• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Ron Paul rejects evolutionary theory

Page 8 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,587
9
81
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Tell me to move, that's an original response. Love it or leave it, eh Cletus?
Meh, it's better than flying off the handle because I suggested using *our* tax dollars to fund something like medical and fuel research. If you don't like it vote against it. That's what I'll be doing.
As will I, which is why I support Paul despite your telling me to pack up and leave, pissant.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,912
46
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Dave is right here and Vic is wrong, it doesn't take a genius to see that and i don't judge people on any merits apart from my own.

I'm English, be glad because i would have voted for Hillary who is a fuckload more of a libertian than Ron Paul will ever be.
As with others, I am amazed that you would think this.

Vic, despite my own disagreements with him, is far more logical than Dave in his trolls.
Logical or not, that doesn't mean he is always right. I never claimed to be always right.

That's what makes things beliefs and opinion.

I'm sure Paul dismissing Science is just to grab the religious base.

Republicans no matter who the front runner turns out to be cannot afford to lose any of the religious base they have counted on to win the Oval Office seat this past decade.

It's as simple as that.
 

LegendKiller

Lifer
Mar 5, 2001
18,261
68
86
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Dave is right here and Vic is wrong, it doesn't take a genius to see that and i don't judge people on any merits apart from my own.

I'm English, be glad because i would have voted for Hillary who is a fuckload more of a libertian than Ron Paul will ever be.
As with others, I am amazed that you would think this.

Vic, despite my own disagreements with him, is far more logical than Dave in his trolls.
Logical or not, that doesn't mean he is always right. I never claimed to be always right.

That's what makes things beliefs and opinion.

I'm sure Paul dismissing Science is just to grab the religious base.

Republicans no matter who the front runner turns out to be cannot afford to lose any of the religious base they have counted on to win the Oval Office seat this past decade.

It's as simple as that.

I don't think he has ever claimed to be always right, even in my discussions with him so don't try to polarize the issue like that. furthermore, he has never claimed to be an expert at everything, unlike you.

If it came down to a battle of intelligence, knowledge, logic, and non-hyperbole non-troll speak, I'll read a post by Vic before I read any of yours.
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Administrator
Oct 9, 1999
35,052
28
86
Originally posted by: dmcowen674

I'm sure Paul dismissing Science is just to grab the religious base.
That's called pandering, and when a Presidential candidate makes decisions based on religious dogma rather than scientific input, it's not only stupid, it's dangerous.

The Bushwhackos have given us more than enough of that kind of intellectual garbage. It's more than enough reason to dismiss Ron Paul as a candidate. :thumbsdown:
 

Fern

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 30, 2003
26,916
172
106
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Dave is right here and Vic is wrong, it doesn't take a genius to see that..

..

I'm English, be glad because i would have voted for Hillary who is a fuckload more of a libertian than Ron Paul will ever be.
Thanks for this. Now I know to never, ever waste my time seriously considering anything you post here. :laugh:
Agreed, jeebus.

It's hard to recall a more incorrect assertion (bolded comment above) seen around here. And that's really saying something given the trolls and mis-information spewed around ATPN.

Fern
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
29,779
3,305
126
Originally posted by: ericlp
Maybe this will shed some light on your subject...

over 90% of americans believe in a god and over half don't believe in evolution.
That can't be serious....
 

WHAMPOM

Diamond Member
Feb 28, 2006
7,630
181
106
Vote Edwards, he wears no golden mask and admits his feet are made of clay. Ron Paul, LMAO.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
47,850
8,165
126
Originally posted by: Harvey
Originally posted by: dmcowen674

I'm sure Paul dismissing Science is just to grab the religious base.
That's called pandering, and when a Presidential candidate makes decisions based on religious dogma rather than scientific input, it's not only stupid, it's dangerous.

The Bushwhackos have given us more than enough of that kind of intellectual garbage. It's more than enough reason to dismiss Ron Paul as a candidate. :thumbsdown:
And here we are again, right back to the usual partisan hacks attacking a candidate they don't like for the exact same actions that the candidates they do like engage in daily.

I used to think you guys were hypocrites. Now I just think you're delusional.


Oh, and to everyone else, thanks for the kind words. However, I am loathe to have my name mentioned in the same sentence with McOwen. He is just a ghoul. A bitter nihilist seeking to spread his bitterness to the rest of the world. In fact, that's why we don't get along, because he would like to have everyone believe that nihilism and pessimism is the core of liberal and democratic belief, when nothing could be further from the truth.
 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,991
0
0
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Robor
Wow, exagerate much? Seems you RP supporters like to do that a lot.

I don't want to pay for a lot of things the gov't funds but it's not all about ME or YOU, it's about what's best for EVERYONE.
And how is that determined? Who decides that? And don't say democracy, because that's what has you and I paying for Iraq.
Simply use the same system that is currently in place for research grants and allow it to go toward stem cell research as well.
That didn't answer my question. What exactly is best for everyone and who gets to decide that? I don't see how anyone can pretend that these are easy questions.
To be honest I have no idea who currently makes the decisions on federal funds going to research grants. I do believe curing disease and finding cleaner and more renewable fuels would benefit everyone though - well maybe not those in the oil industry but that's another story.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,587
9
81
Bureaucrats cannot properly choose alternative fuels. Only the free market can. Government will give us an ethanol based future and wreak havoc on the global food market all while paying massive subsidies to corn farmers.
 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,991
0
0
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Tell me to move, that's an original response. Love it or leave it, eh Cletus?
Meh, it's better than flying off the handle because I suggested using *our* tax dollars to fund something like medical and fuel research. If you don't like it vote against it. That's what I'll be doing.
As will I, which is why I support Paul despite your telling me to pack up and leave, pissant.
Hey, you're the one who is tired of being held up by the 'thugs with guns'. I merely gave you an option to prevent it.

FWIW, you acting like an arrogant cock is a great way to get Paul's message across. It's good to know he's got people like you out there supporting him. :thumbsup:
 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,991
0
0
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Bureaucrats cannot properly choose alternative fuels. Only the free market can. Government will give us an ethanol based future and wreak havoc on the global food market all while paying massive subsidies to corn farmers.
IMO Ethanol is not the long term answer. I don't even know if it's a short term solution.

One thing the government could do is provide a deduction or refund for those with cars over a certain MPG (like they were doing for hybrids).
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
47,850
8,165
126
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Robor
Wow, exagerate much? Seems you RP supporters like to do that a lot.

I don't want to pay for a lot of things the gov't funds but it's not all about ME or YOU, it's about what's best for EVERYONE.
And how is that determined? Who decides that? And don't say democracy, because that's what has you and I paying for Iraq.
Simply use the same system that is currently in place for research grants and allow it to go toward stem cell research as well.
That didn't answer my question. What exactly is best for everyone and who gets to decide that? I don't see how anyone can pretend that these are easy questions.
To be honest I have no idea who currently makes the decisions on federal funds going to research grants. I do believe curing disease and finding cleaner and more renewable fuels would benefit everyone though - well maybe not those in the oil industry but that's another story.
I was questioning your statement bolded above. What exactly is best for everyone? Who decides? And the answer to that is either a dictator, everyone, or no one.
When you try to say, however, that it is whatever you want that is best for everyone, then you are pretending to be dictator, whether you realize it or not. We'd all like the world to be the way we want it to be, but that doesn't mean we should actually try to do that.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,587
9
81
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Tell me to move, that's an original response. Love it or leave it, eh Cletus?
Meh, it's better than flying off the handle because I suggested using *our* tax dollars to fund something like medical and fuel research. If you don't like it vote against it. That's what I'll be doing.
As will I, which is why I support Paul despite your telling me to pack up and leave, pissant.
Hey, you're the one who is tired of being held up by the 'thugs with guns'. I merely gave you an option to prevent it.

FWIW, you acting like an arrogant cock is a great way to get Paul's message across. It's good to know he's got people like you out there supporting him. :thumbsup:
Given the multitudes of jackasses like yourself supporting the status quo (war, corporate welfare, a tanking economy) I don't care if I come across as a jerk. Maybe this country needs more loudmouthed jerks that don't represent the current political elite. There are enough Michael Moores and Rush Limbaughs, perhaps it's time there were some jerks that support freedom instead of the continued slide to authoritarianism.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,587
9
81
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Bureaucrats cannot properly choose alternative fuels. Only the free market can. Government will give us an ethanol based future and wreak havoc on the global food market all while paying massive subsidies to corn farmers.
IMO Ethanol is not the long term answer. I don't even know if it's a short term solution.

One thing the government could do is provide a deduction or refund for those with cars over a certain MPG (like they were doing for hybrids).
No, ethanol is not a solution at all but that's where we're headed because the US government is incapable of making good decisions.

Your refunds for cars over a certain mileage is just another pathetic bandaid on a bigger problem. You're not going to get us off oil if you keep paying people to use oil.
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,716
6
76
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Tell me to move, that's an original response. Love it or leave it, eh Cletus?
Meh, it's better than flying off the handle because I suggested using *our* tax dollars to fund something like medical and fuel research. If you don't like it vote against it. That's what I'll be doing.
As will I, which is why I support Paul despite your telling me to pack up and leave, pissant.
Hey, you're the one who is tired of being held up by the 'thugs with guns'. I merely gave you an option to prevent it.

FWIW, you acting like an arrogant cock is a great way to get Paul's message across. It's good to know he's got people like you out there supporting him. :thumbsup:
Given the multitudes of jackasses like yourself supporting the status quo (war, corporate welfare, a tanking economy) I don't care if I come across as a jerk. Maybe this country needs more loudmouthed jerks that don't represent the current political elite. There are enough Michael Moores and Rush Limbaughs, perhaps it's time there were some jerks that support freedom instead of the continued slide to authoritarianism.
Besides, if they make up their mind based on the supporters they ignorant anyways. You are not voting for the supporters. So silly every time I hear that load of horse shit. Shows how simple minded they are.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
47,850
8,165
126
Ethanol and other biofuels would be a perfectly fine solution for alternative fuels if we stopped making them out of fsckin' food. We could make biofuels from sh!t if we wanted to, but oh no the corn industry...
 

1EZduzit

Lifer
Feb 4, 2002
11,834
1
0
Originally posted by: Vic
Ethanol and other biofuels would be a perfectly fine solution for alternative fuels if we stopped making them out of fsckin' food. We could make biofuels from sh!t if we wanted to, but oh no the corn industry...
Tell me your not this stupid, your just in the mood to troll.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,912
46
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: Vic
Ethanol and other biofuels would be a perfectly fine solution for alternative fuels if we stopped making them out of fsckin' food.

We could make biofuels from sh!t if we wanted to, but oh no the corn industry...
Tell me your not this stupid, your just in the mood to troll.
Excuse me.

He is 110% correct. There is absolutely no reason to be making ethanol from corn.

Switch grass is a much more appropriate plant and does not cut into the food supply.
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,716
6
76
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: Vic
Ethanol and other biofuels would be a perfectly fine solution for alternative fuels if we stopped making them out of fsckin' food.

We could make biofuels from sh!t if we wanted to, but oh no the corn industry...
Tell me your not this stupid, your just in the mood to troll.
Excuse me.

He is 110% correct. There is absolutely no reason to be making ethanol from corn.

Switch grass is a much more appropriate plant and does not cut into the food supply.
Much more efficient :thumbsup:

I think its 10:1 ratio IIRC. Saw it on history channel.
 

cKGunslinger

Lifer
Nov 29, 1999
16,359
34
91
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: Vic
Ethanol and other biofuels would be a perfectly fine solution for alternative fuels if we stopped making them out of fsckin' food. We could make biofuels from sh!t if we wanted to, but oh no the corn industry...
Tell me your not this stupid, your just in the mood to troll.
Uh, no. He's quite right.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
47,850
8,165
126
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: Vic
Ethanol and other biofuels would be a perfectly fine solution for alternative fuels if we stopped making them out of fsckin' food.

We could make biofuels from sh!t if we wanted to, but oh no the corn industry...
Tell me your not this stupid, your just in the mood to troll.
Excuse me.

He is 110% correct. There is absolutely no reason to be making ethanol from corn.

Switch grass is a much more appropriate plant and does not cut into the food supply.
Thank you, Dave.

There are so many other sources as well. Landfill gas, sewer gas, using excess heat from manufacturing to generate steam, on and on and on.... all around us is waste and inefficiency.
 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,991
0
0
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Robor
Wow, exagerate much? Seems you RP supporters like to do that a lot.

I don't want to pay for a lot of things the gov't funds but it's not all about ME or YOU, it's about what's best for EVERYONE.
And how is that determined? Who decides that? And don't say democracy, because that's what has you and I paying for Iraq.
Simply use the same system that is currently in place for research grants and allow it to go toward stem cell research as well.
That didn't answer my question. What exactly is best for everyone and who gets to decide that? I don't see how anyone can pretend that these are easy questions.
To be honest I have no idea who currently makes the decisions on federal funds going to research grants. I do believe curing disease and finding cleaner and more renewable fuels would benefit everyone though - well maybe not those in the oil industry but that's another story.
I was questioning your statement bolded above. What exactly is best for everyone? Who decides? And the answer to that is either a dictator, everyone, or no one.
When you try to say, however, that it is whatever you want that is best for everyone, then you are pretending to be dictator, whether you realize it or not. We'd all like the world to be the way we want it to be, but that doesn't mean we should actually try to do that.
Well I guess the way it is supposed to work is we elect officials we feel represent us and they make decisions on our behalf. Whether that always happens is definitely debatable.
 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,991
0
0
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Tell me to move, that's an original response. Love it or leave it, eh Cletus?
Meh, it's better than flying off the handle because I suggested using *our* tax dollars to fund something like medical and fuel research. If you don't like it vote against it. That's what I'll be doing.
As will I, which is why I support Paul despite your telling me to pack up and leave, pissant.
Hey, you're the one who is tired of being held up by the 'thugs with guns'. I merely gave you an option to prevent it.

FWIW, you acting like an arrogant cock is a great way to get Paul's message across. It's good to know he's got people like you out there supporting him. :thumbsup:
Given the multitudes of jackasses like yourself supporting the status quo (war, corporate welfare, a tanking economy) I don't care if I come across as a jerk. Maybe this country needs more loudmouthed jerks that don't represent the current political elite. There are enough Michael Moores and Rush Limbaughs, perhaps it's time there were some jerks that support freedom instead of the continued slide to authoritarianism.
Actually I'm a very big opponent of the war and to label everyone who isn't a RP supporter as pro-war is blatantly wrong. It was a mistake to go in and it's been a mistake to continue the 'war on terror'. It's a no-win situation for everyone involved. That said, we (the US) created that mess so I think it would be very unpopular to simply yank the troops out before there's some sort of order. I'm all for a withdrawal - starting immediately - just not all out immediately.
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,716
6
76
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Tell me to move, that's an original response. Love it or leave it, eh Cletus?
Meh, it's better than flying off the handle because I suggested using *our* tax dollars to fund something like medical and fuel research. If you don't like it vote against it. That's what I'll be doing.
As will I, which is why I support Paul despite your telling me to pack up and leave, pissant.
Hey, you're the one who is tired of being held up by the 'thugs with guns'. I merely gave you an option to prevent it.

FWIW, you acting like an arrogant cock is a great way to get Paul's message across. It's good to know he's got people like you out there supporting him. :thumbsup:
Given the multitudes of jackasses like yourself supporting the status quo (war, corporate welfare, a tanking economy) I don't care if I come across as a jerk. Maybe this country needs more loudmouthed jerks that don't represent the current political elite. There are enough Michael Moores and Rush Limbaughs, perhaps it's time there were some jerks that support freedom instead of the continued slide to authoritarianism.
Actually I'm a very big opponent of the war and to label everyone who isn't a RP supporter as pro-war is blatantly wrong. It was a mistake to go in and it's been a mistake to continue the 'war on terror'. It's a no-win situation for everyone involved. That said, we (the US) created that mess so I think it would be very unpopular to simply yank the troops out before there's some sort of order. I'm all for a withdrawal - starting immediately - just not all out immediately.
No! We (US citizens) are not responsible! George and his cohorts are and should be brought up on charges for it. That's where the responsibility and blame lies. They want you to take blame for their actions and it seems you have taken them on. I say suit up the executive branch in military garb, drop them off in the middle of Iraq while our boys come home. I think the Iraqis would be fine dishing out justice.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY