star with seven planets of it own is reaching perihelion with our solarsystem during the next four years. Could be getting a bit catastrophic around our neck of the woods once again. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPIcPqedVa4&NR=1" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPIcPqedVa4&NR...</a> ]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Everyone really so certain the earth's not been subject to a world wide flood in the recorded history of mankind?</p> <p>Something has snaked its way through our solarsytem in the past that has been very inhospitable, looks like something has been found our there that might be responsible for all of this catastrophism.</p> <p>A brown drawf star with seven planets of it own is reaching perihelion with our solarsystem during the next four years. Could be getting a bit catastrophic around our neck of the woods once again.</p> <p> <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPIcPqedVa4&NR=1" rel="nofollow"></a><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPIcPqedVa4&NR" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPIcPqedVa4&NR</a>… </p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item> <title> By: Karl </title> <link>https://dangerousintersection.org/2009/01/02/equal-opportunity-creationism-bashing/comment-page-3/#comment-33378</link> <dc:creator><![CDATA[Karl]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Sun, 11 Jan 2009 08:20:48 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=4059#comment-33378</guid> <description><![CDATA[Grumpy stated: Seems to me if a god created mankind for “a purpose,” then any god worth his godhood would see to it that his “purpose” would be fulfilled. Freewill and predestination are nasty concepts for the human mind to wrestle with. If you were somehow given the abiltity to have an opportunity to create "a clone or a new intelligent life form," and you wanted to see if it measured up to your expectations? You have it within your ability to decide when and if this creation meets your desired expectations. When would you decide when the creation measured up or not? How long would the creation need no easily detectable direct intervention from you to know if it was going to turn out according to your expectations? ]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Grumpy stated:</p> <p>Seems to me if a god created mankind for “a purpose,” then any god worth his godhood would see to it that his “purpose” would be fulfilled.</p> <p>Freewill and predestination are nasty concepts for the human mind to wrestle with.</p> <p>If you were somehow given the abiltity to have an opportunity to create "a clone or a new intelligent life form," and you wanted to see if it measured up to your expectations? You have it within your ability to decide when and if this creation meets your desired expectations. When would you decide when the creation measured up or not? How long would the creation need no easily detectable direct intervention from you to know if it was going to turn out according to your expectations? </p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item> <title> By: grumpypilgrim </title> <link>https://dangerousintersection.org/2009/01/02/equal-opportunity-creationism-bashing/comment-page-3/#comment-33362</link> <dc:creator><![CDATA[grumpypilgrim]]></dc:creator> <pubDate>Sat, 10 Jan 2009 20:20:22 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=4059#comment-33362</guid> <description><![CDATA[Karl wrote, "There is a God who created mankind for a purpose. Included in this purpose was an inherent free will in man and a necessity to learn how to chose right from wrong." I'm just starting to read the long commentary in this post and the first thing I noticed is the above claim of Karl's. Here's my question: Doesn't it seem the least bit absurd for a god to have created mankind for "a purpose" and then to include in that "purpose" am trait inherent in mankind that would effectively eviscerate whatever that god wanted? Seems to me if a god created mankind for "a purpose," then any god worth his godhood would see to it that his "purpose" would be fulfilled. ]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Karl wrote, "There is a God who created mankind for a purpose. Included in this purpose was an inherent free will in man and a necessity to learn how to chose right from wrong."</p> <p>I'm just starting to read the long commentary in this post and the first thing I noticed is the above claim of Karl's. Here's my question: Doesn't it seem the least bit absurd for a god to have created mankind for "a purpose" and then to include in that "purpose" am trait inherent in mankind that would effectively eviscerate whatever that god wanted? Seems to me if a god created mankind for "a purpose," then any god worth his godhood would see to it that his "purpose" would be fulfilled. </p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>