Comment on Schneider talks about La Sierra by Paul.
Thatâ€™s quite the generalization Paul. Anyone can make assertions like that. I can only assume youâ€™re referring to Kevin Paulsonâ€™s comment.
I was referring particularly to your sarcasm in the first post as well as Kevin’s denouncement of Schneider, but in general the “majority opinion” on this website keeps finding more and more people to be unhappy with.
Are you condemning someone Paul? That would be ironic
If you think that condemnatory behavior is immune from comment just because such comment would be “ironic” you are kidding yourself. I know you are smart enough to know the difference between denouncing Westboro Baptist Church and being Westboro Baptist Church. Also if you read what I said, it wasn’t the fact that you are condemnatory that I was speaking out against, but the sort of “onion layer” effect that is going on here. I mean seriously…Don Schneider is on your side here, and yet here is a long line of comments trashing him for not being angry enough about it. The reason I commented on this issue is that I had just read an article about Westboro a few minutes earlier. Those are people who took an issue–homosexuality–that they were really passionate about. They then just ballooned out in people on their enemies list until they got to the point that they were against people simply for living in a country in which gays are not killed. The only thing they have left, by their own admission, is to spread the “message” that God hates America. And that has consumed their whole lives. Seriously, you don’t want to become that.
Paul Also Commented
Schneider talks about La Sierra
You people keep going farther and farther down this rabbit hole. Now you are reaching the point where you are condemning people for not being angry enough about this issue. It’s a disgrace. You don’t want to turn into a Westboro Baptist Church.
Recent Comments by Paul
A little-known history about Belief 6
A huge number of educated SDAs believe that there must be more to the creation account, and most of them have put in huge amounts of thought and study to determine what they believe. And yet here you are advocating that the church make sure that there are no “loopholes” so that they not be “allowed” to pursue these lines of thinking. Is this about pursuing truth, or is this about some kind of weird purging of the church in which anyone who believes a little differently is booted out?
Erik: Gentryâ€™s works were published in the so-called â€œpeer-reviewedâ€ literature. Therefore, it is â€œscientificâ€ evidence by the worldâ€™s standards, and eligible to be taught even in the secular science environment of LSUâ€™s classrooms.
Not exactly. The whole point of “peer review” is that peers review the theories and try to figure out if they are right or wrong. Unfortunately, Gentry’s conclusions haven’t stood up well to scrutiny. As such, it would be difficult to incorporate them into a science curriculum.