White Doors

So you have an issue with the excerpt, but not Steyn?

everyone knows? I prefer quality two way speakers myself. totem is a very good speaker making. unreal imaging and Canadian too. There is nothing wrong with Bose however.

It was an easy win. They took down a country with the 4th highest amount of troops in the world in what, two weeks? The NYT kept bleating about the much vaunted republican guard and they melted away like butter. In fact, the war probably went too fast and too well and led to some of the mistakes for the peace. Like disbanding all police and armed forces. There were many mistakes made in the conversion from war footing to winning the peace, but the war itself was a brilliant success and was over in record time. Perhaps you meant to say the insurgency? Granted, that didn't go as well for the reason's that I cited and more, but it sure seems to be doing alot better now.

Addressed by St Thomas Aquinas @ 1500's. I took a philosophy of religion course once, facinating.

you forgot the Korean war.. you know, the one where the western countries handed China it's ass to them?

No, that is English, however mangled it may be. You speak American.

So now communism's murderous rampage is the fault of religion too? Do you want people to take you seriously? Do you know the definition of religion? hint religion does not equal fanaticism. Change your quote above to fanaticism and I agree. Your obsession with religion is not allow you to see the facts as they are. Also, Nazism was not a religious movement. Most historians recognize this. It was a nationalist socialist movement. But go ahead and quote som obscure quote from Hitler invoking religion when he was still gathering votes, if you must. It will just go to show the depths of your illogical obsession of religion.

But that's the problem in denouncing the book without having read it. He supplied many polls from many countries to back up his claims. You should do more research before you reach a conclusion. Are you always this closed-minded?

I think you mean from American to English. Another translation issue.

WW2 had over 60 million...

Honkie? I don't think the names are important so much as the group they are directed to wouldn't you agree? You can call all white guys rednecks, no problem, but any other names to any other groups is out of the question. Also, Steyn didn't say that, I did - but thanks for the bank handed compliment. In my view, political Islam is not generalizing to include all muslims. The CIC would be 'political islam' to me and the other Muslim organizations in Canada, not so much. I see leftists denouncing evangelicals of all stripes on here and I think you yourself has said less than kind things about them, ,but you refuse to think about 'politcal islam'? Did you ever ask yourself why the inconsistencies there?

Sagan's bitterness to religion came through to me quite clearly when I read cosmos. I haven't read Hitchen's and maybe he is not to that level, but he clearly had no patience for people who did not think as he did.

I don't think that Steyn ever mentioned a global world wide conspiracy. What he seems to be concerned with is a population shift primarily away from people who have lived in a western liberal country their whole lives to a society that for the most part, relies on a religion for every facet of their lives. From 21st century thought to 7th century thought in a matter of a generation or two. This is bound to create conflct and if we worry more about the conflict than we do about preserving our western liberal traditions than our way of life is going to be in jeopardy. Interesting you mention the Jewish groups first making use of the HRC's, here is Steyn's take on that, one that I could not improve on:

A much better post WIP. Thank you for the improved communication style - appreciated. But you got this wrong: I do not agree with that at all. Scientific inquiry is more valid than a statement of religious orthodoxy from a religious school of thought in trying to explain the realities of our existence. Religion is obviously better at giving people a set of rules to live by as science does not attempt to do this (with some notable exceptions such as AGW fanatics). My point was that 'scientists' can become fanatics too and that religion is no more of a 'problem' to human advancement than any other creed or philosophy that has a critical mass of fanatical thought. Communism was my example and it thoroughly discredited your singular obesession with religion being a net negative to humanity. You mention communism having lasted onky 100 years more or less, however in that 100 years that philosophy killed more people than all the religions of the world ever has combined. You also mention the inquisition. That gets alot of play in history classes. The best estimates are that the spanish inquisition was responsible for somehting like 7000 deaths. A drop in the bucket compared to communism. Human nature is what both propels us and holds us back. Two steps forward and one step back.

It is a facile, simplistic exercise in reductionism to equate the argument for/against God to creationism and evolution. I know you can do better than that. I think that there are alot of very intelligent closed minded people. It is not limited to religion at all and closed mindedness is not a measure of intelligence - it is a measure of curiosity.

I think you mean the culture of defeat. regardless, there are alot of ex-pats moving back to NB and NS right now, the winds of change are starting to blow on what was once considered standard political thought that passed for policy here in the Maritimes for the past 40 years.

Gosthacked, yeah I watched the elegant universe. loved it. Man, I wish our cbc was half as good as PBS in the states.. WIP I disagree and this is just showing that Weinberg is a bigot. A better way to state this would be: "Group think is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes group think." Do you believe that Russians are inherently more evil than westerners? How about Cubans? Are Eastern Europeans more evil than Western Europeans? I mean religion was banned there so are they either: - Just bad people or - good people, but religion made them communists? You pick

It would appear that you have a religious like adherence to quantum mechanics. Newton 'discovered' gravity and alot of practical applications came from that wouldn't you say? When Einstein came up with General and Special relativity did that all of a sudden make gravity's applications irrelevant? You can't see the forest for the trees man. lol

So you are saying that if a theory became viable to explain how gravity behaves at a sub atomic level that quantum mechanics would remain unchanged? That seems rather silly wouldn't you agree? I see, so I should trust your authority over that of a physicist? lol you'll forgive me if I do not I presume. The math in quantum mechanics is described as ugly by more than a few experts in the field. When the math is ugly it usually means that the theory is inept, needs adjustment or is just plain wrong. We will probably find out in the next 10 years so stay tuned. From what I have gleamed, if string theory continues to evolve, it will have consequences to quantum mechanics and particle theory. I think you can understand that. Yes, and new theories are sometimes met with hostility. Like I said, look up the new theories on the precambrian extinction event. Scientists are proposing a meteor impact likely caused that event too. They are being met with outright hostility by the galciation theorists. See last Months Nat Geographic for the write up. My point is, even scientists like to 'believe' sometimes. I didn't say anything was wrong with it but thanks for putting words in my mouth and repeating what you read on wikipedia. Like I said there are competing theories on this. Do you research and you will see. What are you talking about? Why are you subscribing views to me that I have not expressed? Does it make you angry when people don't fall in line with you? If it does, perhaps a discussion board isn't the best place for you to be. I am certainly not a young earth creationist, but thanks for applying your stereotype of religious people to me. Do you do the same with race and ethnicity too? Again, I was simply referring to competing theories on the precambrian extinction event as an example on how new scientific theories are sometimes greated with hostility. I am perplexed as to why you have an issue with this fact. Moving on.. Ben Stein and his documentary? wtf? Look bud, how about you read what I write instead of presuming to know where I am coming from. It makes a fun topic rather boring and predictible if you insist on persisting in the stereotypes. If I tell you that I am African American will you start asking me how fast I can run the 100m? Drea is openly mocking people who do not subscribe to her narrow views on existence and reality. That for me automatically makes her a bigot. I have been reading her posts for along time though so perhaps it is easier for me than you. I will say your vigorous defence of her does your reputation as an honest poster no favours to go along with your bigoted attempts of stereotyping my thought process. This is pure Bull Shit. Fanatics of every creed, philosophy, ethnicity and politics all compromise their flexibility to adapt. One needs only look at the humanist failure of communism (where they banned religion) to see this. I seem to remember alot of 'scientific' experiments in the gas chambers too... Odd don't you think? If you cannot see this then I will have to question your flexibility to adapt and that would make you a poor adherent to the scientific method now wouldn't it?

I don't know that you can say that. The Theory of relativity changed how we think of gravity for example. It had many many impacts on other theories that either had to be updated or disregarded. You also cannot say that the speed of light constant cannot be changed. What happens to the speed of light around a black hole for instance? Massive gravity has all sorts of affects on things that we are only beginning to understand. As far as string theory and quantum mechanics, the way I understand it, if string theory is to be accepted quite a bit of quantum mechanics has to be updated. For example, if string theory is correct, there really are not hard particles at all. Mass and everythng solid are really just 'rhythmns' on a minute scale. Quantum mechanics does not predict this so obviously that part would have to be discarded or updated. Quantum mechanics also does not explain dark matter for example. Quantum mechanics also breaks down when more dimensions are added to the equation whereas string theory predicts at least 5 dimensions and more likely 7 so I am not sure what authority is giving you the ability to make these blanket statements. Perhaps you do not know as much about physics as you are letting on - and that's ok. Also, the universe could never be a car, unless that car was infinitely big and if the car was infinitely big, you would never be able to see all of the componets so you may want to cut the grade 8 analogies. just sayin.

Pot!

Not particularly, however you need to understand that NB's PST was 15% up to 2 years ago. The Feds vacated 2% of that so politically, we would just be going back to where we were there. Basically it amounts to a transfer from fed responsibility to provincial. The 2% hike would not cover the drops in income taxes. Personally I would like taxes to be in the consumption side rather than the income side. at least the money makes it to the economy. I do think we need a lower rate than 15% though. But I am liking a 10% flat rate on income taxes! This is a radical departure in political thought in the maritimes and a way overdue so it makes me excited for the long term outlook of the economy here, which is nice for a change.

I'm not sure what gives you the enormous hubris that you can say this - since the most research in physics for the past 50 years has been in this direction, one grand unifying theory on everything. And yes, if they ever get it, it will replace anything that does not fit into it - if it works better at explaing it. That even includes relativity itself. You need a HUGE helping of humble pie bud.

Yes, I know what quantum mechanics was for, however it was my understanding that it was falling out of favour. It was also my understanding that string theory was replacing it as a theory on the very small (and hence unifying it with relativity). I will never be so arrogant as to claim to know the math behind string theory, but I was reading recently that the math on quantum mechanics was very ugly and something like 23 variables had to be plugged into it to make it 'work'. This was from a physicist who presumably knew alot about quantum mechanics. As far as I can tell quantum mechanics and string theory and an either/or proposition. Not 100% on that however. Understood and this was basically what I was saying. Human nature has a tendancy to want answers and to dislike the evolvement of understanding at times. One can see this displayed in the scientific community when new theories are often greeted with hostility. Look at the new theory of the pre cambrian mass extinction as an example. As I said, the scientific method is what needs to be protected, not the 'answers' that science has given us. As we get older we can see this to be true. Some things that were virtually scientific fact not so long ago have been changed radically by using the scientific method. I do grant the same to atheists. Just atheists like Drea who claim to know everything immediately lose my respect. However, I disagree on the humble aspect. I think people who accept what we know today and think there are alot of things that are un answered, are more humble. Mabe not personally, but perhaps they have a more humble view on humanities achievements - which I do. I am probably more agnostic too, but I hate to put a label on it as I think about it everyday.

In general I dislike the generalizations and the sterotyping on here, mostly perpetrated by the humanist atheists, which is just ironic. Especially when you consider they are attacking religion in other threads for being exactly how they are behaving. I digress. Isn't it possible the people that believe in a higher power have a more open mind? Dogma aside, isn't holding out hope/faith in a higher power merely being humble in the scheme of things? In reality perpetuating the myth that 'science' has it all figured out is the ultimate in hubris. The scientific method is where it is at, as far as what remains to be discovered? I don't even think we have begun to surprise ourselves. People may look back on the atheists and say that they were closed minded a thousand years from now. However you put it and whatever 'side' you are on, to say that you know the answer and berate others that do not think the same as you is the ultimate in arrogance and smugness. Thank goodness real science and personal sprituality do not work that way and continues on this great journey to look for answers.. and more questions..