Total Posts:33|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

ron paul doesn't rejects evolution

mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2011 6:16:40 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/26/2011 12:48:44 AM, belle wrote:
http://scienceblogs.com...

what say you, ron paul supporters?

so he Does reject evolution... (typo^^)

I say: What a silly man!
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2011 8:55:15 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/26/2011 12:48:44 AM, belle wrote:
http://scienceblogs.com...

what say you, ron paul supporters?:

I thought he approached it well. He doubts it, but sounds open to debate.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2011 9:26:23 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
We can't really judge someone on whether or not they believe in evolution, now don't me wrong... if someone doesn't believe in evolution my gut response is to assume they are deficient in some way. But if I went solely on my gut responses I'd be deficient.

I actually really like Ron Pauls overall attitude to many things. He may or may not be smart, but he has a lot of common sense.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2011 9:55:21 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/26/2011 12:48:44 AM, belle wrote:
http://scienceblogs.com...

what say you, ron paul supporters?

I'm not a Ron Paul supporter, but I think, to most voters, the economy is a little bit higher on the priority list than evolution. How much policy does the president do in regards to scientific studies finding and supporting evolution?
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2011 10:04:09 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Eh, disappointing. I don't think it's particularly important though. It isn't obvious to me how that would impact his ability to be president.
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2011 10:04:39 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/26/2011 10:04:09 AM, Kinesis wrote:
Eh, disappointing. I don't think it's particularly important though. It isn't obvious to me how that would impact his ability to be president.

To clarify: I'm not a Ron Paul supporter.
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2011 10:13:00 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Please. Ron Paul deals with more important issues like questions of 19th century monetary policy which confuse and befuddle his opponents. The Coinage Act of 1873, which demonetized silver, had a strong impact on an adolescent Ron Paul and was only the first in a series of demonetizations in the US until the eventual acceptance of fiat currency ("backed by nothing!") I believe RP has been advocating a return to gold, and only gold, since around the turn of the 20th century if my sources are correct.
mongoose
Posts: 3,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2011 3:24:42 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/26/2011 10:13:00 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
Please. Ron Paul deals with more important issues like questions of 19th century monetary policy which confuse and befuddle his opponents. The Coinage Act of 1873, which demonetized silver, had a strong impact on an adolescent Ron Paul and was only the first in a series of demonetizations in the US until the eventual acceptance of fiat currency ("backed by nothing!") I believe RP has been advocating a return to gold, and only gold, since around the turn of the 20th century if my sources are correct.

So Ron Paul is how old?
It is odd when one's capacity for compassion is measured not in what he is willing to do by his own time, effort, and property, but what he will force others to do with their own property instead.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2011 3:27:20 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/26/2011 3:24:42 PM, mongoose wrote:
At 8/26/2011 10:13:00 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
Please. Ron Paul deals with more important issues like questions of 19th century monetary policy which confuse and befuddle his opponents. The Coinage Act of 1873, which demonetized silver, had a strong impact on an adolescent Ron Paul and was only the first in a series of demonetizations in the US until the eventual acceptance of fiat currency ("backed by nothing!") I believe RP has been advocating a return to gold, and only gold, since around the turn of the 20th century if my sources are correct.

So Ron Paul is how old?

Pretty darn old.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
belle
Posts: 4,113
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2011 3:30:31 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/26/2011 6:16:40 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 8/26/2011 12:48:44 AM, belle wrote:
http://scienceblogs.com...

what say you, ron paul supporters?

so he Does reject evolution... (typo^^)

I say: What a silly man!

damn it. lol. my original title was "ron paul doesn't accept evolution" and i guess i didn't quite edit it properly to reflect the use of the word "rejects". and now i can't edit it :(

anyways, since most people consider him to be highly intelligent, it seems like it would be a big deal for him to decide an issue like that based on his faith. thats not to say that we should expect him to be completely unbiased, because no one is, but especially since he's had some scientific training, it seems utterly irrational for him to call it "a theory" (though he didn't say just you could hear it in his voice :P) and decline to believe in it. one would expect him to know better
evidently i only come to ddo to avoid doing homework...
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2011 3:38:19 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Does it even matter what the President thinks about evolution? It's not like he'd be lecturing against evolution to kids or writing the textbooks or anything.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2011 3:51:51 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/26/2011 3:38:19 PM, mongeese wrote:
Does it even matter what the President thinks about evolution? It's not like he'd be lecturing against evolution to kids or writing the textbooks or anything.

It implying an overall questioning of his intellegence. How can someone that doesn't buy into evolution really be that smart? This isn't like a gaffe of saying 57 states, but if someone actually believed that there were 57 states.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
belle
Posts: 4,113
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2011 3:57:05 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/26/2011 3:38:19 PM, mongeese wrote:
Does it even matter what the President thinks about evolution? It's not like he'd be lecturing against evolution to kids or writing the textbooks or anything.

mostly i think it calls into question his ability to make rational (unbiased) decisions. its not like evolution is an open question on which individuals can reasonably disagree.
evidently i only come to ddo to avoid doing homework...
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2011 3:57:47 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/26/2011 3:51:51 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
It implying an overall questioning of his intellegence. How can someone that doesn't buy into evolution really be that smart? This isn't like a gaffe of saying 57 states, but if someone actually believed that there were 57 states.
Maybe he chooses not to think much about it because it might conflict with his religious views. That has nothing to do with how intelligent or smart he is. He's not perfect. No human is perfect. Evolution is a huge scientific theory, but it should not be enforced as a belief upon anyone.

William James Sidis* had the highest recorded IQ. He used to be a socialist. Doesn't mean he didn't understand politics and economics. Nor does it mean that he was not intelligent or smart. He surely was.

* http://en.wikipedia.org...
brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2011 4:05:39 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Here is an article published in my evening newspaper, the London Evening Standard, which I read with interest on my way home from work tonight:

The audition cannot be expected to go on forever, with the Republican Party lounging in the orchestra stalls, with their feet on the backs of the seats, puffing on wet cigars and saying: "Don't call us, we'll call you." One fine day they are going to have to make up their minds as to who is going to run against Barack Obama next year.

That means they are going to have to get excited about someone. Somebody is going to have to make them sit up and concentrate.

There are those who say that the trouble hitherto has been that everyone assumed, deep down, that Obama would win a second term. He has the advantages of the presidency. He will have an enormous fighting fund. By the time the election comes around, the economy might have improved and unemployment be on the way down. The savviest of the blue-chip candidates would have thought: not this time, wait another four years.

If that really was the reasoning of these absentee candidates, it began to look a little unwise as the recovery proved feeble and unemployment has failed to go down. Suddenly these superior-quality non-combatants (assuming for the moment that they are not mythical beings) began to feel like blue-chip chumps. Obama was beatable after all, and they were sitting this one out.

Now, there's blue-chip and blue-chip. Whether Sarah Palin decides to get involved or not is really part of a different story, not one in which quality comes into consideration. Blue-chip means a candidate who has proven experience in high elective office, is, if not personally wealthy, then able to tap into great wealth, is well respected within the higher echelons of the Republican Party and, on top of it all, is capable of enthusing a crowd. (Palin is what used to be called a bolter, having walked away from elective office without any good reason; she is also short on upper-echelon respect - indeed, that's an aspect of her brand.)

True blue-chip candidates might include Jeb Bush, the brother of the last President and former governor of Florida. Surprising though some people might find this, one looks to the Bush circle these days for a Republican voice of moderation and common sense. Bush has shown an awareness that whatever happens in the primaries, when it comes to the general election the successful candidate is going to have to appeal to independent-minded voters.

This week he was arguing, for instance, that Republicans should not attack Obama's motives. It was fine to say he was incompetent and that he had failed or made things worse, but "he's not deserving of criticism for the common cold on up.
If you're a conservative, you have to persuade. You can't just be against the President".

Bush went on to say something that is complete heresy in his party: that he would be prepared to countenance some new revenues (meaning tax increases). "I think the problems are so severe in this country that leadership is required to find common ground and solutions." This may sound like mild stuff but it is a rare sort of mildness in the context.

What context? Well, the context that has become plain this week, in which we have seen the recently announced candidacy of Rick Perry, the governor of Texas, outshine all opposition. By some lights, Perry qualifies as a blue-chip candidate. He can argue that his 11-year governorship of Texas has been good for employment, even if his opponents point out that it has been good for state employment dependent on federal funding. He is well connected with sources of Texan wealth. And he has just demonstrated his ability to generate enthusiasm - he has probably already kicked Michele Bachmann's flaky candidacy to the kerb. And he has outshone Mitt Romney, hitherto the presumptive frontrunner.

But let nobody say hereafter that they have not been warned. Governor Perry prepared to launch his candidacy with a day-long, arena-sized Christian prayer event, somewhat exclusive in its appeal (no interest in the Catholic, Mormon, Jewish or of course Muslim faithful). He lost no time in pointing out that evolution is only one of several theories out there (intelligent design being another), that human agency in climate change is far from proven, and that climate scientists had been found to be cooking the books in order to attract funds.

He played to the gallery by stating that if Ben Bernanke, the chairman of the Federal Reserve, were to allow another round of quantitative easing, this would amount almost to treason. (In America there is a long history, rooted in classic anti-Semitism, of suspicion of or outright hostility to the Federal Reserve. It is as if in Britain there were political groups hostile not merely to the incumbent Governor of the Bank of England but to the Bank itself.)

Governor Perry, a keen supporter of the Boy Scout movement, turns out to believe that homosexuality is like alcoholism. It's a matter of choice whether you indulge such proclivities or not. If you can't drink in moderation, don't drink at all. And - guys - if you're attracted to other guys, abstain!

"If you don't support the death penalty," writes Governor Perry in a recent book, "and citizens packing a pistol, don't come to Texas." There have been 234 executions during his 11 years in office, a record total for any governor, but not a record annual rate of executions. And this might be the place to say that all the current candidates routinely support the death penalty, as does President Obama. Perry, though, has the distinction of having vetoed a bill which would have banned the execution of the mentally retarded.

All in all, a lively candidate. Stronger, though, on the fringe than on that crucial centre ground.


http://www.thisislondon.co.uk...
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2011 4:07:01 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/26/2011 3:57:47 PM, Mirza wrote:
At 8/26/2011 3:51:51 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
It implying an overall questioning of his intellegence. How can someone that doesn't buy into evolution really be that smart? This isn't like a gaffe of saying 57 states, but if someone actually believed that there were 57 states.
Maybe he chooses not to think much about it because it might conflict with his religious views. That has nothing to do with how intelligent or smart he is. He's not perfect. No human is perfect. Evolution is a huge scientific theory, but it should not be enforced as a belief upon anyone.

William James Sidis* had the highest recorded IQ. He used to be a socialist. Doesn't mean he didn't understand politics and economics. Nor does it mean that he was not intelligent or smart. He surely was.

* http://en.wikipedia.org...

Actually Marilyn Vos has the record for highest recorded IQ.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

But the Guinness book of world records has actually retired the IQ categories because they were "no longer satisfied that intelligence tests were either uniform or reliable enough to produce a single record holder."

http://www.ft.com...
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2011 4:31:54 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/26/2011 3:51:51 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
It implying an overall questioning of his intellegence. How can someone that doesn't buy into evolution really be that smart? This isn't like a gaffe of saying 57 states, but if someone actually believed that there were 57 states.

C'mon, the evidence for evolution takes significantly more effort to understand than the evidence for the number of states in the US.
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2011 4:34:11 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
btw, I recently listened to the audiobook of Ron Paul's manifesto. Quite entertaining, except for the cheesy music every now and then.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2011 4:47:32 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/26/2011 10:13:00 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
Please. Ron Paul deals with more important issues like questions of 19th century monetary policy which confuse and befuddle his opponents. The Coinage Act of 1873, which demonetized silver, had a strong impact on an adolescent Ron Paul and was only the first in a series of demonetizations in the US until the eventual acceptance of fiat currency ("backed by nothing!") I believe RP has been advocating a return to gold, and only gold, since around the turn of the 20th century if my sources are correct.

We were on gold at the turn of the 20th, so who exactly was he advocating to?
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2011 4:53:45 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/26/2011 4:47:32 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 8/26/2011 10:13:00 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
Please. Ron Paul deals with more important issues like questions of 19th century monetary policy which confuse and befuddle his opponents. The Coinage Act of 1873, which demonetized silver, had a strong impact on an adolescent Ron Paul and was only the first in a series of demonetizations in the US until the eventual acceptance of fiat currency ("backed by nothing!") I believe RP has been advocating a return to gold, and only gold, since around the turn of the 20th century if my sources are correct.

We were on gold at the turn of the 20th, so who exactly was he advocating to?

I meant to state that he simply supported the idea even though the gold standard was in place by the turn of the 20th century. If you read his biography you'll find that he discussed the issue heavily with Coolidge over their monthly tennis matches.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2011 4:57:15 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/26/2011 4:07:01 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 8/26/2011 3:57:47 PM, Mirza wrote:
At 8/26/2011 3:51:51 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
It implying an overall questioning of his intellegence. How can someone that doesn't buy into evolution really be that smart? This isn't like a gaffe of saying 57 states, but if someone actually believed that there were 57 states.
Maybe he chooses not to think much about it because it might conflict with his religious views. That has nothing to do with how intelligent or smart he is. He's not perfect. No human is perfect. Evolution is a huge scientific theory, but it should not be enforced as a belief upon anyone.

William James Sidis* had the highest recorded IQ. He used to be a socialist. Doesn't mean he didn't understand politics and economics. Nor does it mean that he was not intelligent or smart. He surely was.

* http://en.wikipedia.org...

Actually Marilyn Vos has the record for highest recorded IQ.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

But the Guinness book of world records has actually retired the IQ categories because they were "no longer satisfied that intelligence tests were either uniform or reliable enough to produce a single record holder."

http://www.ft.com...
250-300 IQ compared to 180. Figure out the difference. It's true that W. Sidis might have scored around 200 on modern IQ tests, but I'm sure his IQ is higher than that of M. Savant.

Nonetheless that's not the subject at hand. It's about whether rejecting to believe in evolution has anything to do with your knowledge or intelligence. No, not necessarily at all. It can be for various other reasons.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2011 5:11:25 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
First of all, that vid in the OP is old news. Second of all, Ron Paul DOES believe in evolution and clarified it in his new book.

Watch from [7:14 - 8:25]
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
seraine
Posts: 734
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2011 9:46:07 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/26/2011 3:24:42 PM, mongoose wrote:
At 8/26/2011 10:13:00 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
Please. Ron Paul deals with more important issues like questions of 19th century monetary policy which confuse and befuddle his opponents. The Coinage Act of 1873, which demonetized silver, had a strong impact on an adolescent Ron Paul and was only the first in a series of demonetizations in the US until the eventual acceptance of fiat currency ("backed by nothing!") I believe RP has been advocating a return to gold, and only gold, since around the turn of the 20th century if my sources are correct.

So Ron Paul is how old?

More than you can count.

But that's not sayin' much.
mongoose
Posts: 3,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/27/2011 12:52:35 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/26/2011 9:46:07 PM, seraine wrote:
At 8/26/2011 3:24:42 PM, mongoose wrote:
At 8/26/2011 10:13:00 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
Please. Ron Paul deals with more important issues like questions of 19th century monetary policy which confuse and befuddle his opponents. The Coinage Act of 1873, which demonetized silver, had a strong impact on an adolescent Ron Paul and was only the first in a series of demonetizations in the US until the eventual acceptance of fiat currency ("backed by nothing!") I believe RP has been advocating a return to gold, and only gold, since around the turn of the 20th century if my sources are correct.

So Ron Paul is how old?

More than you can count.

But that's not sayin' much.

I don't understand this response.
It is odd when one's capacity for compassion is measured not in what he is willing to do by his own time, effort, and property, but what he will force others to do with their own property instead.
Jon1
Posts: 314
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/27/2011 1:24:36 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/26/2011 12:48:44 AM, belle wrote:
http://scienceblogs.com...

what say you, ron paul supporters?

I REALLY don't see the relevance of this.

Presidency =/= Evolution and Science
seraine
Posts: 734
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/27/2011 8:25:20 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/27/2011 12:52:35 AM, mongoose wrote:
At 8/26/2011 9:46:07 PM, seraine wrote:
At 8/26/2011 3:24:42 PM, mongoose wrote:
At 8/26/2011 10:13:00 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
Please. Ron Paul deals with more important issues like questions of 19th century monetary policy which confuse and befuddle his opponents. The Coinage Act of 1873, which demonetized silver, had a strong impact on an adolescent Ron Paul and was only the first in a series of demonetizations in the US until the eventual acceptance of fiat currency ("backed by nothing!") I believe RP has been advocating a return to gold, and only gold, since around the turn of the 20th century if my sources are correct.

So Ron Paul is how old?

More than you can count.

But that's not sayin' much.

I don't understand this response.

It's supposed to be humorous. I am saddened that I have to explain my joke. Ron Paul is older than you can count, but that's not sayin' much because you're dumb. Get it?
mongoose
Posts: 3,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/27/2011 10:38:57 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/27/2011 8:25:20 AM, seraine wrote:
At 8/27/2011 12:52:35 AM, mongoose wrote:
At 8/26/2011 9:46:07 PM, seraine wrote:
At 8/26/2011 3:24:42 PM, mongoose wrote:
At 8/26/2011 10:13:00 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
Please. Ron Paul deals with more important issues like questions of 19th century monetary policy which confuse and befuddle his opponents. The Coinage Act of 1873, which demonetized silver, had a strong impact on an adolescent Ron Paul and was only the first in a series of demonetizations in the US until the eventual acceptance of fiat currency ("backed by nothing!") I believe RP has been advocating a return to gold, and only gold, since around the turn of the 20th century if my sources are correct.

So Ron Paul is how old?

More than you can count.

But that's not sayin' much.

I don't understand this response.

It's supposed to be humorous. I am saddened that I have to explain my joke. Ron Paul is older than you can count, but that's not sayin' much because you're dumb. Get it?

I knew that it was a joke, it just seems misplaced.
It is odd when one's capacity for compassion is measured not in what he is willing to do by his own time, effort, and property, but what he will force others to do with their own property instead.
jat93
Posts: 1,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/27/2011 1:17:39 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/26/2011 12:48:44 AM, belle wrote:
http://scienceblogs.com...

what say you, ron paul supporters?

Who cares? Ron Paul is the only Presidential candidate of which I can safely say I don't really care about his personal beliefs. A constitution abiding President's powers are limited to the point that it usually shouldn't matter what he does or does not believe. Ron Paul isn't sure about the credibility of evolution, and more strikingly, he is emphatically against abortions. I'm pro-choice and I support evolution (at least over creationism) and guess what, I don't care less and I'm still an ardent Ron Paul supporter because he believes in state's rights over injecting his personal opinions into legislation.
heart_of_the_matter
Posts: 408
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2011 9:36:47 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/26/2011 12:48:44 AM, belle wrote:
http://scienceblogs.com...

what say you, ron paul supporters?

I like what he said. I am a Creationist and I am a Ron Paul supporter and I like most of what he stands for, he stated what he truly believes in...and that is fine with me. He is the only candidate worth voting in as President! My position is probably actually a lot stronger toward being against evolution...but then again a person must actually DEFINE what the person means when the use the term "EVOLUTION"...there is a "popular usage" such as people using that term to mean that mankind evolved from primordial ooze or there are people using the term to say we have a common ancestor with an apelike creature...then there are other people who using the term Evolution meaning something like...a change in alleles or genes over time...or something like that....There are very BIG differences in where people are coming from when saying EVOLUTION!