Array Travellers also need to pay airport taxes and other applicable surcharges. The regular one-way fare is S28 (US36)and it is S00 (US38) plus for a return ticket. Main carriers like Singapore Airlines charge more than S00 (US57) for a return fare. Jetstar Asia’s acting chief executive officer. Neil Thompson announced the new route Monday (Dec 12) when he met the press. He said: Bangalore has been growing phenomenally over recent years and while airlines have flocked to fill passenger demand the costs of flying have been very high. Jetstar’s entry into the market will change that he promised adding that the airline will be the only value-for-money airline operating between the two cities. Thompson also announced that Valuair ordain start flying three times a week to Bali in Indonesia from Jan 27. A promotional fare of S9 (US9) for a return trip is also available for those who book in the next one week. Jetstar Asia and Valuair merged recently but the two airlines are retaining their separate brands for now. Thompson. Jetstar Asia’s third new boss in a year and formerly Qantas’ general manager for customer relationship marketing plans to concentrate on customer service and growing existing markets. One area of focus will be to consolidate our positions in the existing markets and grow the business in those areas he said when asked about his role before a new permanent head is appointed in the first quarter of next year. The Straits Times understands that there are no new destinations on the radar for the next few months at least. Given his marketing and customer relationship background. Thompson will also spend some measure working on customer profiles. The idea is to gather information on the different types of people who fly the airline so that programmes and services can be introduced with the customer in mind. Jetstar which is 49 per cent owned by Qantas will fly to 10 destinations by the end of next month. Valuair will fly to three points in Indonesia - Jakarta. Surabaya and Bali.
To me. Logan Cooper’s demand was a slap in the face. Making me hire this kid was one thing but requiring that both Seth and I agree on every prospect coming out of Georgia was ludicrous. My immediate boss. Donald DeSear (the national scouting director) hasn’t said a peep about this sudden change of events. I’ve told him time and time again that I work alone. I’ve got a great communicate of high school and college coaches in Florida. Manny had a tremendous communicate of coaches in Georgia and South Carolina that I’m slowly getting to know. But Manny did have a bird dog though. The kid was a former minor leaguer who went onto be an area scout in the northwest with another club. But at least the kid had a taste of what it was like to sign with a big league club and live on the road for several years going from minor league park to minor league park. He played the game for years at various levels giving him a terrific baseball foundation to displace upon as a scout. What experience did Seth Goldbaum undergo? I’m sorry but watching SportsCenter everynight professing to be a follower of Bill James (did he ever play ball?) and reading something called Baseball Abstract just doesn’t get it done. Taking a step back. I could probably say the same for Logan Cooper our GM. Sure he played little league and high school but he was never drafted and never graced the lineup card of a minor unify team. Gemini Christmas he’s an Ivy Leaguer who majored in math! What experience did he undergo to lead our organization to a World Series? Little if any I would argue. But the ownership saw something I didn’t. A sort of efficiency argument. A business argument. They began to look at things like payroll dollars per win and payroll dollars per run scored. This was all foreign to me. What happened to the old guard? Baseball folk have naturally been former players. What the heck was going on? I guess I see the direction we’re headed but I’m not buying into it. But somebody in the front office has to be on my side. I don’t know who. I certainly don’t have pictures of anybody so it’s beyond me that they would be keeping an old fart like me around. Granted. I’m only 49 but that’s how I feel. We don’t have the lowest payroll nor the highest. We’re middle of the road and simply looking to maximize our opportunities. I’m all for that but making me hire someone without any experience and making him and I agree on all prospects coming out of Georgia is flat wrong. Reluctantly (more like kicking and screaming). I agreed to meet stat boy tomorrow at a junior college in Perry. Georgia to scout two players that stat boy previously emailed me. We’ll then make it over to Middle Georgia State to observe several other players of his. By the way none of them were mentioned in Manny’s 4-inch three-ring binder of prospects from Georgia. This ought to be good. If stat boy and I are really going to make a go of it. I figured it would be well worth my time to show him my approach to scouting these players and to compare my reports with his. And if we have time perhaps we can run over to Macon U to observe the homeless man loitering around first locate that both Goldie and now apparently our GM thought was a cant miss” prospect. Goldie did mention something about law school final exams this week but he said he could probably reschedule tomorrows final if it was absolutely necessary for him to observe tomorrow. Of course. I told him it was absolutely necessary. And while you’re at it Goldie see if you can get me some stats on kids who start out 0 for 2 and end the game 2 for 4. Goldie grinned from ear to ear as he wheeled off towards his special van parked in handicap. You won’t regret this Cutter. We’re gonna make a great team. Yeah we’ll see kid.
Here are some thoughtful e-mails I received over my piece The Mad King and the Crazy Left:I just read your excellent summation over at the American Thinker (referred by larwyn). I undergo been writing on my blog about many of the same issues but from my own Psychoanalytic/Psychiatric pov. The idea that the liberal mindset derives from the be to replace God by man and its derivative that reality is constructed is right on aim. You might find Howard Schwartz’s book. The Revenge of the Primitive of interest on the roots of political correctness. I recently posted Part IV of my series on Narcissism. Disintegration. Suicidality & the Fall of the West. The Death of the Father. My series is describing how the culture (and cult) of narcissism the I being all that counts is undermining our ability to fight and win the war on Islamic fascism. This part in particular was directed toward how man has murdered God and of necessity replaced him with himself. Here’s a bit of it:Pure rationality had come to demand that God be treated as if he didn’t exist (an effort that is continuing today via the legal system a topic for a later post) and many were and are all to happy to comply. By denying the existence of a transcendent God the rationalists were paving the way for man to take his place. I have described elsewhere ( W(h)ither Religion. Political Deification) the disastrous consequences of the death of God for a society as well as the existence of an unconscious need for a God to exist; if we have murdered God as some insist then something merely human will have to be found to take its place. Whether we are talking about one’s faith in overt Atheism. Communism. Secular Humanism. Multiculturalism or some other -ism we are describing the use of human structures to regenerate a transcendent God with a profane object of worship. We are now halfway to disaster….. By destroying God as a civilizing influence the rationalists put themselves into the position of needing a replacement. Fascism was tried and found wanting; communism was tried and found wanting (and untold millions had to die in the attempts); today a more reactionary create of Utopian fantasy ideology is in play in Islamic fascism which will certainly be found wanting as well though there is no way to know how many will have to die first. This may all seem far removed from address on narcissism but the connection is a powerful one. Religion has been one of the most profound and useful ways to civilize those who were unfortunate enough to grow up without the requisite parental guidance and available sources of identification. Religion helps young men especially to channel their passions and behave in socially acceptable ways. The Conscience an important part of the Superego has two parts; it offers proscriptions (Thou shall nots) and prescriptions (Thou shalls). As any parent knows. Thou shall not works best when there is a clear punishment available to enforce compliance. If God can no longer be invoked the only reason to obey the law and inhibit one’s own drives is fear of human authority which at the best of times is highly corruptible and inconsistent two attributes not ordinarily attributed to God. If civilization depends on young men especially taming their instinctual drives and inhibiting the free expression of such drives and their more harmful derivatives then we can see that our civilization has been consistently stripping away vital layers of protection while at the same measure encouraging our young people to act out their impulses; this is not a stable structure. The rest of the post is here. move of the glory of the blogosphere is the way we can sight other who advance our ideas and thinking. Your article was thought provoking and I hope my posts would do the same for you. Regards,ShrinkWrappedHi Tim. I’ve read a number of your articles and in my opinion this is your best work. Not many people connect Darwin. Marx and Nietzsche then go on to connect Spencer and Sanger. I’ve always thought the links between Soviet Communism. Eugenics. Nazism. Abortion. Chinese Communism and Democratic Socialism were obvious. It amazes me how well the liberal elite manage to adjoin these links but then their objective has always been to teach what to think instead of how to think. Over a decade ago. I visited the National Women’s Museum in Seneca Falls. NY with an Australian College Professor who was a Doctor of Philosophy (don’t ask I how I managed that trick). We were both startled to find that Sanger’s past history with the Eugenics and Nazi movements was entirely missing. You’d think that the National Parks Administration would have insisted on historical accuracy. Before Darwin there was the Reverend Thomas Malthus who wrote the act on the Principle of Population. Darwin accepted the reasoning of the Malthusian Doctrine and made it part of his reasoning for natural selection. The truth is that the confrontation between those who believe in the material nature of reality and those who believe in god(s) and religion dates back at least as far as the Greek Philosophers Epicurus and Aristotle (who rejected the materialistic nature of reality). Newsweek published an bind in the early 1990’s about a startling scientific breakthrough. Taking favor of the latest in medical technology researchers had discovered that men and women physiologically used their brains differently during the acts of thinking and problem solving. Considering Socrates had reached the same conclusion by just asking questions centuries before the bring forth of Christ it didn’t seem to be a startling breakthrough to me. Unfortunately at that time everyone knew that men were superior to women so Aristotle concluded that the fact that women thought differently than men proved men were more intelligent. In a way this is similar to Darwin discovering some of the Laws of Nature and concluding that this disproved any intervention by Nature’s God. I became a believer in Intelligent Design when neither Al Gore nor John Kerry evolved to become President of the United States. The truth is that Darwinism as a theory died a number of years ago and the liberal elite refuse to conceal the stinking corpse because of the damage it will do to all their pet agendas. Their defense of Darwinism is comical when you consider that Harvard has committed ,000,000 annually to as David R. Liu. Professor of Chemistry and Chemical Biology explains reduce this to a very simple seriesof logical events that could have taken place with no divine intervention. But didn’t Darwin’s theory already do that? The liberal elite refuses to debate issues such as Abortion and Intelligent create by mental act because actual reality and truth are easier to understand and recognize than their convoluted versions. Don’t get too upset. In July before your The case against Darwin. I emailed Thomas Lifson a heads-up on an article in the New York Times by Cardinal Schonborn of Vienna explaining that the Catholic Church did not accept Darwin’s theory. This had been a creation of the media and others for a good number of years. Although it was interesting that the perform had finally clarified its position the fact that the article had been written by a Cardinal from Austria led me to believe that the Vatican and possibly change surface the Pope wanted to open a debate on Darwinism. Frankly if it had not been for your article. I would have written one for American Thinker and to use Lifson’s term it would have been harsh. Fortunately since only Thomas actually knows who I am his neighbors from Berkley would have been at his door with pitchforks and torches. As I said in my last email to you. Darwinism is DEAD. It is a scientific fact that the fossils found in the Canadian Burgess Shale are a record of when most modern phyla appeared during the start of the Cambrian period. This is create of an explosion in complex life without evidence of a gradual rise of more complex life leading up to the Cambrian period. This is not a case of a missing cerebrate but a inspect of a missing evolution of species. Darwin admitted that if a blind incremental process could not explain a natural phenomenon his theory would be proven false. The flagellar motor found in e-coli and other bacterium is a natural phenomenon that can not be explained as a blind incremental process. The motor and its parts could not have been a result of the gradual rise of complex life to more complex life. Nobel prize winning biochemist Francis Crick who took part in the discovery of the helical structure of DNA recognizes that the first cells cannot be explained by a design-free evolution. Crick’s non-evolutionary solution to this problem is the belief that intelligent aliens seeded life on earth. Oxford Zoologist. Richard Dawkins’ solution to this problem is an irrational belief in the power of chance to the inform that the probability is so infinitesimally small that it is mathematically and theoretically unlikely to have occurred by random chance. The real Big Bang may be the sound of scientific agnostics falling off their mountain of delusions and landing on the path between Intelligent Design and fix Mover. Supposedly. Einstein was once asked how he had developed his theories. His response with a gesticulate was that he tried to look into the mind of God. The people there at the time thought he was just kidding. What if he wasn’t? His most controversial statement is that there must be a set of basic principles which govern both the vastness of the universe and its smallest element. Philosophically a God would be a Perfect Being and a Perfect Being could not be inconsistent. More than one set of basic principles would be inconsistent. A little food for thought. Keep up the good work! Tom Joseph(His website is here. Finally thanks to our good friend Aussiegirl from Ultima Thule we have a (mostly) positive discussion at Lucianne. Below are some of the posts:Comments: (by Aussiegirl)Everything you ever wanted to know about liberals and more. Fantasticrundown of what makes liberals tick and their historic origins. Deconstructing the deconstructionists. Reply 1 - Posted by: woofwoofwoof. 12/10/2005 1:41:56 PMOh. I dunno. I’d nitpick this on many issues for one thing Britain wasalready a strong constitutional monarchy and the fault was at least halfthe Parliment’s. Is the left really that much crazier today than thirty or sixty or twohundred years ago? Well. I agree maybe a little but they were prettycrazy then too. Did the left maintain its cater thru information and journalism? I knowRush goes on about that and he makes many valid points but the leftequated itself with the Enlightment view of Progress. I think justperhaps those two ideas are now breaking loose - it was the Republicanswho were pro-technology even in 1850! Yada yada. Reply 2 - Posted by: 49 Ford. 12/10/2005 2:01:54 PMThis goes to the heart of matters and is a keeper. Thanks for posting. Reply 3 - Posted by: GeneSmith. 12/10/2005 2:04:00 PMI loved the bit about Gasbag Teddy plunging off the bridge of sanity andinto the sea of madness! Reply 4 - Posted by: cap MarineTet68. 12/10/2005 2:06:24 PMThanks and a snifter clink to poster. This is a keeper. Which means I’llbe distributing it. Reply 5 - Posted by: craige. 12/10/2005 2:08:52 PMFor those interested in the liberal mindset:http://home att net/~resurgence/ Steve Kangas did an excellent job explaining liberalism. As alibertarian (ie Consitutional constructionalist). I would undergo enjoyeddebating him. Unfortunetly he commited suicide in Las Vegas in 1999. Reply 6 - Posted by: Douglas DC. 12/10/2005 2:12:23 PMWhat I saw was the Left’s love of self as gods. They furnish themselvesdivine right because they are so much smarter than us unwashed ignorantbelievers. Yet the only way to explain the nature of man is through thefall. We are all sinners,we cannot come to be gods,and to the HolyCreator we are as filthy rags. We think with those rags too,The Liberalshate the idea of an external,eternal,God-and they want to be their own god…. Reply 7 - Posted by: jglas. 12/10/2005 3:14:26 PMThe beat point he makes is that liberals believe in the fundamentalgoodness of all people. That’s what enables lefties to believe that”from each according to his ability and to each according to hisneeds,” is a viable structure for society. We ordain all be one giantloving family kumbaya and nevermind that it has never worked in a fullcentury of trying. Conservatives know you can’t trust everyone. There’s a lot of truth to the ”liberals lack God” point but it’s notthat strong. Plenty of liberals believe in God and plenty ofconservatives are atheists (or at least skeptics). Religions vary somuch in what they condone (from pro-war to anti-war from sin easilyforgiven to sin never forgiven from pro-wealth to anti-wealth from sexbig thing to sex no big thing) that any political view can find awelcoming religion. Laws undergo to be constructed on a most commondenominator scheme (e g murder is wrong) not relativistically (e g it’s OK to kill your wife if your religion condones it). Right is right,and wrong is wrong but not all wrong has to be universally illegal. Reply 8 - Posted by: Photoonist. 12/10/2005 3:29:03 PMLiberals aren’t only insane but are walking contradictions. If thebelieve man is inherently good then why do they spend so much time increating new regulations and trying to take away guns? Reply 9 - Posted by: ForNow. 12/10/2005 3:33:56 PMThe leftists’ will to relativism twisted relativity theory to theirends. The speed of light through a vacuum does not vary relatively tovarious observers. In ordinary language it is an absolute. Motion maybe relative but (a) you can’t put the center of gravity arbitrarilywherever you want it and (b) it’s not a purely arbitrary question whichpicture is simpler and more natural than another. Those two facts arewhy we say the Sun is at the solar system’s center. It’s also adjust that leftists blame reality for not being as it shouldbe and often think that a satisfying interpretation trumps any possibledisconfirmation. Would Newton have blamed gravity if apples fell upward? Reply 10 - Posted by: cap MarineTet68. 12/10/2005 3:37:32 PMThe response to #8 is one I received to that very question on campusearlier this year: Well you see we *ARE* all basically good. Exceptfor the fact that the horribly repressive religions by attempting tosquash our natural desires have created a pressure cooker inside ofus and we blow off steam
Array Travellers also need to pay airport taxes and other applicable surcharges. The regular one-way fare is S28 (US36)and it is S00 (US38) plus for a return ticket. Main carriers like Singapore Airlines charge more than S00 (US57) for a return fare. Jetstar Asia’s acting chief executive officer. Neil Thompson announced the new route Monday (Dec 12) when he met the press. He said: Bangalore has been growing phenomenally over recent years and while airlines have flocked to fill passenger demand the costs of flying have been very high. Jetstar’s entry into the market will change that he promised adding that the airline will be the only value-for-money airline operating between the two cities. Thompson also announced that Valuair will start flying three times a week to Bali in Indonesia from Jan 27. A promotional fare of S9 (US9) for a return trip is also available for those who book in the next one week. Jetstar Asia and Valuair merged recently but the two airlines are retaining their separate brands for now. Thompson. Jetstar Asia’s third new boss in a year and formerly Qantas’ general manager for customer relationship marketing plans to concentrate on customer service and growing existing markets. One area of focus will be to consolidate our positions in the existing markets and grow the business in those areas he said when asked about his role before a new permanent head is appointed in the first quarter of next year. The Straits Times understands that there are no new destinations on the radar for the next few months at least. Given his marketing and customer relationship background. Thompson will also spend some measure working on customer profiles. The idea is to gather information on the different types of populate who fly the airline so that programmes and services can be introduced with the customer in mind. Jetstar which is 49 per cent owned by Qantas will fly to 10 destinations by the end of next month. Valuair will fly to three points in Indonesia - Jakarta. Surabaya and Bali.
To me. Logan Cooper’s demand was a slap in the face. Making me hire this kid was one thing but requiring that both Seth and I agree on every prospect coming out of Georgia was ludicrous. My immediate boss. Donald DeSear (the national scouting director) hasn’t said a peep about this sudden change of events. I’ve told him time and time again that I work alone. I’ve got a great network of high school and college coaches in Florida. Manny had a tremendous network of coaches in Georgia and South Carolina that I’m slowly getting to know. But Manny did have a bird dog though. The kid was a former minor leaguer who went onto be an area scout in the northwest with another unify. But at least the kid had a taste of what it was like to sign with a big league club and live on the road for several years going from minor league park to minor league park. He played the game for years at various levels giving him a terrific baseball foundation to draw upon as a scout. What experience did Seth Goldbaum have? I’m sorry but watching SportsCenter everynight professing to be a follower of Bill James (did he ever play ball?) and reading something called Baseball Abstract just doesn’t get it done. Taking a step back. I could probably say the same for Logan Cooper our GM. Sure he played little league and high school but he was never drafted and never graced the lineup card of a minor unify team. Gemini Christmas he’s an Ivy Leaguer who majored in math! What experience did he have to lead our organization to a World Series? Little if any I would argue. But the ownership saw something I didn’t. A sort of efficiency argument. A business argument. They began to look at things like payroll dollars per win and payroll dollars per run scored. This was all foreign to me. What happened to the old guard? Baseball folk have naturally been former players. What the heck was going on? I guess I see the direction we’re headed but I’m not buying into it. But somebody in the front office has to be on my side. I don’t know who. I certainly don’t have pictures of anybody so it’s beyond me that they would be keeping an old fart like me around. Granted. I’m only 49 but that’s how I feel. We don’t have the lowest payroll nor the highest. We’re middle of the road and simply looking to maximize our opportunities. I’m all for that but making me hire someone without any experience and making him and I agree on all prospects coming out of Georgia is flat wrong. Reluctantly (more like kicking and screaming). I agreed to meet stat boy tomorrow at a junior college in Perry. Georgia to scout two players that stat boy previously emailed me. We’ll then make it over to Middle Georgia State to scout several other players of his. By the way none of them were mentioned in Manny’s 4-inch three-ring binder of prospects from Georgia. This ought to be good. If stat boy and I are really going to make a go of it. I figured it would be come up worth my time to show him my approach to scouting these players and to compare my reports with his. And if we have time perhaps we can run over to Macon U to scout the homeless man loitering around first base that both Goldie and now apparently our GM thought was a cant miss” prospect. Goldie did mention something about law school final exams this week but he said he could probably schedule tomorrows final if it was absolutely necessary for him to scout tomorrow. Of course. I told him it was absolutely necessary. And while you’re at it Goldie see if you can get me some stats on kids who start out 0 for 2 and end the game 2 for 4. Goldie grinned from ear to ear as he wheeled off towards his special van parked in handicap. You won’t regret this Cutter. We’re gonna make a great team. Yeah we’ll see kid.
Here are some thoughtful e-mails I received over my conjoin The Mad King and the Crazy Left:I just read your excellent summation over at the American Thinker (referred by larwyn). I have been writing on my blog about many of the same issues but from my own Psychoanalytic/Psychiatric pov. The idea that the liberal mindset derives from the need to replace God by man and its derivative that reality is constructed is right on target. You might find Howard Schwartz’s book. The Revenge of the Primitive of arouse on the roots of political correctness. I recently posted Part IV of my series on Narcissism. Disintegration. Suicidality & the Fall of the West. The Death of the Father. My series is describing how the culture (and cult) of narcissism the I being all that counts is undermining our ability to fight and win the war on Islamic fascism. This part in particular was directed toward how man has murdered God and of necessity replaced him with himself. Here’s a bit of it:Pure rationality had come to demand that God be treated as if he didn’t exist (an effort that is continuing today via the legal system a topic for a later affix) and many were and are all to happy to comply. By denying the existence of a transcendent God the rationalists were paving the way for man to take his place. I have described elsewhere ( W(h)ither Religion. Political Deification) the disastrous consequences of the death of God for a society as well as the existence of an unconscious need for a God to exist; if we undergo murdered God as some insist then something merely human ordain have to be found to act its place. Whether we are talking about one’s faith in overt Atheism. Communism. Secular Humanism. Multiculturalism or some other -ism we are describing the use of human structures to replace a transcendent God with a profane object of worship. We are now halfway to disaster….. By destroying God as a civilizing influence the rationalists put themselves into the position of needing a replacement. Fascism was tried and open wanting; communism was tried and found wanting (and untold millions had to die in the attempts); today a more reactionary form of Utopian fantasy ideology is in play in Islamic fascism which will certainly be found wanting as well though there is no way to know how many will have to die first. This may all seem far removed from discourse on narcissism but the connection is a powerful one. Religion has been one of the most profound and useful ways to civilize those who were unfortunate enough to grow up without the requisite parental guidance and available sources of identification. Religion helps young men especially to channel their passions and behave in socially acceptable ways. The Conscience an important part of the Superego has two parts; it offers proscriptions (Thou shall nots) and prescriptions (Thou shalls). As any parent knows. Thou shall not works beat when there is a clear punishment available to enforce compliance. If God can no longer be invoked the only reason to obey the law and inhibit one’s own drives is fear of human authority which at the best of times is highly corruptible and inconsistent two attributes not ordinarily attributed to God. If civilization depends on young men especially taming their instinctual drives and inhibiting the remove expression of such drives and their more harmful derivatives then we can see that our civilization has been consistently stripping away vital layers of protection while at the same time encouraging our young people to act out their impulses; this is not a stable structure. The rest of the post is here. move of the glory of the blogosphere is the way we can sight other who advance our ideas and thinking. Your article was thought provoking and I hope my posts would do the same for you. Regards,ShrinkWrappedHi Tim. I’ve read a number of your articles and in my opinion this is your best work. Not many people cerebrate Darwin. Marx and Nietzsche then go on to connect Spencer and Sanger. I’ve always thought the links between Soviet Communism. Eugenics. Nazism. Abortion. Chinese Communism and Democratic Socialism were obvious. It amazes me how well the liberal elite manage to adjoin these links but then their objective has always been to teach what to think instead of how to evaluate. Over a decade ago. I visited the National Women’s Museum in Seneca Falls. NY with an Australian College Professor who was a Doctor of Philosophy (don’t ask I how I managed that trick). We were both startled to find that Sanger’s past history with the Eugenics and Nazi movements was entirely missing. You’d think that the National Parks Administration would have insisted on historical accuracy. Before Darwin there was the Reverend Thomas Malthus who wrote the Essay on the Principle of Population. Darwin accepted the reasoning of the Malthusian Doctrine and made it part of his reasoning for natural selection. The truth is that the confrontation between those who believe in the material nature of reality and those who believe in god(s) and religion dates back at least as far as the Greek Philosophers Epicurus and Aristotle (who rejected the materialistic nature of reality). Newsweek published an article in the early 1990’s about a startling scientific breakthrough. Taking favor of the latest in medical technology researchers had discovered that men and women physiologically used their brains differently during the acts of thinking and problem solving. Considering Socrates had reached the same conclusion by just asking questions centuries before the birth of Christ it didn’t seem to be a startling breakthrough to me. Unfortunately at that time everyone knew that men were superior to women so Aristotle concluded that the fact that women thought differently than men proved men were more intelligent. In a way this is similar to Darwin discovering some of the Laws of Nature and concluding that this disproved any intervention by Nature’s God. I became a believer in Intelligent Design when neither Al pierce nor John Kerry evolved to become President of the United States. The truth is that Darwinism as a theory died a number of years ago and the liberal elite refuse to bury the stinking corpse because of the damage it will do to all their pet agendas. Their defense of Darwinism is comical when you consider that Harvard has committed ,000,000 annually to as David R. Liu. Professor of Chemistry and Chemical Biology explains reduce this to a very simple seriesof logical events that could have taken displace with no divine intervention. But didn’t Darwin’s theory already do that? The liberal elite refuses to consider issues such as Abortion and Intelligent create by mental act because actual reality and truth are easier to understand and recognize than their convoluted versions. Don’t get too upset. In July before your The case against Darwin. I emailed Thomas Lifson a heads-up on an article in the New York Times by Cardinal Schonborn of Vienna explaining that the Catholic Church did not evaluate Darwin’s theory. This had been a creation of the media and others for a good number of years. Although it was interesting that the Church had finally clarified its position the fact that the article had been written by a Cardinal from Austria led me to accept that the Vatican and possibly even the Pope wanted to open a debate on Darwinism. Frankly if it had not been for your article. I would have written one for American Thinker and to use Lifson’s term it would have been harsh. Fortunately since only Thomas actually knows who I am his neighbors from Berkley would have been at his door with pitchforks and torches. As I said in my last email to you. Darwinism is DEAD. It is a scientific fact that the fossils found in the Canadian Burgess Shale are a record of when most modern phyla appeared during the start of the Cambrian period. This is proof of an explosion in complex life without evidence of a gradual rise of more complex life leading up to the Cambrian period. This is not a case of a missing link but a case of a missing evolution of species. Darwin admitted that if a alter incremental process could not explain a natural phenomenon his theory would be proven false. The flagellar go found in e-coli and other bacterium is a natural phenomenon that can not be explained as a alter incremental affect. The go and its parts could not undergo been a result of the gradual rise of complex life to more complex life. Nobel prize winning biochemist Francis Crick who took part in the discovery of the helical structure of DNA recognizes that the first cells cannot be explained by a design-free evolution. Crick’s non-evolutionary solution to this problem is the belief that intelligent aliens seeded life on hide. Oxford Zoologist. Richard Dawkins’ solution to this problem is an irrational belief in the power of chance to the point that the probability is so infinitesimally small that it is mathematically and theoretically unlikely to have occurred by random chance. The real Big Bang may be the sound of scientific agnostics falling off their mountain of delusions and landing on the path between Intelligent create by mental act and Prime Mover. Supposedly. Einstein was once asked how he had developed his theories. His response with a wink was that he tried to look into the object of God. The people there at the time thought he was just kidding. What if he wasn’t? His most controversial statement is that there must be a set of basic principles which govern both the vastness of the universe and its smallest element. Philosophically a God would be a Perfect Being and a ameliorate Being could not be inconsistent. More than one set of basic principles would be inconsistent. A little food for thought. act up the good work! Tom Joseph(His website is here. Finally thanks to our good friend Aussiegirl from Ultima Thule we have a (mostly) positive discussion at Lucianne. Below are some of the posts:Comments: (by Aussiegirl)Everything you ever wanted to know about liberals and more. Fantasticrundown of what makes liberals tick and their historic origins. Deconstructing the deconstructionists. Reply 1 - Posted by: woofwoofwoof. 12/10/2005 1:41:56 PMOh. I dunno. I’d nitpick this on many issues for one thing Britain wasalready a strong constitutional monarchy and the fault was at least halfthe Parliment’s. Is the left really that much crazier today than thirty or sixty or twohundred years ago? Well. I agree maybe a little but they were prettycrazy then too. Did the left maintain its power thru information and journalism? I knowRush goes on about that and he makes many valid points but the leftequated itself with the Enlightment view of Progress. I think justperhaps those two ideas are now breaking loose - it was the Republicanswho were pro-technology even in 1850! Yada yada. Reply 2 - Posted by: 49 Ford. 12/10/2005 2:01:54 PMThis goes to the heart of matters and is a keeper. Thanks for posting. Reply 3 - Posted by: GeneSmith. 12/10/2005 2:04:00 PMI loved the bit about Gasbag Teddy plunging off the bridge of sanity andinto the sea of madness! Reply 4 - Posted by: cap MarineTet68. 12/10/2005 2:06:24 PMThanks and a snifter clink to poster. This is a keeper. Which means I’llbe distributing it. Reply 5 - Posted by: craige. 12/10/2005 2:08:52 PMFor those interested in the liberal mindset:http://home att net/~resurgence/ Steve Kangas did an excellent job explaining liberalism. As alibertarian (ie Consitutional constructionalist). I would have enjoyeddebating him. Unfortunetly he commited suicide in Las Vegas in 1999. Reply 6 - Posted by: Douglas DC. 12/10/2005 2:12:23 PMWhat I saw was the Left’s love of self as gods. They give themselvesdivine right because they are so much smarter than us unwashed ignorantbelievers. Yet the only way to inform the nature of man is through thefall. We are all sinners,we cannot come to be gods,and to the HolyCreator we are as filthy rags. We think with those rags too,The Liberalshate the idea of an external,eternal,God-and they want to be their own god…. Reply 7 - Posted by: jglas. 12/10/2005 3:14:26 PMThe best point he makes is that liberals believe in the fundamentalgoodness of all people. That’s what enables lefties to believe that”from each according to his ability and to each according to hisneeds,” is a viable structure for society. We will all be one giantloving family kumbaya and nevermind that it has never worked in a fullcentury of trying. Conservatives know you can’t trust everyone. There’s a lot of truth to the ”liberals lack God” point but it’s notthat strong. Plenty of liberals believe in God and plenty ofconservatives are atheists (or at least skeptics). Religions vary somuch in what they condone (from pro-war to anti-war from sin easilyforgiven to sin never forgiven from pro-wealth to anti-wealth from sexbig thing to sex no big thing) that any political view can find awelcoming religion. Laws have to be constructed on a most commondenominator scheme (e g murder is wrong) not relativistically (e g it’s OK to kill your wife if your religion condones it). Right is right,and wrong is wrong but not all wrong has to be universally illegal. Reply 8 - Posted by: Photoonist. 12/10/2005 3:29:03 PMLiberals aren’t only insane but are walking contradictions. If thebelieve man is inherently good then why do they spend so much time increating new regulations and trying to take away guns? Reply 9 - Posted by: ForNow. 12/10/2005 3:33:56 PMThe leftists’ will to relativism twisted relativity theory to theirends. The speed of lighten through a vacuum does not vary relatively tovarious observers. In ordinary language it is an absolute. Motion maybe relative but (a) you can’t put the center of gravity arbitrarilywherever you want it and (b) it’s not a purely arbitrary question whichpicture is simpler and more natural than another. Those two facts arewhy we say the Sun is at the solar system’s center. It’s also true that leftists accuse reality for not being as it shouldbe and often think that a satisfying interpretation trumps any possibledisconfirmation. Would Newton have blamed gravity if apples cut upward? Reply 10 - Posted by: cap MarineTet68. 12/10/2005 3:37:32 PMThe response to #8 is one I received to that very question on campusearlier this year: Well you see we *ARE* all basically good. Exceptfor the fact that the horribly repressive religions by attempting tosquash our natural desires have created a pressure cooker inside ofus and we blow off steam
Forex Groups - Tips on Trading
Related article:
http://laserhairremovaldenvercolorado.araviel.com/2008/09/19/daily-scorecard-sports-rap-up-football-basketball/
comments | Add comment | Report as Spam
|