Sour Grapes: Kitzmiller v. Dover (was True Meaning...)
- --- In email@example.com, "isaac" <isaac3rd@...> wrote:
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "gabevee" <gabevee@> wrote:[TOM]: Judge John E. Jones III, the presiding judge in Kitzmiller v. Dover, was nominated for his position by uber-conservative, evangelical senator Rick Santorum and appointed by President Bush II.
> > --- In email@example.com, Dave Oldridge <doldridg@> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 29/12/2011 8:34 AM, Gabor wrote:
> > [snip]
> > > > Gabor: You are a nice man Isaac and I definitely do not intend to
> > > > offend you, but you strong statements about "LIES" on the ID side are
> > > > not supported by sane rational arguments or facts of life, rather the
> > > > strong devotions of dogmatic evolutionism. Anybody who questions the
> > > > existence of DESIGN in the world - every little part of it- is either
> > > > can not think it through OR does not WANT to think it through.That on
> > > > just wants to exclude the Designer from the facts of absolutely
> > > > AMAZING works of design. Very, very sad really. Thanks an have a nice
> > > > day Isaac.
> > >
> > > When people misrepresent their own motivation, I call that lying. You
> > > can call it anything you want, but it will remain false witness.
> > >
> > >
> > Yet people can speak the truth and still not reveal their motive.
> > "Throw yourself down, for it is written "He will command his angels concerning you..." - Satan to Jesus.
> > "Be kind to yourself master! This will not happen to you!" "Get behind me Satan..." Jesus to Peter
> > One was speaking the truth, but his motivation was bad. The other, whose motivation was good, was speaking wrongly.
> > What's that called? Which one was lying?
> > GV
> isaac: In the Dover case, it was crystal clear who was lying. And the judge saw right through the lies and called out the liars in his decision.
When he ruled against The Dover School Board, Judge Jones, previously a darling of republicans and evangelicals, was suddenly saddled with the appelation "activist judge," which is right wing speak for judges who ignore the constitution and abuse their position of power to further a personal agenda. Talk about sour grapes! Talk about hypocrisy!
William A. Dembski, a senior fellow of the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture, Research Professor of Philosophy and Director of the Center for Cultural Engagement at the Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary at Fort Worth, Texas, and a darling of Intelligent Design proponents, wrote on his Uncommon Descent blog:
"This is all about Judge Jones. If it were about the merits of the case we know we'd win. It's about politics Judge John E. Jones is a good old boy brought up through the conservative ranks appointed by GW hisself [sic] Unless Judge Jones wants to cut his career off at the knees he isn't going to rule against the wishes of his political allies."
Conservative television pundit Bill O'Reiily called Jones, after the Kitzmiller V. Dover ruling a "fascist judge." Right wing activist Phyllis Schlafly wrote that Jones's ruling "stuck the knife in the backs of those who brought him to the dance."
The topper, as usual, has to be the decrepit false prophet of the Moral Majority, Pat Robertson, who, after Judge Jones ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, said this on a television broadcast of his 500 Club, after the citizens of Dover, post ruling, voted out the I.D./creationist members of their school board: "I'd like to say to the good citizens of Dover: If there is a disaster in your area, don't turn to God, you just rejected him from your city. And don't wonder why he hasn't helped you when problems begin, if they begin. I'm not saying they will, but if they do, just remember, you just voted God out of your city. And if that's the case, don't ask for his help because he might not be there."
The idea that the right wing (of politics and Xianity) are the great patriots of America; the holy defenders of constitutional purity, is a farce of biblical proportion.
According to Judge Jones, part of the problem stems from what he called "a creeping civic stupidity," where the public, for whatever reason, thinks judges should bow to what politicians say or polls show.
I'm not sure I agree with that, but I get where he's coming from. It seems to me that most, if not all, political systems eventually devolve into factionism. The once heady debates of their salad days in regard to social and political philosophies soon end, supplanted by the desire to prevail against ones opponents (eventually, "enemies," unfortunately) displaces and buries the principles of civil compromise. It becomes a factional win at all costs numbers game.
The shame of it all, to me, is that science and scientists get pulled into the church/state fray. I never imagined that one day I would be joining with scientists and science teachers at school board meetings to speak out against the introduction of religious fiats into the curriculum of public school science and biology classes and/or texts. It's like some absurdist dream. But it's very real.
When you mention, Isaac, the perjuries in this case I can't help think about Barbara Forrest's discovery of the "missing link" that bridges the evolution of creationism to intelligent design: "cdesign proponetsists." That had to sting. And the best part is that it is now a matter of public record. Conservapedia ("The Trustworthy Encyclopedia") has put a new spin on "cdesin proponentsists," refering to it as a "smear term," which seems pretty odd to me. Only the defeated would call clear and damning evidence of deception and fraud a "smear."
By the way, those who perjured themselves during the Kitzmiller v. Dover case should get on their knees and give thanks that the "activist" Judge Jones mercifully let them off the hook. I don't know if I would have found it in my heart to do the same.
--- On Tue, 1/10/12, PIASAN@... <PIASAN@...> wrote:
From: PIASAN@... <PIASAN@...>
Subject: [creation_evolution_debate] programmed responses....was: appeal to authority...
Date: Tuesday, January 10, 2012, 3:02 AM
> I wonder also if it (Laurie) is a program, since if anyone even irrational
> shown where they are wrong, then they would likely change their tactics and
> avoid the risk of looking completely stupid.
> You guys aren't the first to suggest this. In other forums, Laurie has been
known as "Applebot" for the reasons you suggest.
> LA> That sort of talk is the only "refuge" evolutionists have. It is the
facts and evidence that resulted in various evolutionists admitting at various
times and in various ways that the Creation scientists regularly "routed" their
evolutionary opponents in that decade of all those hundreds of open, public,
Parroting the same kinds of responses is indicative of programmed pseudo-random
Pi:Notice how many of Laurie's responses are word-for-word identical... including everything after the first sentence in his comment (above) and the regurgiquote that was snipped.robert--laurie I also would like to see you use another tactic then come back with your usual whammy!!!!!11