proposal: kill all unfit human life

Religions > Atheism > proposal: kill all unfit human life

LINK TO THIS PAGE

rating : 0 | 0

Page 4 of 8

Topic:	Religions > Atheism
User:	"david ford"
Date:	19 Dec 2005 11:38:43 AM
Object:	proposal: kill all unfit human life

david ford wrote in "Re: Darwin was a racist.":

I "support infanticide," and support the killing of all unfit human life.

Fellow defenders of infanticide include the atheism-adherents James D.
Watson, Francis Crick, Peter Singer, Steven Pinker, Adolf Hitler, and
Ernst Haeckel.
Darwin
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1135004225.246782.327080%40g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
In Sparta, also, a form of selection
was followed, for it was enacted that all children should
be examined shortly after birth; the well-formed and
vigorous being preserved, the others left to perish.
I propose the killing of disabled and all other unfit human lives, such
as Terri Schindler Schiavo.
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1125332830.051705.205450%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
not-PVS
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1115683914.394927.244340%40f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
1979 Schaeffer & Koop on the a-moral implications of atheism
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-b1c67abe.0504061225.4c675814%40posting.google.com
Haeckel and Buchner and a Darwinian a-moral climate
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1118315214.069039.280490%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
1868 Haeckel, 2003 Dawkins, 1997 George Williams, 1995 Dennett:
Darwinist atheists/ materialists downgrading the value of human life
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-399aluF5uql89U1%40individual.net
Haeckel on killing the disabled
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-3a8etdF65smnrU4%40individual.net
atheism-adherents Hitler & Haeckel parallels
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1133410708.967895.276860%40g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Hitler's actions make sense given his atheism and eugenic, social
Darwinist vision
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1134145559.645139.229550%40f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
Multi-Pronged Role of Darwinian Thought in Shoah's Arrival
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1132080322.482544.299440%40g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Taking a firm, godless stand for death
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-b1c67abe.0410291758.3dfffe4b%40posting.google.com
the secular religion of atheism has a bloody history
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1121400956.627638.38960%40g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Reality supports the worldview philosophy of materialism/ atheism
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-3813ksF5ggkc3U1%40individual.net
On the Origin of Life
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-39oh33F63riraU1%40individual.net
.

User: "Matt Silberstein"
Title: Re: "biomedical scientists" did 'science' in carrying out "Nazi racial programs"	28 Dec 2005 03:16:14 PM

On 28 Dec 2005 12:22:44 -0800, in talk.origins , "david ford"
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> in
<dford3-1135801364.548390.306010@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:

Matt Silberstein wrote:

On 27 Dec 2005 14:08:07 -0800, in alt.atheism , "david ford"
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> in
<dford3-1135721287.496768.326960@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:

[snip]

Matt, I can't think of any compelling reasons for someone in North
America to care in the least about genocide occurring in Africa, or
Europe.
Are you aware of any such reasons?

I'm in the U.S., and don't even care when people _here_ are starved to
death.

[snip]

[snip]
--
Matt Silberstein
Do something today about the Darfur Genocide
http://www.beawitness.org
http://www.darfurgenocide.org
http://www.savedarfur.org
"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
.

User: "david ford"
Title: Re: "biomedical scientists" did 'science' in carrying out "Nazi racial programs"	28 Dec 2005 09:32:25 PM

Matt Silberstein wrote:

On 28 Dec 2005 12:22:44 -0800, in talk.origins , "david ford"
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> in
<dford3-1135801364.548390.306010@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:

Matt Silberstein wrote:

On 27 Dec 2005 14:08:07 -0800, in alt.atheism , "david ford"
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> in
<dford3-1135721287.496768.326960@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:

[snip]

[snip]

Let me guess: you're the strong, silent type.

--
Matt Silberstein

Do something today about the Darfur Genocide

http://www.beawitness.org
http://www.darfurgenocide.org
http://www.savedarfur.org

"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"

Hentoff, Nat. 28 Dec 2005. _Jewish World Review_ "Darfur: The
genocide goes on and on"
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/hentoff122805.asp
I don't know about you, but AFAIK, little is said about Darfur in the
pages of the _Washington Post_ and _New York Times_.
Though I must confess, I pay scant attention to them, as with CBS, NBC,
and ABC. They're all shoddy suppliers of that product known as "news."
Have you heard much about Darfur from them?
Nat Hentoff's "Darfur: The missing media"
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/hentoff092205.asp
The _Washington Post_ and _New York Times_ et al. did a similar-quality
job covering another genocide occurring way back in the 1940s.
Lipstadt, Deborah E. 1986. _Beyond Belief: The American Press and the
Coming of the Holocaust 1933-1945_ (New York: The Free Press), 370pp.,
4-5, 16, 20, 219-20, 226-8, 234-5, 238, 244-5, 247, 268, 270, 275, 278.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
May each of the editors and reporters at the _Washington Post_ and _New
York Times_ have 1,000 children for their making of that product called
"news" in the 1940s and in 2005.
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Nat Hentoff's "Lying about Terri Schiavo"
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1129607287.267946.272510%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Terri Schindler Schiavo story with villains, victims, and heroes
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1125332830.051705.205450%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
not-PVS
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1115683914.394927.244340%40f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
.

User: "Matt Silberstein"
Title: Re: "biomedical scientists" did 'science' in carrying out "Nazi racial programs"	28 Dec 2005 10:31:54 PM

On 28 Dec 2005 19:32:25 -0800, in alt.atheism , "david ford"
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> in
<dford3-1135827145.891246.71620@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:

Matt Silberstein wrote:

On 28 Dec 2005 12:22:44 -0800, in talk.origins , "david ford"
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> in
<dford3-1135801364.548390.306010@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:

Matt Silberstein wrote:

On 27 Dec 2005 14:08:07 -0800, in alt.atheism , "david ford"
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> in
<dford3-1135721287.496768.326960@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:

[snip]

[snip]

[snip]
--
Matt Silberstein
Do something today about the Darfur Genocide
http://www.beawitness.org
http://www.darfurgenocide.org
http://www.savedarfur.org
"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
.

User: "wbarwell"
Title: Re: "biomedical scientists" did 'science' in carrying out "Nazi racial programs"	29 Dec 2005 11:18:01 AM

Matt Silberstein wrote:

On 28 Dec 2005 19:32:25 -0800, in alt.atheism , "david ford"
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> in
<dford3-1135827145.891246.71620@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
wrote:

Matt Silberstein wrote:

On 28 Dec 2005 12:22:44 -0800, in talk.origins , "david ford"
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> in
<dford3-1135801364.548390.306010@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
wrote:

Matt Silberstein wrote:

On 27 Dec 2005 14:08:07 -0800, in alt.atheism , "david ford"
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> in
<dford3-1135721287.496768.326960@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
wrote:

[snip]

Matt, I can't think of any compelling reasons for someone in
North America to care in the least about genocide occurring in
Africa, or Europe.
Are you aware of any such reasons?

I'm in the U.S., and don't even care when people _here_ are
starved to death.

[snip]

Kind of says it all, doesn't it?
"Whats a little genocide? I am a christian."
Amazing he rants and raves about Darwin
and genocide and then admits he does not really
care at all about genocide.
--
Happy Hogmanay!
Cheerful Charlie
.

User: "david ford"
Title: Re: "biomedical scientists" did 'science' in carrying out "Nazi racial programs"	29 Dec 2005 05:56:03 PM

wbarwell wrote:

Matt Silberstein wrote:

On 28 Dec 2005 19:32:25 -0800, in alt.atheism , "david ford"
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> in
<dford3-1135827145.891246.71620@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
wrote:

Matt Silberstein wrote:

On 28 Dec 2005 12:22:44 -0800, in talk.origins , "david ford"
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> in
<dford3-1135801364.548390.306010@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
wrote:

Matt Silberstein wrote:

On 27 Dec 2005 14:08:07 -0800, in alt.atheism , "david ford"
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> in
<dford3-1135721287.496768.326960@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
wrote:

[snip]

Matt, I can't think of any compelling reasons for someone in
North America to care in the least about genocide occurring in
Africa, or Europe.
Are you aware of any such reasons?

I'm in the U.S., and don't even care when people _here_ are
starved to death.

[snip]

Kind of says it all, doesn't it?
"Whats a little genocide? I am a christian."

Amazing he rants and raves about Darwin
and genocide and then admits he does not really
care at all about genocide.

Do you oppose genocide now occurring in Africa?
If 'yes,' upon what basis/ grounds/ rationale?
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
1916/ 1922 Nordau; infanticide, slavery, and genocide
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1132847220.475151.206790%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
Reagan's allegation that there exists
some [Reagan]"natural law," some [Reagan]"higher law of morality."
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1132849740.419205.114320%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
1979 Schaeffer & Koop on the a-moral implications of atheism
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-b1c67abe.0504061225.4c675814%40posting.google.com

--
Happy Hogmanay!

Merry Winter Solstice!
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1134184020.915479.145130%40g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com

Cheerful Charlie

User: "wbarwell"
Title: Re: "biomedical scientists" did 'science' in carrying out "Nazi racial programs"	30 Dec 2005 05:59:15 AM

david ford wrote:

wbarwell wrote:

Matt Silberstein wrote:

On 28 Dec 2005 19:32:25 -0800, in alt.atheism , "david ford"
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> in
<dford3-1135827145.891246.71620@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
wrote:

Matt Silberstein wrote:

On 28 Dec 2005 12:22:44 -0800, in talk.origins , "david ford"
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> in
<dford3-1135801364.548390.306010@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
wrote:

Matt Silberstein wrote:

On 27 Dec 2005 14:08:07 -0800, in alt.atheism , "david ford"
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> in

<dford3-1135721287.496768.326960@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>

wrote:

[snip]

Matt, I can't think of any compelling reasons for someone
in North America to care in the least about genocide
occurring in Africa, or Europe.
Are you aware of any such reasons?

I'm in the U.S., and don't even care when people _here_ are
starved to death.

[snip]

Kind of says it all, doesn't it?
"Whats a little genocide? I am a christian."

Amazing he rants and raves about Darwin
and genocide and then admits he does not really
care at all about genocide.

Do you oppose genocide now occurring in Africa?
If 'yes,' upon what basis/ grounds/ rationale?

Yes. Because it is wrong.
Because good people are being victimized
by religious fanatics, which is always evil.
Amazingly, all these damned Christians and
Moslems don't seem to care.
And when that starts its a slippery slope where
anybody's rights are up for grabs.
Typical evil from the religious moral morons.
***********************************************************
The Failure of Christianity in America
W. C . Barwell 3-8-05
***********************************************************
Since Nixon, this nation has rapidly moved to the far right,
taken there mainly by christian right wingers who have fully
supported the GOP as it has moved right to gain support of
christian zealots and conservatives. This started when Nixon
played the racist Southern Strategy card building on civil
rights era resentments by far right Southerners, in a purposeful
plan create by Kevin Phillips, playing on unchristian racist
resentments of the post Jim Crow civil rights era. Kevin Phillips,
architect of the Sourthern strategy, apologized on NPR radio a
few years back for this plan, which he admitted often sunk into
rank racism.
So we now have had a essentially a christian GOP government
for 30 years.
Under Nixon:
Christian Americans supported incompetent and corrupt
Vietnamese politicians. And a senseless war in Vietnam
that accomplished nothing. And a corrupt US military that
mislead us steadily about all of this.
Nixon lied about having a secret plan to end the war.
Christians supported Nixon's having instigated awful and
murderous policies as the Phoenix program.
Supported the secret bombings in Cambodia that killed
hundreds of thousands of innocent Cambodians.
Despite the lies and deceits, few Christian leaders seemed
to care or be disturbed by such things.
Winked at the invasion of East Timur and parts of New
Guinea by our allies, the Indonesions.
The Indonesians killed 1/4 of the East Timurese over several
decades, mass murder, genocide. 2 million dead.
Winked at the Greek far right Junta that overthrew the
Greek government. Today many Greeks still intensely
dislike teh US for support these men who tortured and jailed
many without charges, based on politics.
Supported the murderous far right Brazilian generals who
overthrew that democratically elected government.
Supported the mass murdering Argentinian government and
their terroristic "Dirty War" of torture, mass murder
and disappearances.
Supported the murderous Pinochet of Chile and overthrow
yet another democratically elected goverment.
No Christians respected life here. Or freedom. But supported
Nixon heartily despite the horrors we commited in Vietnam
and Cambodia and Chile and winked at support for other
dictators and right winged coups mentioned above.
The right wingers of both parties supported this, and many
claimed to be christians.
Reagan.
Reagan lead the GOP in support for military aid to the
genocidal Rios Montt of Guatemala, who's armies most purposefully
practiced wholesale torture, rape and genocide on the Mayan
Indians of Guatemala. A war of terror.
Reagan and the GOP supported the mass murdering ex-Somoza
Guards of Nicaragua.
Reagan and the GOP supported Saddam Hussein of Iraq, despite
Saddam's starting a warm, and using poison gas in his war.
Reagan and the GOP supported the murderous Robert
D'Aubisson of El Salavador, a known far right death
squad leader.
The El Salvadoran government was involved in numerous
murders, and massacres, such as the killing of 400
villagers at a small village called El Mezote, most
of them young women and children.
Reagan and the GOP supported Noriega of Panama.
Few christiabs complained, not the leadership of
US denominations.
Reagan and the GOP happily supported Pol Pot's claim
to be the rightful government of Cambodia despite the
genocide committed by the insane Pol Pot's Khmer Regime,
and even had teh CIA send money and supplies to Pol Pot
while ignoring China's reaming Pol Pot without complaint.
Reagan and the GOP supported a number of murdering
far right extremist guerrilla movements in Africa
including the genocidal Frelimo in Mozambique.
Reagan fought sanctions to end apartheid in South africa.
The Christian and religous right heavily supported Reagan
and the GOP despite numerous examples of such evils as
listed above. The leaders of the religous right never cared
nor complained, neither did the religous leaders of the
main stream christian denominations.
There was and is no respect for life in American
christianity as these wholesale and repeat failures of
America christianity collectively over 20 years shows.
Then we had Bush.
Bush continued support for the evil dictators above,
including Pinochet, Pol Pot and others. However,
Saddam screwed us and invaded Iraq, mainly because
Bush screwed up and did not warn him to not do so
even though Saddam repeatedly threatened Kuwait for
months, carefully gauguing Bush's lack of reaction
and thinking lack of reaction amounted to de facto
permission or acceptance of an invasion of Kuwait
by the inert Bush.
Bush did not act in case of genocide my Jugoslavia's
Milosevic, and Bush and the GOP's loud and obnoxious
footdragging here allowed Milosevic to kill
hundreds of thousands with near impunity.
The leaders of the GOP, House and Senate, and religous
leaders of the right and mainstream denominations never
cared about any of this, nor made issue of these evils.
In the Desert Storm war, Bush allowed the US air
force to bomb Iraq's water and sewer systems.
A war crime.

They placed sanctions on Iraq that made it impossible
to keep their water supplies safe resulting in numerous
deaths that eventually would total over 2 million dead
Iraqi civilians, mostly children.
Our government coldly calculated that these sanctions would
indeed would cause mass epidemics and mass death, and did
it anyway.
Thomas Nagy, a California college professor used the FOIA
statutes to obtain these documents that were published
in September 2001 in the Progressive Magazine.
http://www.progressive.org/0801issue/nagy0901.html
No Christian leaders of either far right or mainstream
cared nor brought Bush and the GOP leadership of House
and Senate to task for this genocide of innocents.
Clinton
Under Clinton this policy continued. Again, Christians did
not care. All Christians cared about was Clintons
don't-ask-don't-tell gays in military policy and Clinton's
sex life and Whitewater.
$47 million spent investigating whitewater while the Christian
right roared with naked hate. Money spent investigation mass
murder in Iraq caused by our purposeful by our sanctions?
$0. Roars of disaprovable from Christian America over these mass
murders? Few.
What has 30 years or right winged GOP government and right
winger christianity got us? Mass murder, genocide,
Nothing but callousness, disregard for human life,
mass moral failure of religion, Christianity and
the american right.
Not once did religous christian Americans, either
leadership or rank and file ever find any of these
evils unacceptable or punish any who supported any
of this.
Most GOP House and Senate members were people who
did these things claimed to be christians. Not a one
cares, not a christian cares, they did not care or act.
30 years of failure. 30 years of support for
far right genocidal bastards, mass murderers,
and evil.
Total christian failure.
Total lack of any real morality at all
in American christianity.
Christians posture as moral, but American christians have
a very bad track records when it comes to morality, they
will happily support any genocidal monster as long as he's
a right winger, and right winger politicians support
that monster, no matter how murderous or genocidal he
and his evil regime is.
Christianity is evil. The proof here is obvious,
and this is not some atrocity of the middle ages,
or the 1500's,this is here and now and ongoing and
continuing.
Bush lied us into a war in Iraq and rather than being
horrified, the christian far right has applauded this.
The christian failure of christian America is ongoing
and shows no signs of morality. No signs of change.
Thus we see that for the last 30 years in America,
christianity has been an utter and total and complete
moral failure.
(End)
--
Happy Hogmanay!
Cheerful Charlie
.

User: "Ernest Major"
Title: Re: "biomedical scientists" did 'science' in carrying out "Nazi racial programs"	31 Dec 2005 11:35:28 AM

In message <11ra84c2mi0mt36@corp.supernews.com>, wbarwell
<wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> writes

Reagan and the GOP supported a number of murdering far right extremist
guerrilla movements in Africa including the genocidal Frelimo in
Mozambique.

I think you mean Renamo.
--
alias Ernest Major
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.9/217 - Release Date: 30/12/2005
.

User: "wbarwell"
Title: Re: "biomedical scientists" did 'science' in carrying out "Nazi racial programs"	31 Dec 2005 01:49:31 PM

Ernest Major wrote:

In message <11ra84c2mi0mt36@corp.supernews.com>, wbarwell
<wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> writes

Reagan and the GOP supported a number of murdering far right
extremist guerrilla movements in Africa including the genocidal
Frelimo in Mozambique.

I think you mean Renamo.

Ah yes, good catch....
Fixed.
--
Happy Hogmanay!
Cheerful Charlie
.

User: "david ford"
Title: Re: "biomedical scientists" did 'science' in carrying out "Nazi racial programs"	29 Dec 2005 07:30:30 PM

Matt Silberstein wrote:

On 28 Dec 2005 19:32:25 -0800, in alt.atheism , "david ford"
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> in
<dford3-1135827145.891246.71620@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:

Matt Silberstein wrote:

On 28 Dec 2005 12:22:44 -0800, in talk.origins , "david ford"
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> in
<dford3-1135801364.548390.306010@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:

Matt Silberstein wrote:

On 27 Dec 2005 14:08:07 -0800, in alt.atheism , "david ford"
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> in
<dford3-1135721287.496768.326960@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:

[snip]

[snip]

[snip]

--
Matt Silberstein

Do something today about the Darfur Genocide

http://www.beawitness.org
http://www.darfurgenocide.org
http://www.savedarfur.org

"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"

Matt, I thought of your touching bigheartedness when encountering
"Sudan" while looking at the journal article titles at
http://www.camlaw.rutgers.edu/publications/law-religion/index.htm
These titles caught my eye:
3.1.2 Nazi's Persecution of Religion as a War Crime: The OSS's
Response Within the Nuremburg Trials Process.
3.2.8 PIUS XII AND THE JEWS: The War Years as Reported by the New York
Times.
4.1.2 The Interrogation of Karl Hermann Frank & the Kristallnacht
Documents.
4.1.4 War Crimes and Legal Immunities: The Complicities of Waffen-SS
General Karl Wolff in Nazi medical experiments.
5.1.2 The Blue Nile, Sudan: When Will the International Community Hear
Their Cries?
5.1.3 From the Trial of Adam and Eve to the Judgments of Solomon and
Daniel.
7.1.1 Roe v. Wade: A Scandal Upon The Court
8 Hitler and Murray's Hitler
8.1.2 An Early Example of Personality Profiling: Henry A. Murray's
Study of Adolf Hitler
Some original docs are at
http://www.camlaw.rutgers.edu/publications/law-religion/NInst3.htm
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Churches resisted Hitler
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1128561942.412167.145530%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
theological disputes among German Protestants; Nazi concentration camps
for Catholics and Protestants
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1129228612.176548.107730%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
Hitler thought he had Jewish ancestors.
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1128621261.103530.184110%40o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
on Hitler, in
Haeckel and Buchner and a Darwinian a-moral climate
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1118315214.069039.280490%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
Lifton, Robert Jay. 1986. _The Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing
and the Psychology of Genocide_ (NY: Basic Books, Inc.,
Publishers), 561pp. On 270:
Inmates suffered from hunger, nonetheless, and
from the constant uncertainty about "What will it
be this time?" For they had absorbed the
Auschwitz principle that _anything is permitted_.
Roe v. Wade
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=Pine.SGI.3.95.961103170616.15767C-100000%40umbc10.umbc.edu
.

User: "Matt Silberstein"
Title: Re: "biomedical scientists" did 'science' in carrying out "Nazi racial programs"	29 Dec 2005 09:32:54 PM

On 29 Dec 2005 17:30:30 -0800, in talk.origins , "david ford"
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> in
<dford3-1135906230.644735.161180@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> wrote:

Matt Silberstein wrote:

On 28 Dec 2005 19:32:25 -0800, in alt.atheism , "david ford"
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> in
<dford3-1135827145.891246.71620@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:

Matt Silberstein wrote:

On 28 Dec 2005 12:22:44 -0800, in talk.origins , "david ford"
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> in
<dford3-1135801364.548390.306010@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:

Matt Silberstein wrote:

On 27 Dec 2005 14:08:07 -0800, in alt.atheism , "david ford"
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> in
<dford3-1135721287.496768.326960@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:

[snip]

[snip]

[snip]
--
Matt Silberstein
Do something today about the Darfur Genocide
http://www.beawitness.org
http://www.darfurgenocide.org
http://www.savedarfur.org
"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
.

User: "josephus"
Title: Re: "biomedical scientists" did 'science' in carrying out "Nazi racialprograms"	29 Dec 2005 10:16:00 PM

david ford wrote:

Matt Silberstein wrote:

On 28 Dec 2005 19:32:25 -0800, in alt.atheism , "david ford"
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> in
<dford3-1135827145.891246.71620@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:

Matt Silberstein wrote:

On 28 Dec 2005 12:22:44 -0800, in talk.origins , "david ford"
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> in
<dford3-1135801364.548390.306010@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:

Matt Silberstein wrote:

On 27 Dec 2005 14:08:07 -0800, in alt.atheism , "david ford"
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> in
<dford3-1135721287.496768.326960@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:

[snip]

[snip]

[snip]

--
Matt Silberstein

Do something today about the Darfur Genocide

http://www.beawitness.org
http://www.darfurgenocide.org
http://www.savedarfur.org

"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"

The original document is an improvement. But posting links to stuff YOU
have written does not count as proof. You can say ANYTHING YOU WANT but
you must give links to the original documents and post all comments from
you. This is the standard practice... linking to text written by David
Ford IS NOT PROOF And is irrelevant.
Please give us links to primary sources. We do not promise to agree
with you but your posts will stand or fall on what you say without
busywork loading and reading stuff belonging to David Ford which is NOT
HISTORICALLY VALID. DAVID HAS NO CREDIBILITY POSTING these things. So
David cannot use himself as a SOURCE. to do so is dishonest.
josephus
..
josephus

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Churches resisted Hitler
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1128561942.412167.145530%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
theological disputes among German Protestants; Nazi concentration camps
for Catholics and Protestants
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1129228612.176548.107730%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com

Hitler thought he had Jewish ancestors.
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1128621261.103530.184110%40o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com

on Hitler, in
Haeckel and Buchner and a Darwinian a-moral climate
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1118315214.069039.280490%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com

Lifton, Robert Jay. 1986. _The Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing
and the Psychology of Genocide_ (NY: Basic Books, Inc.,
Publishers), 561pp. On 270:
Inmates suffered from hunger, nonetheless, and
from the constant uncertainty about "What will it
be this time?" For they had absorbed the
Auschwitz principle that _anything is permitted_.

Roe v. Wade
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=Pine.SGI.3.95.961103170616.15767C-100000%40umbc10.umbc.edu

User: "josephus"
Title: Re: "biomedical scientists" did 'science' in carrying out "Nazi racialprograms"	27 Dec 2005 10:34:28 PM

david ford wrote:

Matt Silberstein wrote:

On 26 Dec 2005 20:05:51 -0800, in alt.atheism , "david ford"
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> in
<dford3-1135656351.075963.94870@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:

[snip]

For what reason(s) should "we" even want to try to "stop" "genocide"?

There's no such thing as an 'evil' or 'bad' or 'sinful' action.
Hence, "genocide" can't be considered 'evil' or 'bad' or 'sinful.'

[snip]

1916/ 1922 Nordau; infanticide, slavery, and genocide
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1132847220.475151.206790%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com

--
Matt Silberstein

Do something today about the Darfur Genocide

http://www.beawitness.org
http://www.darfurgenocide.org
http://www.savedarfur.org

"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"

I know you are being sarcastic, but It is a GROSS failure of Christians
in general. The churches I attended as a starving kid, would send money
to other places but could not be BOTHERED to worry about poor white trash.
josephus

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Terri Schindler Schiavo
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1125332830.051705.205450%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
not-PVS
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1115683914.394927.244340%40f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com

Haeckel and Buchner and a Darwinian a-moral climate
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1118315214.069039.280490%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com

User: "david ford"
Title: Re: "biomedical scientists" did 'science' in carrying out "Nazi racialprograms"	28 Dec 2005 09:40:12 PM

josephus wrote:

I know you are being sarcastic, but It is a GROSS failure of Christians
in general.

What is "It"?

The churches I attended as a starving kid, would send money
to other places but could not be BOTHERED to worry about poor white trash.

Do you think those "churches... attended as a starving kid" _should_
have paid attention to "a starving kid" from their own neighborhood?
If 'yes': how come-- upon what rationale should they have paid
attention to a local "starving kid"?
.

User: "josephus"
Title: Re: "biomedical scientists" did 'science' in carrying out "Nazi racialprograms"	29 Dec 2005 02:46:04 AM

david ford wrote:

josephus wrote:

I know you are being sarcastic, but It is a GROSS failure of Christians
in general.

What is "It"?

The churches I attended as a starving kid, would send money
to other places but could not be BOTHERED to worry about poor white trash.

This gets into the question of Christian Charity. I knew NEIGHBORS
that should have cared but they would give money to foreign actions they
did not really have ANY method of distributing help to those godless
poor whites and blacks. In fact it was the Black community that was the
most generous. Do not think for one second that any word of mouth about
Christian generosity mean anything to do with YOUR neighbors. We a not
talking about a random family, my family was deliberately excluded by
the BAPTIST CHURCH. When I lived in Abbott Texas, we had 2 churches.
A Baptist and a Methodist. The congregations would alternate between
the two churches. the "meta-church" was more generous than the formal
churches. In fact the Baptist convention FORBADE any dealings with the
METHODIST Church. I really think is was nasty business. But they
threatened the that little church. Formal Baptist Churches are mean
minded and stingy. I know from personal experience.
josephus
.

User: "david ford"
Title: Re: "biomedical scientists" did 'science' in carrying out "Nazi racial programs"	26 Dec 2005 10:11:04 PM

Tiny Bulcher wrote:

david ford wrote:

<examples of atheist wickedness>

So you're against atheism. What are you *for*?

The intelligent design hypothesis, for one thing.
Do you accept any of the intelligent design hypothesis?
More questions, please.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Reality vs. worldview philosophy of materialism/ atheism
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-3813ksF5ggkc3U1%40individual.net
On the Origin of Life
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-39oh33F63riraU1%40individual.net
ID as a metaphysical research program
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1129317540.779352.231140%40f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
.

User: "Bob"
Title: Re: "biomedical scientists" did 'science' in carrying out "Nazi racial programs"	26 Dec 2005 11:10:07 PM

On 26 Dec 2005 20:11:04 -0800, "david ford" <dford3@gl.umbc.edu>
wrote:

Tiny Bulcher wrote:

david ford wrote:

<examples of atheist wickedness>

So you're against atheism. What are you *for*?

The intelligent design hypothesis, for one thing.
Do you accept any of the intelligent design hypothesis?

does anyone know, including those who support it, what the ID
'hypothesis' is beyond 'god did it'?
---------------------------
to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com"
and enter 'wf3h' in the field
.

User: "david ford"
Title: Re: "biomedical scientists" did 'science' in carrying out "Nazi racial programs"	27 Dec 2005 08:03:50 AM

Bob wrote:

On 26 Dec 2005 20:11:04 -0800, "david ford" <dford3@gl.umbc.edu>
wrote:

Tiny Bulcher wrote:

david ford wrote:

<examples of atheist wickedness>

So you're against atheism. What are you *for*?

The intelligent design hypothesis, for one thing.
Do you accept any of the intelligent design hypothesis?

does anyone know, including those who support it, what the ID
'hypothesis' is beyond 'god did it'?

Meaning of "god"?
Does anyone know, including those who support it, what the
blindwatchmaker hypothesis is beyond
'totally-blind-at-every-level-processes DIDIT'?
.

User: "wbarwell"
Title: Re: "biomedical scientists" did 'science' in carrying out "Nazi racial programs"	27 Dec 2005 10:49:07 PM

david ford wrote:

Bob wrote:

On 26 Dec 2005 20:11:04 -0800, "david ford" <dford3@gl.umbc.edu>
wrote:

Tiny Bulcher wrote:

david ford wrote:

<examples of atheist wickedness>

So you're against atheism. What are you *for*?

The intelligent design hypothesis, for one thing.
Do you accept any of the intelligent design hypothesis?

does anyone know, including those who support it, what the ID
'hypothesis' is beyond 'god did it'?

Meaning of "god"?

Does anyone know, including those who support it, what the
blindwatchmaker hypothesis is beyond
'totally-blind-at-every-level-processes DIDIT'?

Yes, but you don't have the brains to deal with it.
--
Wassail, Happy Holidays, Merry Solstice, Happy
Saturnalia, mull the wine and pass the eggnog.
Cheerful Charlie
.

User: "david ford"
Title: Re: "biomedical scientists" did 'science' in carrying out "Nazi racial programs"	27 Dec 2005 11:37:44 PM

wbarwell wrote:

david ford wrote:

Bob wrote:

On 26 Dec 2005 20:11:04 -0800, "david ford" <dford3@gl.umbc.edu>
wrote:

Tiny Bulcher wrote:

david ford wrote:

<examples of atheist wickedness>

So you're against atheism. What are you *for*?

The intelligent design hypothesis, for one thing.
Do you accept any of the intelligent design hypothesis?

does anyone know, including those who support it, what the ID
'hypothesis' is beyond 'god did it'?

Meaning of "god"?

Does anyone know, including those who support it, what the
blindwatchmaker hypothesis is beyond
'totally-blind-at-every-level-processes DIDIT'?

Yes, but you don't have the brains to deal with it.

Perhaps lurkers "have the brains to deal with it." So please, proceed.
.

User: "Tiny Bulcher"
Title: Re: "biomedical scientists" did 'science' in carrying out "Nazi racial programs"	27 Dec 2005 02:33:13 PM

david ford wrote:

Tiny Bulcher wrote:

david ford wrote:

<examples of atheist wickedness>

So you're against atheism. What are you *for*?

The intelligent design hypothesis, for one thing.
Do you accept any of the intelligent design hypothesis?

Which one? There appear to be several.
--
Tiny
.

User: "david ford"
Title: Re: "biomedical scientists" did 'science' in carrying out "Nazi racial programs"	27 Dec 2005 04:33:05 PM

Tiny Bulcher wrote:

david ford wrote:

Tiny Bulcher wrote:

david ford wrote:

<examples of atheist wickedness>

So you're against atheism. What are you *for*?

The intelligent design hypothesis, for one thing.
Do you accept any of the intelligent design hypothesis?

Which one? There appear to be several.

Excellent question. Keep them coming.
I'll rephrase. Do you agree with any of the following propositions?:
The world of physics,
and the world of biology,
exhibit the (actual/ not-false/ not-deceptive) appearance of having
been the product of mind/ intelligence.
Mind/ intelligence was involved in the origination of:
* our physical/ material universe in the hot big bang, in which
matter-energy and the spatial dimensions of length width & height and
our temporal dimension of time began to exist in a creation out of
absolutely nothing creation event
* the first biological lifeform
* the organisms that appeared during the Cambrian explosion
* the world of biology
* the advanced-carbon-life-friendly
earth - moon - sun - solar-system - galaxy system
* the advanced-carbon-life-friendly nature of our material universe
* humans
Something with mind/ intelligence has the ability to problem-solve in a
wide variety of situations.
The mind/ intelligence responsible for the origination of biological
life had to solve many problems, for example, the problems of: waste
collection and disposal in a cell, energy acquisition and storage and
use, fabrication of a duplicate copy of cell machinery, information
storage and replication and transmission.
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Reality vs. worldview philosophy of materialism/ atheism
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-3813ksF5ggkc3U1%40individual.net
On the Origin of Life
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-39oh33F63riraU1%40individual.net
omphalic YEC and blindwatchmakingist parallels
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-b1c67abe.0411270821.29ee3dd9%40posting.google.com
Einstein: physics was designed
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-37f67dF59po8jU1%40individual.net
ID as a metaphysical research program
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1129317540.779352.231140%40f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
1985 Cairns-Smith: "Present-day organisms are manifestly pieces of
'high technology', and what is more seem to be necessarily so."
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1123558517.582123.223890%40o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
1985 A.G. Cairns-Smith, 1986 Andrew Scott, 1999 Freeman Dyson
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-33bltcF3rgbovU1%40individual.net
1985 A.G. Cairns-Smith; How did recorded-in-DNA/ genetic information
originate?
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-32gv43F3jsrelU1%40individual.net
How does a seeingwatchmakingist account for the origin of
the recorded-in-DNA/ genetic information within:
a human? a bacterium? the first biological lifeform?
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-348nj6F47evohU1%40individual.net
.

User: "david ford"
Title: Re: "biomedical scientists" did 'science' in carrying out "Nazi racial programs"	28 Dec 2005 01:18:20 PM

Tiny Bulcher wrote:

david ford wrote:

Tiny Bulcher wrote:

The question I would like answered, by proponents of any theory of the
origins and diversity of life, is: how did whales happen?

I don't know. Someone once told me that we don't even know how a baby
whale becomes an adult whale.

I see. Well, when there is a theory or hypothesis that can give me an
answer to this seemingly basic question, I shall pay some heed to it.
Any theory of the origin and diversity of life that cannot at least
speculate as to the processes that gave rise to whales isn't much of a
theory. Or hypothesis. Or wild guess, even.

Have you encountered a "speculat[ion] as to the processes that gave
rise to whales"?

Please look at what's below;
do you think that biology exhibits the appearance (whether actual or
false/ misleading) of having been the product of mind/ intelligence?

Niope. I already said I don't think that. I still don't.

So you think Dawkins is incorrect in thinking that biology exhibits the
(false/ misleading) appearance of having been the product of mind/
intelligence?
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Dawkins vs. an atheist philosopher
Dawkins notes that earth "is dominated by feats of engineering and
works of art" that humans have made. Humans have thereby become
entirely accustomed to the idea that complex elegance is an
indicator of premeditated, crafted design. This is probably the
most powerful reason for the belief, held by the vast majority of
people that have ever lived, in some kind of supernatural
deity.[page xii]
(Being an atheist, Dawkins naturally doesn't believe in any type of
supernatural deity.)
Dawkins relates having dinner with a "well-known atheist" and
"distinguished modern philosopher." In response to Dawkins's remark
that he could not imagine being an atheist prior to Darwin's 1859
propounding of the theory of natural selection, the
atheist-philosopher replied, "What about [the arch-skeptic David]
Hume?" Asked Dawkins, "How did Hume explain the organized complexity
of the living world?" The philosopher responded with what I interpret
to be a rhetorical question: "He [Hume] didn't. .... Why does it
need any explanation?"[5] Rephrasing, I get, 'The complexity of
biology doesn't need an explanation.'
Dawkins strenuously disagrees with that stance, opining that the
"amount of complex design" in biology "give[s] the appearance of
having been designed"[1] and "cries out for an explanation"[ix]:
Paley knew that it needed a special explanation; Darwin knew it
and I suspect that in his heart of hearts my philosopher
companion knew it too.[6]
In my opinion, it is quite possible that the philosopher _didn't_ know
this to be the case owing to some degree of ignorance of biology on
his part, just as in Dawkins's opinion, "some of his [Hume's] writings
suggest that he underestimated the complexity and beauty of biological
design."[6] The possibility that the modern philosopher was ignorant
in matters biological is bolstered by the fact that, as biologist
Michael Ghiselin notes,
These days only a few philosophers maintain strong links with the
empirical sciences. Much "philosophy of science" has little if
any connection with what goes on in the laboratory.[120]
Noddingly acquainted with philosophy, atheist physicist Steven
Weinberg concurs with Ghiselin's assessment:
After a few years' infatuation with philosophy as an
undergraduate I became disenchanted. The insights of the
philosophers I studied seemed murky and inconsequential compared
with the dazzling successes of physics and mathematics. From
time to time since then I have tried to read current work on the
philosophy of science. Some of it I found to be written in a
jargon so impenetrable that I can only think that it aimed at
impressing those who confound obscurity with profundity. Some of
it was good reading and even witty, like the writings of
Wittgenstein and Paul Feyerabend. But only rarely did it seem to
me to have anything to do with the work of science as I knew
it.[168]
Should a modern philosopher believe that the
seeming-intelligent-design of _physics_ does not call out for an
explanation, it would be interesting to know to what degree that
philosopher is ignorant of physics. Since Hume (1711-1776) last
wrote, _much_ has been learned about physics and biology. Claims that
Hume once and for all defeated arguments for design of biology and of
physics are predicated upon the comparatively poor state of knowledge
existing over 200 years ago.
Ghiselin, Michael T. 1989. _Intellectual Compromise: The Bottom
Line_ (NY: Paragon House), 226pp.
Weinberg, Steven. 1993. _Dreams of a Final Theory_ (NY: Vintage
Books), 340pp.
Dawkins, Richard. 1987. _The Blind Watchmaker_, 332+pp.

To take only
the first of your examples, I know how ears work, thank-you, mainly
because mine don't. Do you know why my ears don't work? 2 mls. of fluid
in the wrong place. You'll forgive me for being less than impressed
with the allegedly marvellous engineering of the human ear. As a system
specifically designed to fulfil a specific function, the ear is barely
adequate. If, OTOH one were to consider it as an adaptation, at many
removes, of systems originally fulfilling quite different functions (or
similar functions in quite different environments), then perhaps that
make more sense. To me, anyway. And don't even get me started on knees.

<snip>

Do you see any flaws in this reasoning?:
The collapse of the World Trade Center towers following burning jet
fuel's weakening of the structural integrity of the buildings' steel
demonstrates the presence of "many many stupid flaws" in these
allegedly-designed buildings.
For example, if mind/intelligence were indeed responsible for the
towers, the steel used therein would have been protected from the
degrading effects of prolonged, intense heat from large quantities of
burning jet fuel.
Or better yet, mind/intelligence would have taken
steps to prevent any Islamic-terrorist-guided airplanes from even
entering the buildings: an intelligent designer(s) of the buildings
would have made it so that colliding airplanes bounce off of the
towers.
Because of the presence of these and other "stupid flaws," I
conclude that the World Trade Center towers were *not* the workproduct
of mind/ intelligence.
IOW, totallyblindprocessesdidit.
.

User: "Tiny Bulcher"
Title: Re: "biomedical scientists" did 'science' in carrying out "Nazi racial programs"	29 Dec 2005 05:18:53 AM

david ford wrote:

Tiny Bulcher wrote:

david ford wrote:

Tiny Bulcher wrote:

The question I would like answered, by proponents of any theory of the
origins and diversity of life, is: how did whales happen?

I don't know. Someone once told me that we don't even know how a baby
whale becomes an adult whale.

Have you encountered a "speculat[ion] as to the processes that gave
rise to whales"?

Yes.

Please look at what's below;
do you think that biology exhibits the appearance (whether actual or
false/ misleading) of having been the product of mind/ intelligence?

Niope. I already said I don't think that. I still don't.

So you think Dawkins is incorrect in thinking that biology exhibits the
(false/ misleading) appearance of having been the product of mind/
intelligence?

Yes. I think Richard Dawkins is incorrect on this and many other
points.
<snip>

Do you see any flaws in this reasoning?:

The collapse of the World Trade Center towers following burning jet
fuel's weakening of the structural integrity of the buildings' steel
demonstrates the presence of "many many stupid flaws" in these
allegedly-designed buildings.
For example, if mind/intelligence were indeed responsible for the
towers, the steel used therein would have been protected from the
degrading effects of prolonged, intense heat from large quantities of
burning jet fuel.

Or better yet, mind/intelligence would have taken
steps to prevent any Islamic-terrorist-guided airplanes from even
entering the buildings: an intelligent designer(s) of the buildings
would have made it so that colliding airplanes bounce off of the
towers.
Because of the presence of these and other "stupid flaws," I
conclude that the World Trade Center towers were *not* the workproduct
of mind/ intelligence.

IOW, totallyblindprocessesdidit.

Or, we might perhaps posit that human beings are not in fact very
intelligent, unable to foresee all ends, and capable of very bad
design. Do you think a putative designer of the universe is like that,
too?
--
Tiny
.

User: "josephus"
Title: Re: "biomedical scientists" did 'science' in carrying out "Nazi racialprograms"	27 Dec 2005 10:50:46 PM

david ford wrote:

Tiny Bulcher wrote:

david ford wrote:

Tiny Bulcher wrote:

david ford wrote:

<examples of atheist wickedness>

So you're against atheism. What are you *for*?

The intelligent design hypothesis, for one thing.
Do you accept any of the intelligent design hypothesis?

Which one? There appear to be several.

sorry, that is a creationist claim and not supported by any science.

Mind/ intelligence was involved in the origination of:
* our physical/ material universe in the hot big bang, in which
matter-energy and the spatial dimensions of length width & height and
our temporal dimension of time began to exist in a creation out of
absolutely nothing creation event

sigh, No it is not a scientific statement in any sense.

* the first biological lifeform

No one really know and the research is making some headway. the
creationists "goddidit" is not really excluded but we DO NOT require it.

* the organisms that appeared during the Cambrian explosion

* the world of biology

* the advanced-carbon-life-friendly
earth - moon - sun - solar-system - galaxy system

Science looks very closely at all of these things. The creationist
point of view is not included.

* the advanced-carbon-life-friendly nature of our material universe

This is the Anthropological Theorem. It is philosophy and we know a
great deal about this universe, your guess is as good as mine., but we
have NO REASON for it to be different.

* humans

are hominids and APES.

Something with mind/ intelligence has the ability to problem-solve in a
wide variety of situations.

The mind/ intelligence responsible for the origination of biological
life had to solve many problems, for example, the problems of: waste
collection and disposal in a cell, energy acquisition and storage and
use, fabrication of a duplicate copy of cell machinery, information
storage and replication and transmission.

Is this the reason that human spines are so poorly constructed? Why
is the human eye less than the eye of the sea creatures Kracken and
squids. That eye HAS NO BLIND SPOT, humans do. Maybe there were
several designers and some of them did not do as well as others. Occums
razor intimates we should assume NO Designers and evolutionary theory
explains it without any designers.

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

<snip>
I want to compliment you on the improvement in your posting.
josephus
.

User: "david ford"
Title: Re: "biomedical scientists" did 'science' in carrying out "Nazi racialprograms"	28 Dec 2005 01:50:47 PM

josephus wrote:

david ford wrote:

Tiny Bulcher wrote:

david ford wrote:

Tiny Bulcher wrote:

david ford wrote:

<examples of atheist wickedness>

So you're against atheism. What are you *for*?

The intelligent design hypothesis, for one thing.
Do you accept any of the intelligent design hypothesis?

Which one? There appear to be several.

sorry, that is a creationist claim and not supported by any science.

sigh, No it is not a scientific statement in any sense.

Do you think time and matter-energy began to exist?
The Search for a Loophole to the Beginning of the Universe
in the Big Bang
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=Pine.LNX.4.10A.B3.10005292327160.25513-100000%40jabba.gl.umbc.edu

* the first biological lifeform

No one really know and the research is making some headway. the
creationists "goddidit" is not really excluded but we DO NOT require it.

Do you think "we DO NOT require" the operation of mind/ intelligence to
account for the origination of the first biological lifeform?
If 'yes': what leads you to think that?
Bateson, William. 1915. "Heredity" _Annual Report of the
Smithsonian Institution, 1915_, 359-394. On 375:
....when we hear the spontaneous formation
of formaldehyde mentioned as a possible first
step in the origin of life we think of Harry Lauder in the
character of a Glasgow schoolboy pulling out his
treasures from his pocket-- "That's a wassher-- for
makkin' motor cars."

* the organisms that appeared during the Cambrian explosion

* the world of biology

* the advanced-carbon-life-friendly
earth - moon - sun - solar-system - galaxy system

Science looks very closely at all of these things. The creationist
point of view is not included.

"The creationist point of view is not included" as what-- an option? a
possibility?

* the advanced-carbon-life-friendly nature of our material universe

This is the Anthropological Theorem. It is philosophy and we know a
great deal about this universe, your guess is as good as mine., but we
have NO REASON for it to be different.

* humans

are hominids and APES.

Do you think some human lives are of less value than some gorilla
lives?
Suppose a laboratory is going down in flames. An elderly paraplegic
human is in the building, and a young gorilla.
You can only save the paraplegic or the gorilla from the burning
building, but not both.
Which would you save?
Whichever your answer: how come?

Is this the reason that human spines are so poorly constructed?

Maybe. If it were up to you, how would you construct human spines?
What material(s) would you use? Titanium? Steel? Ceramic?

Why is the human eye less than the eye of the sea creatures Kracken and
squids. That eye HAS NO BLIND SPOT, humans do.

Does the "BLIND SPOT... humans" have adversely affect humans?

Maybe there were
several designers and some of them did not do as well as others. Occums
razor intimates we should assume NO Designers and evolutionary theory
explains it without any designers.

"evolutionary theory explains it without any designers"
IOW, totally-blind-at-every-level-processes DID IT.

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

<snip>
I want to compliment you on the improvement in your posting.

Thanks.
.

User: "josephus"
Title: Re: "biomedical scientists" did 'science' in carrying out "Nazi racialprograms"	29 Dec 2005 02:26:49 AM

david ford wrote:

josephus wrote:

david ford wrote:

Tiny Bulcher wrote:

david ford wrote:

Tiny Bulcher wrote:

david ford wrote:

<examples of atheist wickedness>

So you're against atheism. What are you *for*?

The intelligent design hypothesis, for one thing.
Do you accept any of the intelligent design hypothesis?

Which one? There appear to be several.

sorry, that is a creationist claim and not supported by any science.

sigh, No it is not a scientific statement in any sense.

Do you think time and matter-energy began to exist?

The Search for a Loophole to the Beginning of the Universe
in the Big Bang
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=Pine.LNX.4.10A.B3.10005292327160.25513-100000%40jabba.gl.umbc.edu

* the first biological lifeform

No one really know and the research is making some headway. the
creationists "goddidit" is not really excluded but we DO NOT require it.

Do you think "we DO NOT require" the operation of mind/ intelligence to
account for the origination of the first biological lifeform?
If 'yes': what leads you to think that?

Ok in the study of science there is the idea that the simplest
explanation will be the most likely correct. All kinds of convoluted
explanations exist. but the simplest are the closest to the true
explanations. ID fails on the evidence. It has none. and you can
believe in it if you wish. It is just a religious belief. no science
involved. and the other point is that science does not NEED a GODDIDIT
explanation. Science works just fine without it.

Bateson, William. 1915. "Heredity" _Annual Report of the
Smithsonian Institution, 1915_, 359-394. On 375:
....when we hear the spontaneous formation
of formaldehyde mentioned as a possible first
step in the origin of life we think of Harry Lauder in the
character of a Glasgow schoolboy pulling out his
treasures from his pocket-- "That's a wassher-- for
makkin' motor cars."

There are real peer reviewed papers on abiogenesis. you and all
your brethren can't be bothered to look at it. Because they and you
reason from ignorance.

* the organisms that appeared during the Cambrian explosion

* the world of biology

* the advanced-carbon-life-friendly
earth - moon - sun - solar-system - galaxy system

Science looks very closely at all of these things. The creationist
point of view is not included.

"The creationist point of view is not included" as what-- an option? a
possibility?

No it is not even an option. It is simply the NULL argument.
creationists are still claiming ID is science but They provide NO
evidence of ANY kind. and BEHE has Zero credibility on the evidence he
tries to claim. All that evidence has been refuted exactly and
precisely. Most creationists are misguided, ignorant or just plain
stupid. But you have the technical skills to do research. It is a
shame that you post over and over things that are either not true or
just plain BAD HISTORY. I would be really surprised to see David post
any CURRENT quotations, research or scientific writings.
Quoting from anybody from the 19th century, anybody from NAZI
Germany. is dishonest when you try to link Darwin with Hitler or anyone
from NAZI Germany. Darwin was 75 years before the NAZI. That also
means the science which is common knowledge among educated and science
types, can be misused, abused, or just plain justification of criminal
actions. The science is neutral and can be used for GOOD or BAD.
Please start posting things from the 20Th century later rather than
early 20th century.

* the advanced-carbon-life-friendly nature of our material universe

This is the Anthropological Theorem. It is philosophy and we know a
great deal about this universe, your guess is as good as mine., but we
have NO REASON for it to be different.

* humans

are hominids and APES.

Do you think some human lives are of less value than some gorilla
lives?

Suppose a laboratory is going down in flames. An elderly paraplegic
human is in the building, and a young gorilla.
You can only save the paraplegic or the gorilla from the burning
building, but not both.
Which would you save?
Whichever your answer: how come?

There is a problem with this as a STAWMAN ethical choice. A real
ethical system must deal with a range of problems like choosing between
two children or choosing between a mother and a child. The fact that
you post a gorilla or a human means you are not interested in a
reasonable question.

Is this the reason that human spines are so poorly constructed?

Maybe. If it were up to you, how would you construct human spines?
What material(s) would you use? Titanium? Steel? Ceramic?

This is a loaded rhetorical question. You cannot, and I cannot. It is
not a reasonable question.

Why is the human eye less than the eye of the sea creatures Kracken and
squids. That eye HAS NO BLIND SPOT, humans do.

Does the "BLIND SPOT... humans" have adversely affect humans?

Yes. It is a special kind of blindness.

Maybe there were
several designers and some of them did not do as well as others. Occums
razor intimates we should assume NO Designers and evolutionary theory
explains it without any designers.

"evolutionary theory explains it without any designers"
IOW, totally-blind-at-every-level-processes DID IT.

Yes. it does not need any guidance as you posit. It really is blind
and powerful. You are the end result of the process. But so is every
creature alive today. The process does not predict 100% improvement.
lines die off because they do not adapt and go extinct. just think,
creationist is at the end of an evolutionary process.

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

<snip>
I want to compliment you on the improvement in your posting.

Thanks.

your welcome.
.

User: "david ford"
Title: Re: "biomedical scientists" did 'science' in carrying out "Nazi racial programs"	23 Dec 2005 10:25:11 PM

david ford wrote:

Matt Silberstein wrote:

On 21 Dec 2005 19:02:05 -0800, in talk.origins , "david ford"
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> in
<dford3-1135220525.124394.105140@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> wrote:

[snips]

Who, if anyone, did they "blam[e]"?

Hitler. Racism. Anti-Semitism. Hatred.

"Racism."
1859 Darwin vs. the Judeo-Christian conception of the unity of man
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1120016676.023811.113660%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com

Darwin: "the New Zealander... compares his future fate with that of the
native rat now almost exterminated by the European rat"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1135178729.788016.144250%40o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
1871 Darwin: [CD]"the civilised races of man"-- e.g. [CD]"the
Caucasian"-- [CD]"will almost certainly exterminate and replace
throughout the world the savage races"-- e.g. [CD]"the negro or
Australian," as in Australian aborigine-- with the end result being
[CD]"man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, than the Caucasian"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=b1c67abe.0407060404.711490be%40posting.google.com
[1872 Darwin]"Blushing is evident in all the Aryan nations of
Europe.... The
Semitic races blush freely, as might have been expected, from their
general similitude to the Aryans."
[Darwin]"Dr. Saviotti in... 1871... remarks that it more frequently
occurs in prognathous skulls, not of the Aryan race, than in others"
[1871/ 74/ 88 Darwin]"Europeans and Hindoos... belong to the same Aryan
stock.... Jews... belong to the Semitic stock"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1132942108.117285.130610%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
In a 29 September 1890 letter to Joseph Hooker, Huxley called Huxley's
1890 "The Aryan Question and Pre-Historic Man" essay "scientific":
Huxley, Leonard, editor. 1901. _Life and Letters of Thomas Henry
Huxley: by his son Leonard Huxley_, in two volumes (NY: D. Appleton
and Company), 539pp. and 541pp. On 286 of volume 2:
Providence has, I believe, specially devolved on
Gladstone, Gore, and Co. the function of keeping "'ome
'appy" for me.
I really can't give up tormenting _ces droles_.
However, I have been toiling at a tremendously scientific
article about the "Aryan question" absolutely devoid of
blasphemy.
T.H. Huxley's 1890 essay "The Aryan Question and Pre-Historic Man"
http://aleph0.clarku.edu/huxley/CE7/Aryan.html
He talks quite a bit therein about a [Huxley on 284 of my Huxley
book copy]"blond, long-headed race," i.e. [Huxley on 305]"an Aryan
race."
Hitler & Darwin on
[Hitler & Darwin]"master[s]"
over
[Darwin]"subjugated... men"
having
[Darwin]"utility to their masters"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1135100164.057260.78490%40o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
Darwin on [1871 Darwin]"careful selection" in connection with the
breeding of humans;
1924/5 Hitler & 1871 Darwin on heterogeneous & homogeneous peoples
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1133977762.788382.143030%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Alan Wolfe in _The New Republic_: "We ought never to forget that the
twentieth century's greatest American skeptic, H.L. Mencken, was an
ugly anti-Semite."
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-39rvm4F63q0jrU1%40individual.net
H.L. Mencken in the 1910 _Men versus the Man: A Correspondence between
Robe