Joshua Rosenau spends his days defending the teaching of evolution at 
Answers in Genesis hosts a version of the image above. Is there any plausible reading of this in which AiG isn't threatening to blow you away?
Good that Ken Ham can take time away from his busy schedule of getting busted for tax evasion feuding with the international branch of his group to threaten anyone who wanders into his little corner of the interweb.
Update: As my excellent commenters remind me, Ken Ham and Kent Hovind (similar as they may seem) are not the same person. I'm sure there's an interesting post in this about how we remember names, since I tend to mix up people with the same initials. Sorry for any confusion.
Comments
It never ceases to amaze me how the holier than thou types nearly always turn out to be the exact opposite :) There has to be some good grad/post grad thesis possibilities in explaining why this is so LOL
Posted by: Doug Alder | October 4, 2006 4:39 PM
It never ceases to amaze me that radical leftists killed 100 Million people in the 20th century and you people just pooh pooh it like it was an aberation.
Its inherent in the mind set.
Posted by: Ubermerman | October 4, 2006 5:03 PM
Ham got busted, too? Or are you confusing him with Kent Hovind?
Posted by: pough | October 4, 2006 5:05 PM
Yep, Joshy got confused.
But he won't admit he was wrong. Watch him put a spin on it as he parses the words to say something other than what you thought he said.
Posted by: Ubermerman | October 4, 2006 5:09 PM
Images like this lead one to wonder how much longer it will be before some nutcase packs heat into a school because of some imaginary message from a favorite divine messenger.
But it'll all be okay according to someone's calculus, just as long as the body count doesn't add up to an integer greater than all those assembled 20th Century atheist lefties!
Posted by: Guenther the Untermensch | October 4, 2006 5:27 PM
Josh,
First you make all kinds of false claims about the recent detainee bill, and now you falsely accuse Ham of tax evasion?
What's going on?
Posted by: Dave_B![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://scienceblogs.com/tfk/nav-commenters.gif)
|
October 4, 2006 8:07 PM
Even if you accept this statement as prima facie factual, exactly what does this have to do with biological evolution?
Or are you just another marionette conservative with your strings being pulled by Faux News?
Posted by: NJ | October 4, 2006 8:58 PM
Dave, when did you show any of what I said about the detainee bill to be false?
Posted by: Josh | October 4, 2006 9:50 PM
Looks pretty much like photos posted by the man who shot women ay Dawson College last month. (The site has been removed.) In his case, it was presented by authorities as evidence of psychopathy.
Posted by: Greg | October 5, 2006 12:25 AM
"I'm sure there's an interesting post in this about how we remember names, since I tend to mix up people with the same initials. Sorry for any confusion."
So, that's why I get you mixed up with Jason.
And that's quite a nice collection of trolls you got 'round these parts.
Posted by: RPM | October 5, 2006 6:21 PM
I'm amazed everyone doesn't mix us up. As for the trolls, my plan is to use them to train the ultimate robotroll. Or possibly to breed them and produce a perfect biotroll. The problem is that I doubt I'd have enough females for a breeding experiment.
Posted by: Josh | October 5, 2006 8:18 PM
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/feedback/2006/1006.asp
I wandered onto and read the above page, and my brain nearly imploded. The intellectual chasm separating any working scientist from a person who could take seriously that "argument" is vast.
How is it possible to ever bridge?
Posted by: PhysioProf | October 6, 2006 12:54 PM
Josh, these are your 2 statements, the first from your original post and the second from a post in the comments.
and
Your claims are dependent on the Combat Status Review Tribunal doing something that it can't do legally (classify a citizen as an alien). It's a giant "what if?".
Your use of the word "can" in the first quote, as in "can be detained indefinitely..." seems to be along the lines of "the sun can explode at any time and destroy the earth".
Most of your readers, however, are going to read "can" as: "they can do it because the bill authorizes it".
It doesn't.
You can read the bill for yourself at www.thomas.gov. Search on bill number s.3930. You'll see that there is plenty of "legal process", including defense counsel for the accused.
My use of the word "science" in my first post wasn't referring to chemistry or biology, but the use of fact and reason.
Posted by: Dave_B![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://scienceblogs.com/tfk/nav-commenters.gif)
|
October 7, 2006 7:19 AM
Dave: The bill removes safeguards. Our system of government operates on checks and balances. Remove those checks and balances and people can do whatever they want. I also cited a longer analysis that supported my claim, an analysis you didn't respond to. There are legal arguments that could be made to justify classifying a citizen as an enemy combatant (perhaps if the person's citizenship were unclear). That person has no recourse to challenge the legal argument or a factual assertion about his/her citizenship.
They could do that before, they can't now. The government can now do things they couldn't get away with before. I stand by what I said.
Posted by: Josh | October 7, 2006 12:45 PM