a response to Phil Miller's posts
Chris Colby
[an emormous amount of material -- deleted]
Phil, I'd like to make a few comments. I hope you will consider them.
1.) Your wishes do not affect reality. You may want the world to
work in a way that gives you the warm fuzzies, but that doesn't
alter reality.
2.) Evolution is a scientific theory. Atheism is a philosophical
position. The two are not the same thing. It is possible to
reconcile religion and science in this respect.
3.) Science (for example, evolution) describes things, it does
not proscribe actions or dictate morals. That isn't what it is
about. Criticizing evolution on that basis is stupid -- like
going to a football game and being disgusted that you didn't
learn anything about 17th century French impressionist painters.
4.) Please learn something about evolution before you criticise
it. You are really clueless (not a flame, a fact that a little
reading could cure). I have a talk.origins FYI file that explains
the basics of evolution; email me if you would like to receive it.
: philll
Chris Colby
email: co...@bu-bio.bu.edu
Herb Huston
}3.) Science (for example, evolution) describes things, it does
}not proscribe actions or dictate morals. That isn't what it is
}about. Criticizing evolution on that basis is stupid -- like
}going to a football game and being disgusted that you didn't
}learn anything about 17th century French impressionist painters.
Why is a 17th century French impressionist painter like a Mesozoic hominid?
-- Herb Huston
-- hus...@access.digex.net
Rohan Oberoi
I missed something here. Was there a coherent thought behind this ?
If so, speak now, or forever hold your tongue.
Rohan
L. Drew Davis
>Rohan
I thought it was a riddle. But the only answer I've come
up with is "because people have to spend a lot of Monet to
get Cezanne tickets".
--------------
L. Drew Davis Internet: dr...@cc.gatech.edu
uucp: ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!gt5645c
Portable flange facers repair leaking flanges fast.
Jon Livesey
|> ro...@nmc.cit.cornell.edu (Rohan Oberoi) writes:
|>
|> >In article <22r6ui$8...@access.digex.net>, hus...@access.digex.net (Herb Huston) writes:
|> >|> In article <22pjkp$9...@news.bu.edu> co...@bu.bu.edu (Chris Colby) writes:
|> >|> }3.) Science (for example, evolution) describes things, it does
|> >|> }not proscribe actions or dictate morals. That isn't what it is
|> >|> }about. Criticizing evolution on that basis is stupid -- like
|> >|> }going to a football game and being disgusted that you didn't
|> >|> }learn anything about 17th century French impressionist painters.
|> >|>
|> >|> Why is a 17th century French impressionist painter like a Mesozoic hominid?
|> >
|>
|> >I missed something here. Was there a coherent thought behind this ?
|> >If so, speak now, or forever hold your tongue.
|>
|> >Rohan
|>
|> I thought it was a riddle. But the only answer I've come
|> up with is "because people have to spend a lot of Monet to
|> get Cezanne tickets".
I thought it might be an oblique reference to places like Lasceaux,
but then I realised I don't know how old the cave paitings there
really are.
jon.
Kelley, Jonathan A.
[Cruel preface events deleted...]
> I thought it was a riddle. But the only answer I've come
>up with is "because people have to spend a lot of Monet to
>get Cezanne tickets".
ObGroaningInsultHomageToThePunster:
May you enjoy tortuous toilet-seatings for the rest of your
existence.
A good pun deserves proper homage.
>--------------
>L. Drew Davis Internet: dr...@cc.gatech.edu
>uucp: ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!gt5645c
>Portable flange facers repair leaking flanges fast.
ObGroan:
Groan...
ObPedantry:
They were *nineteenth* century Impressionist painters, of course.
ObArtPunReply:
LHOOQ here, if you don't stop punning, I may van Gogh over there
and Ernst-ly Braque your limbs.
(Of course, that usage is a little Loos. But que Seurat, Seurat.)
---
Jonathan Kelley
jke...@romeo.caltech.edu
kg anderson
.good advice to Phil Miller deleted.
>3.) Science (for example, evolution) describes things, it does
>not proscribe actions or dictate morals. That isn't what it is
>about. Criticizing evolution on that basis is stupid -- like
>going to a football game and being disgusted that you didn't
>learn anything about 17th century French impressionist painters.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Unless Chris (clever guy that he is) did this on purpose (in order to
prove his point that it's ridiculous to expect science to dictate
morals), I'd like to point out that there is no such animal as
a 17th century French impressionist painter. Unless my parents
wasted their time funding my liberal arts education, I seem to
recall that Impressionism didn't occur until the mid-to-late 19th
century.
Do I get any pedant points for this?
>Chris Colby
>email: co...@bu-bio.bu.edu
>
kg anderson
k...@uncmvs.oit.unc.edu
Herb Huston
}Chris Colby writes:
}
}.good advice to Phil Miller deleted.
}
}>3.) Science (for example, evolution) describes things, it does
}>not proscribe actions or dictate morals. That isn't what it is
}>about. Criticizing evolution on that basis is stupid -- like
}>going to a football game and being disgusted that you didn't
}>learn anything about 17th century French impressionist painters.
} ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
}Unless Chris (clever guy that he is) did this on purpose (in order to
}prove his point that it's ridiculous to expect science to dictate
}morals), I'd like to point out that there is no such animal as
}a 17th century French impressionist painter. Unless my parents
}wasted their time funding my liberal arts education, I seem to
}recall that Impressionism didn't occur until the mid-to-late 19th
}century.
And that's why a 17th century French impressionist painter is like a
Mesozoic hominid.