Quotes of the day
posted at 10:35 pm on February 12, 2009 by Allahpundit
“Michael Shermer, editor of Skeptic magazine and author of The Mind of the Market, rightly tells free-market conservatives that they should appreciate how understanding evolution boosts their case for liberty: Darwin is truly a liberator! And Shermer tells those on the political left who usually embrace discoveries of science such as evolution that they need to appreciate the implications of evolution for their own pet theories about government-run economies…
A fear, of course, can’t negate facts. But in any case, the fear is unfounded. Just as an explanation of our biological origins does not need to rely on myths and alleged divine revelations, neither does morality. Indeed, the origins of morality are found in our nature as rational creatures with free choice who must understand the world around us and within us and develop principles to guide our conduct—morality—in order to survive and flourish.
Darwin was one of the most revolutionary and right thinkers in human history, up there with Newton and Einstein in terms of the implications of his discoveries. When we compare him to Lincoln by saying that he has liberated us from the slavery of ignorance and freed us to see the truth, we speak by analogy but no less truthfully. So let us celebrate the birth two hundred years ago of these two liberators who did so much for humanity.”
*
Via LGF.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »
500 comments. make book on it.
:-)
Buckaroo on February 12, 2009 at 10:36 PM
Is Glen Beck Mormon ?
redrock on February 12, 2009 at 10:37 PM
Happy Birthday Darwin. If nothing else, you got a lot of fundamentalists interested in biology.
justfinethanks on February 12, 2009 at 10:38 PM
“redrock on February 12, 2009 at 10:37 PM”
yes, shortly after getting sober he joined the l.d.s. …
Buckaroo on February 12, 2009 at 10:38 PM
Ugh. It’s quotes like these which force my intellect to take a second opinion of you, AP. I’m soooooooo sorry your choice to hold to a particular faith or not has kept you a “slave” to the opinions of those who actually believe in God.
Jockolantern on February 12, 2009 at 10:38 PM
Yep.
amerpundit on February 12, 2009 at 10:39 PM
Huh? Apples and oranges I say.
HawaiiLwyr on February 12, 2009 at 10:39 PM
Heh. Or not.
Though there are two separate arguments here: power of his thinking (not equal to Newton or Einstein remotely) and the implications of his discoveries (perhaps fair comparison).
Spirit of 1776 on February 12, 2009 at 10:39 PM
Is Glen Beck Mormon ?
redrock on February 12, 2009 at 10:37 PM
Are you spamming comments across threads?
Bishop on February 12, 2009 at 10:41 PM
micro-evolution
macro-evolution
2 entirely different things, one is actual science, the other is a crackpot theory with serious Philosophical and Societal implications with zero evidence in support.
instead we just throw it all under one term, stupidly.
jp on February 12, 2009 at 10:42 PM
How many of these people………
……….. work for a form of the government?
Seven Percent Solution on February 12, 2009 at 10:43 PM
Oh sorry. Is this a different thread. Nevermind.
redrock on February 12, 2009 at 10:43 PM
Darwin accomplished more outside of science than he did in it.
Happy birthday, Chuck!
spmat on February 12, 2009 at 10:43 PM
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!BLASPHEMERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Meanwhile,the Mullah’s are pondering,
who’s gonna get stoned for this heretic!(Sarc).
canopfor on February 12, 2009 at 10:45 PM
Tzetzes on February 12, 2009 at 10:46 PM
Oh sorry. Is this a different thread. Nevermind.
redrock on February 12, 2009 at 10:43 PM
Maybe someone is impersonating you.
Bishop on February 12, 2009 at 10:47 PM
Egad.
Charles Johnson redux spreading over at Hotair.
I think it’s going to be this years Swine Flu.
FlatFoot on February 12, 2009 at 10:48 PM
What does Glenn Beck being mormon have to do with this quote? I am SO confused! :)
Ok, before the games begin, I like these picks by AP because they raise so much discussion which is really the fun of this…….
catlady on February 12, 2009 at 10:49 PM
Where is the barrier between the two and how does it function to allow some speciation via natural selection but not beyond a certain point?
dedalus on February 12, 2009 at 10:49 PM
I remember reading something from Rand’s old fling about her and evolution…
http://www.nathanielbranden.com/catalog/articles_essays/benefits_and_hazards.html
http://www.muditajournal.com/archives/348.php
ninjapirate on February 12, 2009 at 10:50 PM
Happy birthday Chuck.
Ars Moriendi on February 12, 2009 at 10:51 PM
http://wiki.objectivismonline.net/wiki/Sex
ninjapirate on February 12, 2009 at 10:52 PM
Maybe.
Bishop on Feb 12,2009 at 10:47PM.
Bishop:I might be seeing double,but its amazing,the
same exact quote,by redrock,on the Michelle
Salutes thread,its uncanny to say the least,
and comment number 1 to boot!!
canopfor on February 12, 2009 at 10:54 PM
Thank you David Hume.
Social Darwinism part II, here we come!
darclon on February 12, 2009 at 10:57 PM
Lincoln dedicated us to God.
Darwin abandon us away from God.
Mojave Mark on February 12, 2009 at 10:58 PM
Give ‘em a break. Darwin’s b-day is the Atheist version of “Krishna Jayanti” or “Visakah Puja.” Of course they’re going to mark one of their most hallowed of days.
TMK on February 12, 2009 at 10:59 PM
I guess Darwin didn’t have good enough genes to live very long.
SouthernGent on February 12, 2009 at 11:00 PM
I stopped going to LGF because Charles became obsessed with the “evolution” thing.
How many evolution threads in the last few days…. 5…6?
HA, AP, Ed, DO NOT ENTER THE DARWIN ZONE!
I know it makes for a great thread and oodles of hits, but it’s a site killer in the long run.
katy on February 12, 2009 at 11:01 PM
Yes, this is the perfect time to PUSH this…let’s find the divisions between fellow-travelers and root out those who don’t exactly tow our ideological line and try to humiliate them and drive them out…because our hobby horse is THAT important!
AUINSC on February 12, 2009 at 11:01 PM
For whatever reason, this appears to be the day of the long knives for blogs all over the place.
wccawa on February 12, 2009 at 11:03 PM
Says here that Darwin had ten children.
Mr Gus on February 12, 2009 at 11:08 PM
To paraphrase Uncle Jay: Darwin taught that humans are animals. Lincoln taught that we’re not.
JohnJ on February 12, 2009 at 11:10 PM
+1
Good blog gone bad. But AP is much, much more tolerant then there.
Spirit of 1776 on February 12, 2009 at 11:10 PM
Really? Talk abut reproductive success.
justfinethanks on February 12, 2009 at 11:10 PM
Well, I believe in evolution of course. It’s obvious it exists. It came right after creation and life of all types has evolved ever since over the eons.
But LGF and Hotair, and some of the foul people on both sites, are about to flip me to the other side pretty soon.
They don’t seem to eat their own with such relish and frequency.
FlatFoot on February 12, 2009 at 11:12 PM
Pretty much. Reading a bit even though I normally find the topic not to my interest. Two died in infancy and one at the age of 10. He initially started school to become an Anglican clergyman.
Mr Gus on February 12, 2009 at 11:14 PM
Darwin, liberator?
With science supposedly on their side, thanks to Darwin, philosophers like Fredrich Nietzsche predicted that the increasing popularity of atheism would usher in a new age in the twentieth century. It did…an new age of evil, with more war casualties, more genocide, and more politically motivated killing than the rest of history combined. Atheistic nations like the USSR and Blood-Red China murdered more than fifty million of their own people, as well as aggressively pursuing global conquest. Adolf Hitler*, who was held captive by the doctrines of Nietzsche and Darwin, pulled the world into the worst war ever while murdering millions of Jews. Dictators have turned nations like N. Korea and Cuba into Bible-burning, Christian-torturing prison states. The crimes perpetrated by all of the misguided religionists since the dawn of time put together is a fraction of these godless regimes’ wickedness.
Conversely, who are the first to compassionately respond to victims of natural disasters? Who give more sacrificially to the poor than any other group? Who are the most likely to give up successful careers in order to serve the underprivileged full-time? Who are the most likely to adopt one of the world’s 143 million orphans? (I could go on and on) Religious people…specifically, the Christian creationists that Stalin, Mao, and Hitler loved to hate.
*Hitler made seemingly Christian statements at times, apparently to unite religious leaders behind him. But he was obviously guided in his governance and his lifestyle by Darwin and Nietzsche.
jgapinoy on February 12, 2009 at 11:14 PM
That’s true. Charles has pretty much destroyed my ever visiting there again since his obsession with this subject. That, and the hordes of foul people he attracts.
Seeing of that here too along the way. I hope this doesn’t become LGF II.
FlatFoot on February 12, 2009 at 11:16 PM
There is only so many options to choose from in the DNA code. Natural selection can switch on or off many different things but it can’t switch on an elephants trunk for a Zebra. The elephants trunk is a group of information that does not exist in Zebra DNA and thus cannot be selected.
So you can get many variations of a Kind, but you never get to a different kind.
Maxx on February 12, 2009 at 11:18 PM
If you read that correctly, then you will realize that what he’s actually saying can be rephrased thusly: “Indeed, the origins of morality are found in our nature as natural creatures.” And it is there that philosophical naturalism falls apart. Why not just skip the middle man, “reason”, and say morality is natural? If this author is right in the origins of morality, then “rational” is a useless adjective. Indeed it’s meaningless.
Weight of Glory on February 12, 2009 at 11:19 PM
Is this a serious post by AP or a joke??
Albertanator on February 12, 2009 at 11:20 PM
Did Giraffes always have long necks? If not, why do they have them now?
Johan Klaus on February 12, 2009 at 11:20 PM
Thankfully AP, is indeed much more tolerant and open minded then LGF is…with AP you can at least disagree and not have to worry about being banned…LGF has turned into a nutty site which is a shame because it has done some really good things in the past…alas, HotAir is excellent anyways…
Albertanator on February 12, 2009 at 11:23 PM
If Darwin is right, how do you explain Chuck Schumer?
Saltysam on February 12, 2009 at 11:23 PM
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!
Good one!
mikeyboss on February 12, 2009 at 11:24 PM
A joke? Yes, but probably not in the way you mean.
katy on February 12, 2009 at 11:24 PM
It’s moral relativity plain and simple.
darclon on February 12, 2009 at 11:24 PM
I agree. I used to enjoy visiting LGF but Charle Johnson’s growing obsession with aetheism has pretty much driven me away for good.
That and the hordes of vile people that hang out there now. They’re quick to eat their own and they do so with great frequency.
Actually, been seeing a bit of that here lately too.
I hope the Darwin/Creationism stuff and hordes of vile people feeding on their own doesn’t become a regular feature here at Hotair. I don’t really want to find another Conservative Blog to hang out at when I’m hangin’.
SilverStar830 on February 12, 2009 at 11:25 PM
I agree. I’m a Darwinian Creationist. Let’s leave it at that and move on.
Saltysam on February 12, 2009 at 11:28 PM
Darwin looks rather foolish today because he was postulating upon things that have been proven to be too far fetched. Lincoln’s vision for our nation and his character hold true to this day.
warriorlawyer on February 12, 2009 at 11:29 PM
Nietzsche is set up a little too often as a straw man. For example, in one of his last commentaries concerning anti-Semitism he stated:
That doesn’t really fit with the notion of him mentoring Hitler. In fact, he broke with Wagner due to Wagner’s anti-Semitic views, and Wagner was certainly more influential upon Hitler than Nietzsche.
FWIW.
darclon on February 12, 2009 at 11:31 PM
yawn. AP trying his old gimmick again.
Ampersand on February 12, 2009 at 11:31 PM
I’m convinced that the earth is really just some creature’s advanced sea-monkey collection.
Does that make me a creationist or a Darwinist?
Bishop on February 12, 2009 at 11:32 PM
Just to be clear.
I definitely believe in and support Evolution. Obviously, it has always been very prevalent and its existence is irrefutable.
It started right after creation and hasn’t stopped since.
SilverStar830 on February 12, 2009 at 11:33 PM
Possibly a Sea Monkeyist.
That or a devout follower of Eric Cartman I.
Mr Gus on February 12, 2009 at 11:35 PM
Who knows. However there’s a very fundamental difference between a giraffe getting a longer neck and a giraffe becoming, say, an elephant.
As far as scientific theories go, evolution is a pretty poor one as it is impossible to test. That said, I’m not going to say it’s untrue, I’m just saying I find it highly dubious and unlikely.
Until there is a real world example of a helpful mutation I’m not going to even consider it as anything more than a crackpot theory. Oh and sickle-cell disease cannot be considered helpful as it is intrinsically harmful. After malaria is removed from the picture it is entirely harmful and therefore mutations like that wouldn’t be able to account for the advancement of a species toward complexity.
Kronos on February 12, 2009 at 11:38 PM
Darwin plus Lamarck make one complete scientist.
Lincoln minus Obama makes a better country.
profitsbeard on February 12, 2009 at 11:41 PM
For whatever reason, this appears to be the day of the long knives for blogs all over the place.
wccawa on February 12, 2009 at 11:03 PM
ouch!
catlady on February 12, 2009 at 11:42 PM
Well, I have some good news for you. There are a few examples I can use, but one recent and intesting one is witnessing E. Coli evolve the ability to digest citrate through a random mutation. It’s a very complex mutation, and is akin to watching an animal go from a herbivore to an omnivore before your very eyes. What’s more, is that this was performed in an ongoing, twenty year evolutionary expiriment. The scientists freeze the E Coli at various intervals, so anyone else can go back and duplicate the expiriments. Which makes evolution both testable AND reproducable.
You’re welcome.
justfinethanks on February 12, 2009 at 11:44 PM
Nietzsche was influential to Hitler, not about anti-Semitism, but about the Ubberman. Hitler wanted a master race of blue-eyed, blond Aryans, & the Jews, Blacks, handicapped, etc, were deemed not only inferior, but a drag on human evolutionary progress.
jgapinoy on February 12, 2009 at 11:45 PM
Maxx on February 12, 2009 at 11:46 PM
Sorry, but philosophers don’t buy that. You can’t reason morality from Material Monism. No way, no how.
Based on logic (principle #1 below), you can’t have morality and have no God. Basic on logic (Principle #2 below), you must have immortality otherwise morality is meaningless, because there can be no everlasting consequences:
These are necessary conditions in order to have rational justification for ethics:
1. There must be a metaphysical absolute. If there is no metaphysical absolute (if all is eternal and nothing is absolute or transcendent) there can be no justified distinction between good and evil and therefore no morality. Consider the implications of pantheism, polytheism, naturalism and secular humanism. Is God therefore necessary for morality?
2. There must be personal immortality. If there is no personal immortality there can be no morality. If there is no personal continuity there can be no future and no purpose, and if there is no purpose there can be no goal or good.
3. There must be freedom. If there is no freedom there can be no morality. The good as the end in itself is achieved through choice. If there is no freedom there can be no choice and therefore the good is not achievable.
4. There must be clarity. If there is no clarity there can be no morality. If it is not clear what is good then one cannot be held accountable for pursuing the good. If there is no clarity then there is skepticism and if there is skepticism then there is relativism.
5. There must be rationality. If there is no rationality then there can be no clarity and therefore no morality. What is clear could not possibly be otherwise. Its contradiction is logically impossible. One has to stop thinking to avoid seeing what is clear.
There is a moral law which is clear, comprehensive & critical:
1. It is clear because is is grounded in human nature, and is therefore easily knowable and universal.
2. It is comprehensive, including all aspects of human nature and choice.
3. It is critical; its consequences are a matter of life and death.
Tim Burton on February 12, 2009 at 11:46 PM
And the so called examples, such as black moths and white moths are self explanatory.
Johan Klaus on February 12, 2009 at 11:46 PM
Footnote: Notes from S. Gangadean
Tim Burton on February 12, 2009 at 11:47 PM
If many animals taste like chicken, how do we know that somewhere in the far past there wasn’t a common ancestor of the chicken, frog, dog and crocodile? A really effin strange looking missing link.
Spooky, when you really think about it.
Bishop on February 12, 2009 at 11:47 PM
I love Nietzsche. When his philosophy is applied on a personal level, it can be a great spur to self-discipline. Postmodernists made a complete hash of him because they were a bunch of academic pansies, but Heidegger’s interpretation of him as “the last metaphysician” seems about right. Nietzsche did not like Darwin much, but that was part of his general dislike for the English, Shakespeare excepted, as well as his aversion to all doctrines of “progress”.
However, that passage you quoted about having anti-Semites shot is from one of the letters he wrote after he’d gone insane, so it isn’t really the product of a sound mind, assuming he had one to begin with. That said, at the end of his career, Nietzsche does seem to have come to the conclusion that the Ubermensch was some amalgamation of the best of the German character combined with the best of the Jewish character, or, as he put it “Caesar with the soul of Christ”.
venividivici on February 12, 2009 at 11:47 PM
+1
jgapinoy on February 12, 2009 at 11:48 PM
Well, my mother-in-law has been described in many ways.
Limerick on February 12, 2009 at 11:51 PM
Is this a reference to one of the many evolutionary frauds foisted upon a gullible, Darwin-trusting public?
jgapinoy on February 12, 2009 at 11:51 PM
I think (I pull this from Portable Nietzsche, which isn’t handy for me right now) that Nietzsche was contemptible of Darwin.
Irrelevant to the debate, but an interesting point, if I recall correctly.
emailnuevo on February 12, 2009 at 11:53 PM
I think I’ll go over to LFG, rather than read another farrago of inane and ill-informed comments denying the obvious fact of biological evolution. The association of conservatism with know-nothingism is going to be the death of the movement.
MrLynn on February 12, 2009 at 11:54 PM
Here is my take on Darwin and creationists. I believe in God as described in the Bible but I will not limit Him to the beliefs of those that lived 5000 years ago. I believe in a blessed creation and evolution and I really don’t care if my anciant ancestors emerged from a primordial pool or is the spawn of some intergalactic procreation. I am still a child of God and I choose not to limit His power to my own narrow minded interpretations of His word. I believe He created the Heavens and Earth but place no boundaries on how nor do I limit the vastness of it all.
goat on February 12, 2009 at 11:55 PM
Isn’t it also Kim Dung Hill’s birthday?
jgapinoy on February 12, 2009 at 11:55 PM
Contemptuous towards. My bad.
Guess I’m in the unfit pool, with those fat finches.
emailnuevo on February 12, 2009 at 11:56 PM
I think I’ll go over to LFG, rather than read another farrago of inane and ill-informed comments denying the obvious fact of biological evolution. The association of conservatism with know-nothingism is going to be the death of the movement.
MrLynn on February 12, 2009 at 11:54 PM
No one is holding a gun to your head to make you stay, if the debate bothers you, make like a tree and get outta here.
Bishop on February 12, 2009 at 11:58 PM
OK, Nietzsche didn’t like the QB, but he took the evolution hand-off & ran with it to its logical conclusion–Uberman–which Hitler attempted to put into practice.
jgapinoy on February 12, 2009 at 11:58 PM
Evolution is simply a mechanism God gave His creations to adapt and grow in their environment.
goat on February 12, 2009 at 11:59 PM
goat on February 12, 2009 at 11:55 PM
You’re doing it all wrong; way too congenial. How in the name of Gaia is AP supposed to get this thread to 500 if you don’t dive in with guns blazing?
Now get back out there and draw some blood.
Bishop on February 13, 2009 at 12:01 AM
Speakup on February 13, 2009 at 12:01 AM
Oh, absolutely, you’re right. I just think it’s fun that, despite the philosophical kinship, Nietzsche didn’t like him – must’ve been some kinda guy!
emailnuevo on February 13, 2009 at 12:02 AM
Yes. Giraffes first appeared about 1 million years ago, with their long necks intact. There are older animals in the fossil record that kind of look like giraffes, but they didn’t have long necks, and they’re extinct anyway, so forget about them.
RightOFLeft on February 13, 2009 at 12:02 AM
Jgap, care to debate a former atheist reborn Christian on evolution versus literal creationism?
goat on February 13, 2009 at 12:03 AM
Which God?
Speakup on February 13, 2009 at 12:03 AM
I bet there are more people who accept evolution that have read the bible than there are creationists who have read Origin of Species.
Anyone who thinks evolution says we came from monkeys clearly has not studied Darwin’s theory at all.
“My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures, have become clearer and stronger with advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them.”
– Abraham Lincoln, quoted by Joseph Lewis in “Lincoln the Freethinker,”
deewhybee on February 13, 2009 at 12:03 AM
Back from a brief visit to LGF. The comments there are, if anything, even more inane than those here.
Sic transit rationality!
MrLynn on February 13, 2009 at 12:06 AM
You know, you’re right. This thread is way too polite. Could somone please make a reference to either “ignorant Darwiniacs” or “slack jawed SkyDaddy worshipers” to get things started?
justfinethanks on February 13, 2009 at 12:08 AM
I bet there are more people who accept evolution that have read the bible than there are creationists who have read Origin of Species.
I’m in, $5,000 says you’re wrong, though you are going to have a hell of a time proving yourself the winner.
Bishop on February 13, 2009 at 12:08 AM
Bishop on February 13, 2009 at 12:01 AM
I have no desire to draw AP’s blood but draw him in by the same arguments that attracted me back into the fold. I cannot limit the powers or devices of God to fit what folks 5,000 years ago used to explain their existance.
goat on February 13, 2009 at 12:08 AM
Speakup on February 13, 2009 at 12:03 AM
The One that created us through whatever path He chose. I am not so conceited to think I was created in His image. Read my comments with a mind that is open not closed.
goat on February 13, 2009 at 12:14 AM
The ignorant crypto-Nazi damned-to-Hell soulless Darwiniacs and the slack-jawed conservatism-destroying science-allergic SkyDaddy worshipers should be friends.
CK MacLeod on February 13, 2009 at 12:15 AM
Breaking News: Continental Airlines commuter jet crashes into house in Buffalo, NY.
SnarkVader on February 13, 2009 at 12:17 AM
Bishop on February 13, 2009 at 12:08 AM
Here’s one, I’ve read the Bible but not the Origin of Species and I have no problem with evolution theory though it does have some big gaps. Micro-evolution is a proven fact, macro-evolution is still in its infancy as far as understanding goes.
goat on February 13, 2009 at 12:18 AM
goat on February 13, 2009 at 12:08 AM
You effin Bible thumper.
And AP, you soulless lizard chaser.
Ok…now GO!
Why do I have to do everything around here?
Bishop on February 13, 2009 at 12:19 AM
I imagine a future where our children are told of a man who taught us our true origins, and the laws that govern our existence. A man who liberated us from the slavery of ignorance and freed us to see the truth. I imagine children being told how they should study the laws, and to proclaim them daily with fervor.
Wait a minute,I forgot which side is religion and which isn’t. Linesss blurrriinngg…….
WaltDakota on February 13, 2009 at 12:21 AM
Here’s one, I’ve read the Bible but not the Origin of Species and I have no problem with evolution theory though it does have some big gaps. Micro-evolution is a proven fact, macro-evolution is still in its infancy as far as understanding goes.
goat on February 13, 2009 at 12:18 AM
I didn’t understand a word you said.
I think a better plan would be to watch “Contact” and “Passion of the Christ” on a large tv with split-screen and really let your intellect go wild.
Bishop on February 13, 2009 at 12:23 AM
That damn near cost me a beer.
I’m the stepchild on this issue (slapped by the Word-of-God’rs and slapped by the Word-of-Charles’rs) so I’ll let you all rage. I just don’t find any reason to think God didn’t put evolution into the mix. As a Big-Bang Christian Buddist Catholic Zoroasteran I get no respect.
Limerick on February 13, 2009 at 12:25 AM
If you read The Creationists by Numbers, you’ll discover that creationists came up with making a broad distinction between “micro” and “macro” evolution during the 30s (before then, they didn’t even accept “microevolution”). This was a marketing masterstroke. While scientists do indeed use these terms, they don’t draw distinction in the mechanism that causes the two, and they never have. When you convince the public that there is some sort of real, function difference between the two, you can convince them that it makes a lick of sense to accept one but not the other.
justfinethanks on February 13, 2009 at 12:26 AM
Bishop on February 13, 2009 at 12:19 AM
I am sure if I sat down for a beer with AP I could bring him back to the Lord without thumping the Bible. I used to be an atheist and it wasn’t Biblical arguments that brought me back, it was the power of life and the undescribable wonder of His creation. The argument I use also came from a former atheist in that we cannot limit the Lord by our own limited view of His creation.
goat on February 13, 2009 at 12:28 AM
Breaking: 49 killed in Continental crash in Buffalo, New York.
amerpundit on February 13, 2009 at 12:30 AM
Happy Birthday Darwin although your formulations provide no ultimate answers they do lead us through the doorway to explore humanity. And to you Mr.Lincoln aside from your great height ,your legacy of service to this country will always give us something to look up too. In doing that– may we always strive to be the land of the free and the home of the brave.
canditaylor68 on February 13, 2009 at 12:31 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »