Comments for Stranger Fruit

Comment on Friday Felid #19 by Monado

Monado — Sun, 17 May 2009 21:41:44 +0000

What a beautiful little cat!

Comment on Good news before I go … by jpj

jpj — Sat, 16 May 2009 10:23:42 +0000

At least the Lions have cool helmets.

Comment on Good news before I go … by Thony C.

Thony C. — Sat, 16 May 2009 02:42:22 +0000

That’s an insult to the Detroit Lions.

Comment on Good news before I go … by Glenn Branch

Glenn Branch — Sat, 16 May 2009 00:10:24 +0000

Actually, the Missouri bill appears never to have been assigned to a committee.

Comment on The Value of History of Science to Science Education by anand

anand — Fri, 15 May 2009 10:00:14 +0000

Very interesting article. Usefull for me

Comment on Monday Mustelid #34 by Soma

Soma — Fri, 15 May 2009 04:00:32 +0000

Marbled polecats are so cute!

Comment on Monday Mammal by CHRISS BISHARD

CHRISS BISHARD — Wed, 13 May 2009 11:11:22 +0000

HI, THE GULO GULO IS A WOLVERINE. BUT… WHAT WERE THE OTHER 4 PREVEOUS STAGES? I AM CURIOUS. THOO THIS BOOK LOOKS GOOD ^-^

Comment on Simplify by Dan!

Dan! — Tue, 12 May 2009 13:43:10 +0000

I followed your example and did the same thing! Call it spring cleaning, if you will.

Comment on Casey Luskin is a WHAT? by jim

jim — Mon, 11 May 2009 18:57:22 +0000

@ Konstantin
do you mean “genetic” fallacy? i’m betting you did. either way, you clearly don’t understand how the fallacy works. the issue here isn’t that luskin is wrong because he isn’t a biologist. the issue is that he was given false credentials as a way of suggesting that he is an expert and, therefore, has an opinion that should be heeded on the subject.
please understand the issue at hand before commenting.
thanks.

Comment on Teaching Evolution One Icon At A Time by MartinC

MartinC — Mon, 11 May 2009 08:32:49 +0000

Some of those quotes reminds me of something Jonathan Wells said a couple of years back.
“When we look at the evidence for darwinian evolution, its pathetic.
Its not overwhelming, its underwhelming. And as soon as people learn
that they will realise that darwinism is not good science, what it is
is the best natural explanation for what we see, but that doesnt make
it the real explanation for what we see. Its artificially constrained
by this materialistic philosophy that inspired this radical
redefinition of science in 2001. Without that radical redefinition of
science, if people are encouraged to follow the evidence, darwinism
will fall.”