Gallileo was told not to teach his theories as fact until they could be proven, and to not contradict the church in theological matters, not matters of science. "Intelligent design" tells school boards not to teach evolution as fact until it can be proven (to THEIR liking), and the Church considered geocentricism to be a theological matter.
He dared to look for empirical proof of a scientific theory that had been rejected on theological grounds, and his proof was rejected as heresy.
Perhaps you could try being intellectually honest. That is unless your anti-religious zeal has blinded you to the level of intolerance and hatred you've been spewing around this article with your many posts.
Of course atheism is a religion, it is a system of belief about the supernatural nature (or lack there of) of this universe. It's the null religion. Do you believe that zero is not a number? Or perhaps that a null pointer isn't a pointer at all? Come on now. If it isn't a relgion is it a taco? I think it fits the former definition better. Intellectual honesty does not entail an appeal to ridicule in lieu of an actual argument.
Zero apples is not food. A null value does not point to a region of memory. Worshiping no gods is not a religion.
The story of Galileo is a tad more complicated than the simplistic version we're used to. I'm no Roman Catholic, but this meme needs to be corrected. From your link: "After Galileo went back to Padua, the leading scientific mediocrities started complaining. It was the scientists who said that challenging Aristotle was heresy -- not the Church." From the Chuch: 1571, Paul IV issues the first formal Index Librorum Prohibitorum, including such works as De Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium by Copernicus.
Galileo was 7 when that happened. Stop listening to people who are arguing that it was ok to censor the man's empirical proof of a heretical scientific theory.
No one is censoring the Pope. Quite the opposite, the man gets far more attention than I think he deserves. He speaks for 1/7 people on earth. Theoretically, since most baptisms are done without the consent of the subject.
intolerant Ratzinger: "an ancient human and Christian system of reference [...] has the right to remain faithful to its method of preserving the earth in relation to human dignity"
FTFA: Cini also recalled a colloquium on Darwin held by Benedict in September 2006 in which the "intelligent design" movement was given precedence over the theory of evolution. "The Church can no longer use pyres or corporal punishment," [...] Cini said of Benedict on Thursday: "By cancelling, he is playing the victim, which is very intelligent. It will be a pretext for accusing us of refusing dialogue."
In other words, these people have been publishing shit under his name for several years, and he didn't bother stopping them, and yet he's responsible enough to lead the country? So you're shifting from "he's a racist" to "he can't run a country because he believes in free speech"? Or "he can't lead a country because he once was too busy being a parent and a doctor to make sure that the people who kept his newsletter going weren't saying anything he didn't agree 100% with"?
Man, WHERE were his priorities?! He should have been out there, constantly making sure no one was abusing their free speech, instead of being on-call for medical emergencies! You're right! He shouldn't be trusted with anything important! Not a country, not a person's life, not the air-worthiness of air force pilots, not nothing!
So basically, you're saying that he shouldn't be held responsible for what his associates did Basically, if he associated with people who turned out to be racist, and he's no longer associated with them, that doesn't mean that he is a racist.
Reason has uncovered pretty damning evidence that Ron Paul actually did write many of the things that concern is being expressed about that he's now disclaiming. A paper attributing everything in the newsletter as being written by Ron Paul is not damning evidence of Ron Paul.
Your parser and "live error correction" didn't manage to discover the plain meaning of "America the country" from its context I just repeated. You're mentally retarded:
America is The name of the continent on which many countries, including the one you're talking about, are located. I knew all along what country you were talking about, but you do not posses a brain capable of understanding that, as you have demonstrated.
If Rob Malda left it to others to edit the site, only published editor approved content, and put the site under his name (ie "Rob Malda's Newsletter") with no signs whatsoever that anyone other than Rob or people associated with Rob are involved, then yeah, the situation would be comparable. Copyright: Ron Paul and associates.
I've heard that the whole 2012 thing is a bit of a bugaboo If you were the one carving the damn calender in rock, by hand, would you think that 500 years is enough headway for now?
UN observers are usually sent to third-world nations and "flawed democracy", not countries like the US or any other Western country for the matter. So, as a matter of mact, UN observers won't certify US elections because nobody asked them to, not because they were there and refused to do it in light of widespread fraud, as your message implied. You and your '+5 Informative' are so very wrong:
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A team of international observers will monitor the presidential election in November, according to the U.S. State Department. [...] Thirteen Democratic members of the House of Representatives, raising the specter of possible civil rights violations that they said took place in Florida and elsewhere in the 2000 election, wrote to U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan in July, asking him to send observers.
I thought it was just one county, and they simply forgot Paul because he was at the bottom of the list when they sent in their report (even write-in candidates beat him). Nothing nefarious Did they forget Thompson, 9iu11ani and Hunter?
New Hampshire Updated 11:06 a.m. EDT, Jan 10, 2008 County Results Exit Poll
There are very few legitimate explanations for what could have happened. Ron Paul may be a racist. He may be a man who's willing to pander to racists. Or he may be utterly and completely incompetent, willing to lend his name to a publication edited directly by people whose views he supposedly finds repugnant, and not even bothered enough to check on its progress for that time period.
What's the fourth explanation? 'cos I'm not seeing it.
Freedom of speech. Why does Taco allow the troll posts to stay on/.? He could wipe away all the gay/blac/etc hating posts, but he doesn't. Does that mean that Taco believes all the words he allows to be uttered on his site?
appears to be copyright to "Ron Paul and Associates". Why hasn't he tried to get these taken down as being defamatory if they're not really his? Do you know what the word "associates" means?
If you don't know what country we're talking about when I say
America is built on the simple, but radical (for the 1780s, anyway) realization that people have rights, create governments to protect those rights, so when we create them, we must create them with powers to protect them, but not to abuse them. We have a right to privacy, as the 4th Amendment says. The government exists to protect it,
Or are you going to tell me that, say, the 13th Amendment banning slavery limits only the government from owning slaves?
then that's your "character flaw" at work, not mine. I know what you're talking about because I can parse your text and do live error correction in my head. I can understand you despite of your errors, that doesn't mean you are correct.
And regarding the formation of continents. How many continents do you think there are? Go look at the olympic flag, count the rings, and then try to fit North America, Central America, and South America along with the rest of the world. Don't work huh?
You won't stop being wrong, but at least stop thinking you're right: your ego is in the way of your intellectual development.
Ron Paul's official newsletter contained racist articles penned in his name. This is a fact, acknowledged by the Paul campaign. No. The newsletter was in his name. The articles were not. A person can assume that the articles in a newsletter reflects the views and opinions of the person who initiated the newsletter, until it becomes clear that they do not.
And here's the kicker: You insist that Ron Paul's views are not important. You insist that the assumption is paramount, and trumps any actual information. This is not honest, smart, nor productive.
You realize that it was "president," not "dictator," right? The president can't just order laws changed. Good luck convincing congress to sign off on any of that. Well, according to the present president, the president of Pakistan believes in democracy. Considering that this was said after he sacked the supreme court, suspended the constitution, ordered a national curfew and had thousands of opponents jailed, he can reasonably believe that a president wields supreme autocratic power;-)
In no particular order: 4. Erase all censorship from all media...This includes: Internet, Television, print, video games, music, etc. The intent is noble, but censorship starts at auto-censorship and goes all the way up through editorial choice and on to laws. You couldn't stop it all even if you were king of the world.
You also need to control some forms speech, such as sales speech: You need laws that require truth in advertising, because if you don't, crooks will poison the public in get rich quick schemes at an appalling rate.
The president can only pardon people who have been convicted of violating federal laws. Since most people in prision for drug posession were charged under state drug laws, there wouldn't be anything you could do about it. You can: Cut their federal-monies by 2x the internment costs of each of these victims of the system. Also, bomb them.
Slashdot Mirror
He dared to look for empirical proof of a scientific theory that had been rejected on theological grounds, and his proof was rejected as heresy.
Of course atheism is a religion, it is a system of belief about the supernatural nature (or lack there of) of this universe. It's the null religion. Do you believe that zero is not a number? Or perhaps that a null pointer isn't a pointer at all? Come on now. If it isn't a relgion is it a taco? I think it fits the former definition better. Intellectual honesty does not entail an appeal to ridicule in lieu of an actual argument.
Zero apples is not food.
A null value does not point to a region of memory.
Worshiping no gods is not a religion.
The story of Galileo is a tad more complicated than the simplistic version we're used to. I'm no Roman Catholic, but this meme needs to be corrected. From your link: "After Galileo went back to Padua, the leading scientific mediocrities started complaining. It was the scientists who said that challenging Aristotle was heresy -- not the Church."
From the Chuch: 1571, Paul IV issues the first formal Index Librorum Prohibitorum, including such works as De Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium by Copernicus.
Galileo was 7 when that happened. Stop listening to people who are arguing that it was ok to censor the man's empirical proof of a heretical scientific theory.
Not only is there no mention of specific technology in slashdot's ethos, but you're effectively arguing that faith and science don't matter.
Theoretically, since most baptisms are done without the consent of the subject.
FTFA: Cini also recalled a colloquium on Darwin held by Benedict in September 2006 in which the "intelligent design" movement was given precedence over the theory of evolution.
"The Church can no longer use pyres or corporal punishment," [...] Cini said of Benedict on Thursday: "By cancelling, he is playing the victim, which is very intelligent. It will be a pretext for accusing us of refusing dialogue."
Man, WHERE were his priorities?! He should have been out there, constantly making sure no one was abusing their free speech, instead of being on-call for medical emergencies! You're right! He shouldn't be trusted with anything important! Not a country, not a person's life, not the air-worthiness of air force pilots, not nothing!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy#Guilt_by_association_as_an_ad_hominem_fallacy
I've been following the links, the case against Paul is nothing more than guilt by association as an ad hominem fallacy.
I'm not able to follow your question. Could you elaborate and clarify what you are asking me? The 2012 doomsday scenario is based on hand-carved rock monuments: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesoamerican_Long_Count_calendar#2012_and_the_Long_Count
Their civilization ended roughly 500 years ago.
I think the calendar stops there because there was no need to have carved monuments of calendars lasting to the end of times.
You're a sad case
UN observers are usually sent to third-world nations and "flawed democracy", not countries like the US or any other Western country for the matter. So, as a matter of mact, UN observers won't certify US elections because nobody asked them to, not because they were there and refused to do it in light of widespread fraud, as your message implied. You and your '+5 Informative' are so very wrong:
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A team of international observers will monitor the presidential election in November, according to the U.S. State Department. [...]
Thirteen Democratic members of the House of Representatives, raising the specter of possible civil rights violations that they said took place in Florida and elsewhere in the 2000 election, wrote to U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan in July, asking him to send observers.
After Annan rejected their request, saying the administration must make the application, the Democrats asked Secretary of State Colin Powell to do so. The issue was hotly debated in the House, and Republicans got an amendment to a foreign aid bill that barred federal funds from being used for the United Nations to monitor U.S. elections, The Associated Press reported.
From David de Sola, CNN, Monday, August 9, 2004 Posted: 9:08 AM EDT (1308 GMT)
And their report, on the BBC.
New Hampshire
Updated 11:06 a.m. EDT, Jan 10, 2008
County Results
Exit Poll
McCain
88,466
37%
7
Romney
75,343
32%
4
Huckabee
26,768
11%
1
Giuliani
20,395
9%
0
Paul
18,303
8%
0
Thompson
2,886
1%
0
Hunter
1,220
0%
Freedom of speech.What's the fourth explanation? 'cos I'm not seeing it.
Why does Taco allow the troll posts to stay on
then that's your "character flaw" at work, not mine. I know what you're talking about because I can parse your text and do live error correction in my head.
I can understand you despite of your errors, that doesn't mean you are correct.
And regarding the formation of continents. How many continents do you think there are? Go look at the olympic flag, count the rings, and then try to fit North America, Central America, and South America along with the rest of the world. Don't work huh?
You won't stop being wrong, but at least stop thinking you're right: your ego is in the way of your intellectual development.
And here's the kicker: You insist that Ron Paul's views are not important. You insist that the assumption is paramount, and trumps any actual information.
This is not honest, smart, nor productive.
Considering that this was said after he sacked the supreme court, suspended the constitution, ordered a national curfew and had thousands of opponents jailed, he can reasonably believe that a president wields supreme autocratic power
4. Erase all censorship from all media...This includes: Internet, Television, print, video games, music, etc. The intent is noble, but censorship starts at auto-censorship and goes all the way up through editorial choice and on to laws. You couldn't stop it all even if you were king of the world.
You also need to control some forms speech, such as sales speech: You need laws that require truth in advertising, because if you don't, crooks will poison the public in get rich quick schemes at an appalling rate.
Also, bomb them.