MD CODE (Estratti)

[david777]

"Una ulteriore riflessione riguarda il grado di conflittualità economica nei confronti dell’Islam e viceversa, e dunque la possibilità di realizzare una coesistenza, utile anche a promuovere una soluzione della questione palestinese.
La più attenta comprensione dell’esperienza iberica medioevale potrebbe contribuire a convincersi della capacità dell’Islam di prodigarsi nella formulazione di norme convenzionali di coesistenza, di rispettarle e di contribuire in tal modo alla comprensione tra mussulmani, giudei e cristiani, non solo in Israele.
¹¹⁶Probabilmente ciò implicherebbe però la rinuncia da parte del fondamentalismo di ognuna delle parti alla realizzazione di uno stato confessionale [limitandosi] ad applicare quei principi teocratici che non sono comuni, riconosciuti e condivisi, esclusivamente alla propria comunità. Non si tratta di rifiutare e diluire i valori teocratici nel vasto mare del laicismo, bensì di adeguarsi alla necessità della coesistenza, evitando però di pregiudicare, nel ricorso ai mezzi ed ai privilegi offerti dal sistema laico, l’incolumità e la sicurezza di ogni particolare confessione religiosa.
Quando si pretende di subordinare il mondo intero ai valori etico-sociali, ci si dovrebbe anche chiedere se dal confronto con le altre identità spirituali, il proprio modello teocratico ed i relativi presupposti teologici sono riconoscibili come autentici, e se, comunque sia, ottengono il consenso dell’altrui coscienza.
Perciò ognuno si faccia coinvolgere perlomeno dal proprio ed originario modello teocratico, limitandosi però al di fuori della comunità religiosa alla cooperazione, affinché gli essenziali valori etico-sociali, nella misura in cui il livello di coesistenza lo permette, siano riconosciuti e praticati dallo Stato e dai cittadini. In tal modo lo Stato pur essendo laico nell’impostazione potrà fondarsi sui principi della teocrazia biblica, benché sia soltanto l’avvento dell’era messianica a realizzare, secondo la tradizione giudeocristiana, il governo ed i cittadini ideali.
L’eterogeneità della spiritualità umana e l’inclinazione al malgoverno che ne deriva, laddove si costruiscono complesse strutture sociali e previdenziali gestite da enti pubblici, non permettono per il momento il superamento del liberismo economico, però si può, a seconda dei casi, calibrarlo: se la spiritualità di un popolo è elevata, l’efficienza dello stato sociale può dimostrarsi molto elevata e la coesistenza riuscita, e nondimeno anche in tal caso una certa misura di liberismo provvederà maggiore sicurezza e garantirà un più effettivo pluralismo." MD CODE


Questo pezzo dell'MD CODE riflette l'idealismo della mia giovinezza agli inizi degli anni novanta.
"L'Esperienza Iberica" non è stata quel che ci hanno insegnato a scuola: La realtà è stata ben diversa e qualunque tentativo di riprodurne la versione idealizzata non potrà far altro che affossare ulteriormente la Civiltà Occidentale.



Le esecuzioni e le persecuzioni inflitte durante il dominio dell'Islam in Spagna non sono tanto diverse da quelle del "Califfato Islamico - ISIS" di oggi e della Jihad nel corso della Storia.



Le crociate possono essere state crudeli ma certamente erano mirate a riprendere il controllo dei territori strappati alla Cristianità.
Certamente molti crociati non erano animati dagli interessi del Regno di Dio piuttosto che da quelli propri, ed è certamente per tale ragione che i loro metodi si sono adeguati a quelli del nemico senza tanti complimenti, persino contro i giudei di cui sicuramente avevano capito ben poco.
Fatto sta che tra crimini, violenze ed errori - di arroganza come anche di strategia - le crociate, e poi le guerre contro l'Impero Ottomano, hanno salvato sia l'Europa che l'intero Occidente dall'islamizzazione.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMjUFBYEzqQ

Oggi il fondamentalismo islamico parla di riprendersi i "propri" territori in Occidente e di riposizionarsi laddove l'Islam aveva lasciato la Jihad in sospeso a causa della risposta dei re cristiani. La verità è che tali territori sono occidentali alla pari di quasi l'intero Medio Oriente, del Nordafrica e buona parte dell'Asia Minore.

Isis ed i similari movimenti islamici per la restaurazione del Califfato vogliono riprendersi parte dell'Europa dopo aver restaurato l'intero Medio Oriente e ristabilito l'ortodossia più rigorosa nei paesi islamici.

Sono da prendersi sul serio tali intenzioni e possono queste essere considerate in linea col "Vero Islam"?

Stando ai maggiori leaders occidentali tali progetti e comportamenti non avrebbero nulla da spartire col "Vero Islam".

In prima linea sono Mr Obama e Mr Blair e gli altri cantano in coro il medesimo mantra della "Religione della Pace - Islamic Peace Protocol".
No Cookies | dailytelegraph.com.au



Anjem Choudary si è De Facto promosso ad ambasciatore del "Califfato Islamico" e nonostante tale funzione formalmente pacifica di rappresentanza islamica, dovrebbe essere messo dietro le sbarre. Tra le tante cose interessanti ed informative che dice, colpisce e convince quando dice che "l'Islam non significa Pace [bensi] Sottomissione… Esiste secondo Anjem Choudary posto per la violenza nell'Islam e dunque "esiste un posto per la Jihad nell'Islam". La rilettura dei dati storici confermano la versione di Anjem Choudary e non quella dei nostri leaders occidentali. L'Islam può diventare "religione di pace" ma solo a Jihad compiuta ed a condizione che i settarismi siano sotto controllo da parte di un'autorità islamica in grado d'imporsi quale supremo interprete ed esecutore dell'ortodossia.

Quando tale condizione viene raggiunta e la Sharia imposta e consolidata… allora l'Islam diventa religione di una certa pace.
Nel frattempo però il mondo non islamico rimane "Dar al-Harb - Casa della Guerra" in contrasto con Dar al-Islam.
L'Islam lo dichiara chiaro e tondo (quale concetto derivato dal Corano)… e dunque Anjem Choudary sta facendo correttamente l'Ambasciatore Islamico e non solo dell'ISIS.
Le garanzie di cui parlano certe autorità islamiche per dimostrare che l'Islam intende promuovere la pace della Sharia col dialogo e la conciliazione non risultano confermate dai metodi utilizzati nel corso dei secoli… ed il graduale annichilamento della Cristianità nei paesi islamici lo dimostra.
L'impressione della pace sembra indotta dalla temporanea coesistenza laddove l'Islam trova conveniente e pacifico crescere mentre la sua forza non 6 sufficiente per raggiungere una posizione dominante. In tali casi - ma non a casa propria - la conciliazione e la coesistenza si dimostrano utili e persino prescritte. … Ma la vera ed ultima sostanza non cambia… Se l'Islam fosse veramente coerente circa tali intenzioni… si vedrebbe a casa propria "Dar al-Islam" prima a che casa degli altri, dove conviene star calmi ed attendere praticando la Dawah e la crescita demografica. L'Islam è un capolavoro di strategia di guerra e propaganda!



L'Islam è un capolavoro di strategia di guerra e propaganda! Che la Sharia possa essere naturalizzata nel corpo della giurisprudenza e delle costituzioni occidentali, "onde promuovere la pace e la coesistenza", è contro la natura della Civiltà Occidentale e certamente un passo sostanziale in direzione dell'Islamizzazione dell'Occidente. Il protocollo della Pace Islamica si accompagna all'idea che l'Islam è stato ed è pacifico fino a quando ingiustamente viene attaccato nella/dalla miserevole "Casa della Guerra". Resistere la santità della Sharia quando i tempi sono "maturi" e criticare l'Islam con "eccessiva" libertà di parola… determinerebbero una grave ingiustizia in aggiunta a tutte le altre ordinarie.
Il vittimismo e la "Giusta Ira" vocale col dito indice alzato e minaccioso sarebbero la conseguenza delle ingiustizie subite e dei comportamenti crociati.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMGRGtiO9Ro

Reintrodotto ed aggiornato il contesto corrente del risveglio islamico in atto ritorniamo alla crisi in corso nella "Mezzaluna Fertile".


Con un occhio alla corrispondenza tra Pike e Mazzini non posso non ripensare alla Turchia quale ipotesi in grado - ad un tempo - di spiegare la profezia dei 3 corni inglobati nell'Undicesimo (ossia "Il Piccolo" e "l'Ottavo")e di risolvere la crisi palesemente indotta con la creazione di ISIS ed affini.



La Turchia "Recalcitra" - Perché la Turchia non affianca gli USA. L'Isis in casa. Perché la Turchia non fa la guerra con gli Usa | Europa Quotidiano

Sono stato in passato in buona misura anch'io eurocentrico nell'escatologia biblica. Non mi sarei mai sognato d'ipotizzare che il centro politico della "IV Bestia" (L'Impero Romano) potesse non essere Roma o perlomeno una capitale occidentale, e di conseguenza perlomeno tre di tali ceppi potessero non ritrovarsi in Occidente.
La mia preferenza era (come si è già visto dalle citazioni dell' MD CODE precedenti) per un sorta di Napoleone che riuscisse a riunire tre ceppi europei...
Il più simile a Napoleone - per "bocca grande", ambizione imperiale, genio populista e persino "generosità"...era per me il Cavalier Berlusconi... e non ho mancato di dichiararlo o perlomeno di suggerirlo.

Nell'individuazione del "Piccolo Corno" non mi sarei sognati di pensare ad un ceppo etnico non europeo o perlomeno già una volta parte dell'Impero Romano nel senso classico del termine e limitato alla data massima dell'Apocalisse di Giovanni.

Col tempo ho pensato ad altre ipotesi meno eurocentriche...
Si, ancora penso che il "Seggio di Pietro" sarà obiettivo del "Piccolo Corno", ma non penso che ciò sarà per volontà e consenso del Vaticano.
Il Piccolo Corno vorrà vestirsi di tutta l'autorità dell'Imperatore Romano - autorità che implica sia il potere temporale che quello "spirituale" - ed è per questa ragione che in quanto "Cesare" non si accontenterà di essere imperatore senza il titolo di "Pontefice" Massimo". L'MD CODE indica che tale potere sarà indispensabile al Piccolo Corno onde riformare "I Tempi e la Legge" -altra questione dell'MD CODE da spiegare.

Non avevo alcuna fretta di avventurarmi in ipotesi più avventurose circa la "Pista Turca" - o meglio turcomanna... - per ponderarla meglio nel tempo... ma gli eventi m'inducono a suggerirla nell'essenziale.
Allora qui faccio un'altro passo.

Penso che il NWO abbia provocato tutto questo putiferio in Medio Oriente - con la scusa di eliminare Assad - allo scopo di creare una grave crisi di sicurezza a scapito d'Israele e dei paesi islamici consolidati ed alleati dell'Occidente - e naturalmente di tutte le minoranze - allo scopo di costringere l'ONU a contemplare la restaurazione di un Califfato Islamico alleato dell'Occidente. Tra gli indizi di tale volontà è stata proprio la promozione della "Fratellanza Mussulmana" in posizioni di rilevanza negli Stati Uniti. Qualcosa è andato storto in Egitto con Morsi, dove probabilmente si pensava di costituire tale califfato... ed allora è scattato un'altro piano, in alternativa ma pur sempre in linea con la medesima alleanza e visione della Fratellanza Mussulmana.

La mia ipotesi è che tale piano alternativo guardi alla Turchia per la ricostituzione del Califfato Ottomano.
ISIS ed affini dovrebbero spingere la Turchia ad entrare in guerra contro ISIS e sconfinare in Siria ed Iraq.

Ho detto anche troppo per questa volta e per quanto riguarda la compatibilità con la tesi escatologica dell'MD CODE circa i "tre corni"... si vedrà in seguito...

Il piano riguarderebbe anche il coinvolgimento d'Israele... per ritrovarci alla fine con due potenze prevalenti in Medio Oriente costrette a fare un'accordo: la Turchia ed Israele, dove per "Turchia" non s'intenderebbe soltanto la Turchia come la intendiamo oggi e neppure slegata dalla NATO e dall'EU.
L'Occidente è pronta a fornire armi e soldi - a naturalmente il NWO dietro le quinte non farà risparmi guardando agli obiettivi sia agli globali che a quelli nel "Golfo" ed in Russia... ma le truppe dovrebbero essere messe in campo dai "Turcomanni" - i quali non si limitano al territorio turco attuale...
Serviranno infatti nel corso della crisi molte truppe sul campo - decine di milioni e per gradi fino a centinaia di milioni - ... ed il NWO ha scoperto dove pescarle e come incorporarle - ossia naturalizzarle - all'Occidente.

Ecco alcuni sviluppi che vanno in direzione della mia ipotesi.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dSB-omHWDY

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1f59ae30-4...#axzz3FH0Azci8

La Turchia "recalcitra" contro gli USA perché non ha ancora afferrato i piani del NWO, ma quando ciò avverrà si farà tentare con grande compiacimento. La Turchia è sotto la mira del NWO, il quale sa bene come fare a tirarla in mare con uncini adatti allo scopo.
La posta in gioco sarà la restaurazione del Califfato Ottomano, un posto di eminenza presso l'EU e la "Grande Turchia" dal Mediterraneo fino al cuore dell'Asia.

Ma ci vorranno "azioni di persuasione" sia per Israele che per la Turchia... e dunque il radicalismo armato nell'area verrà mantenuto a briglia sciolta con azioni palliative di controllo e pilotaggio... Entrambi Israele e la Turchia devono prepararsi a varcare i propri confini... per estenderli... per AMORE o per FORZA.

[david777]

Inutili i raid Usa, Kobane verso la resa - IlGiornale.it

"Dall'8 agosto gli americani hanno lanciato appena 1768 sortite contro le postazioni jihadiste disseminate fra Siria ed Iraq. L'apporto alleato, dagli inglesi agli Emirati arabi, è ridicolo: appena 195 missioni. Nello stesso arco di tempo durante l'invasione dell'Iraq del 2003 erano scattati 29.200 raid per abbattere Saddam. Adesso risultano appena il 6% e poco incisivi."


Why did the US help the Kurds in Iraq but leave Isis to massacre them in Syria? | Cale Salih | Comment is free | theguardian.com

The Guardian si chiede:

Why did the US help the Kurds in Iraq but leave Isis to massacre them in Syria?

Mi sembra che la risposta si ritrovi nell'ipotesi di un piano per spingere la Turchia ad intervenire in Siria ed Iraq, per fare della Turchia ciò che dicevamo prima.

ISIS - "idealmente" ISIL… - dovrebbe secondo tale ipotesi fare il lavoro di demolizione del "Levante" per poi andare il "pensione"…
Nel caso precedente d'intervento in aiuto dei curdi si trattava di proteggere una diga strategica.

In questa immagine del medesimo link - vedi sopra - la metafora del disimpegno "alleato" è chiara.


La bandiera nera sventola senza timore in netto anticipo sull'attacco alla città di Kobani.

La Turchia non interviene, lasciando i curdi ad un misero destino.
ISIS ai confini della Turchia apre la grande partita attesa: quella dell'intervento di terra da negoziare nei termini e nei modi di reciproca convenienza. Se la mia ipotesi è fondata, la Turchia avanzerà richieste notevoli - quali un intervento contro Assad ed il finanziamento dell'intervento con vantaggi territoriali ed estensione della sovranità. Naturalmente la copertura aerea ed i rifornimenti di armamenti e munizioni dovrebbero essere a scapito della NATO con una probabile richiesta di truppe e tecnici specializzati. Nello sfondo dell'operazione dovrebbe riapparire la questione della Turchia quale membro dell'EU.

In sintonia con tale ipotesi, ISIS dovrebbe ritirarsi in direzione della Giordania e di Israele - dove il medesimo stratagemma di disimpegno dovrebbe ricominciare per costringere Israele a sconfinare, e forse - nella migliore delle ipotesi - ad imitare la Turchia con similari accordi NATO. Sospetto che Israele verrà lasciata completamente da sola… per far piacere agli "Alleati" e lanciare un messaggio all'ISLAM. In tal caso Israele se la caverà da sola sia sconfinando in Siria che in Giordania, dove per forza di cose dovrà piantare permanente,ente le tende per vitali ragioni strategiche.

ISIS la pagherà cara per i crimini efferati commessi contro le minoranze e le popolazioni civili, oltre che per la presuntuosa ed arrogante temerarietà esercitata con spietatezza contro "Il Popolo del Libro", di cui non è degno di sciogliere neppure i calzari.

L'Islam che ne verrà fuori sarà più moderato e civile - Mr Obama sarà fiero di se stesso - ma i carboni ardenti resteranno sotto la cenere anche dopo un accordo di pace - comunque temporaneo e fallace - con Israele.

La Bandiera Nera sventola nel frattempo sotto il volo degli "Alleati".

Penso che il "Sogno" vada ben oltre le attese… ma Israele lo trasformerà in un incubo!

[david777]

Lasciamo per il momento i riferimenti dell'MD CODE alla crisi geopolitica.
Ritorniamo allo scontro sul versante culturale.
L'MD CODE considera l'Evoluzionismo ateo tra i maggiori responsabili dello sfascio della Civiltà Occidentale e della crisi del Giudeocristianesimo.
La debolezza dell'Occidente di fronte alla minaccia di culture violenti ed incompatibili con le democrazie liberali avanzate ritrova nell'ateismo di marca naturalista una delle maggiori cause.

Ecco un pezzetto della questione dall'MD CODE e dipoi il terremoto provocato da una mia affermazione su YOUTUBE, dove sembra che io sia andato a disturbare il sacerdozio della Scienza Universale di alcuni scienziati in aspro contrasto con i "colleghi" dell'Intelligente Design.
Seguiranno due liste di reazioni e discussioni aspre sul video che non sembra per il momento più accessibile di Youtube.
L'immagine del Video in questione con relativo titolo serviranno a cercarlo su youtube quando forse sarà ripristinato.
Informo che il linguaggio in uso sarà di molto "sopra le righe".


3. L'Evoluzionismo: considerazioni critiche


¹⁰⁶L'evoluzionismo viene dato come un fatto e la stessa ricerca scientifica subisce pesantemente la sua incidenza: "La teoria darwiniana è ora confortata da tutte le rilevanti testimonianze disponibili, e la sua veridicità non è messa in dubbio da nessun serio biologo moderno". ¹⁰⁷La tradizione del dubbio sull'evoluzionismo è invece da lungo tempo consolidata, in particolare da quando W. R. Thompson, ad un secolo dalla prima edizione dell'Origine delle Specie di Darwin, nell'introduzione all'edizione commemorativa della medesima opera ebbe a scrivere:"Come si sa, fra i biologi c'è una notevole divergenza di opinioni non soltanto sulle cause dell'evoluzione, ma anche sul suo effettivo meccanismo. Questa divergenza è dovuta al fatto chel'evidenza è insoddisfacente e non permette di giungere a una conclusione certa. E' pertanto giusto e opportuno richiamare l'attenzione dei non specialisti sui contrasti esistenti nel campo dell'evoluzione". ¹⁰⁸Le opposizioni nei riguardi dell'evoluzionismo non provengono soltanto dal conservatorismo religioso: "L'evoluzione non è presa di mira solo dai cristiani fondamentalisti, ma viene messa indubbio anche da stimati scienziati. Un crescente dissenso si riscontra fra i paleontologi, gli scienziati che studiano la documentazione fossile". ¹⁰⁹Un evoluzionista ha ammesso l'eccesso del consenso della comunità scientifica nei confronti del darwinismo e le grandi difficoltà della teoria evoluzionistica. ¹¹⁰Christopher Booker, articolista del londinese Times, pur essendo egli stesso favorevole alla teoria di Darwin, ne parla al passato: "... Era una teoria attraente e meravigliosamente semplice. L'unico guaio, come almeno in parte si rendeva conto lo stesso Darwin, erano le sue numerosissime e colossali lacune... A un secolo dalla morte di Darwin, non abbiamo ancora la minima idea dimostrabile, o anche solo plausibile, di come sia avvenuta in effetti l'evoluzione... fra gli evoluzionisti stessi c'è quasi guerra aperta, e ogni gruppo... reclama qualche nuova modifica".¹¹¹Il New Scientist osserva che "un crescente numero di scienziati, in particolareun crescente numero di evoluzionisti, sostiene... che la teoria darwiniana... non è una teoria scientifica vera e propria… molti dei critici hanno le più alte credenziali intellettuali". ¹¹²Il carattere non sperimentale piuttosto che congetturale dell'evoluzionismo è lampante nella risposta dell'astronomo Robert Jastrow alla domanda su come ebbe origine la vita: "… queste domande non hanno risposte precise, dal momento che i chimici non sono mai riusciti a riprodurre gli esperimenti della natura sulla creazione della vita a partire dalla materia non vivente. Gli scienziati non sanno come ciò sia avvenuto...". ¹¹³La teoria creazionista è scientifica, perciò, almeno quanto l'evoluzionismo, nel senso che né l'una né l'altra sono sperimentali, essendo ambedue ordinariamente espressioni ipotetiche di natura filosofica o religiosa: "Gli scienziati non hanno prove che la vita non sia stata il risultato di un atto di creazione". ¹¹⁴Spesso si accusano i creazionisti, i fondamentalisti ed i metafisici in genere, di inadeguatezza ed incapacità strutturale ai fini della ricerca scientifica, a motivo di quelle che vengono definite come"superstizioni della religione", alla cui credenza si attribuisce uno stadio antropologico a dir poco medievale, mentre è lo stesso evoluzionismo a dimostrare i segni del preconcetto dogmatico nella ricerca stessa: "... molti scienziati cedono alla tentazione di essere dogmatici... il problema dell'origine delle specie è stato presentato come se fosse stato definitivamente risolto. Nulla potrebbe essere più lontano dalla verità... Ma la tendenza a essere dogmatici persiste, e non rende un servizio utile alla causa della scienza".




777davidelijah

commented on a video on YouTube.
Shared publicly - May 4, 2014



Scientifically speaking, ID and Evolutionism are both theories and therefore they should be equally taught in schools. Gravity and Evolutionism are not in the same class of proved science.






walkergarya
May 13, 2014+

Reply

Scientifically speaking, you do not know what you are talking about. Evolution is a well documented accepted Scientific Theory. Intelligent Design is at best pseudo-science or more accurately, just creationism re-branded. 





777davidelijah
May 13, 2014

Pseudo-academic arrogance of Naturalism Philosophy upgraded to Evoluionism and inevitably created plenty of problems to the Western society. Naturalism should in the best scenario stop at the ethical and scientific border described by Jaques Monod Chance and Necessity: An Essay on the Natural Philosophy of Modern Biology: Jacques Monod, Austryn Wainhouse: 9780394466156: Amazon.com: Books
The West is crumbing for degeneration of Freedom caused by materialism as mediated by Atheistic Evolutionism. A recent symptoms? Eurofest 14 and its final pick - which is also the allegory of a society ready for a meaningless new age culture.
Evolutinism and Naturalism work temporarily well in Biological science and derivate applications, but discrepancies and theoretical objection are increasing.
It is a theory and not scientifically proved factual science.



+777davidelijah

You distinction between "scientific theory" and "unsubstantiated hypothesis" is an opinion itself.

No it is not. Scientific Theory is an hypothesis that has the support of the Scientific Community and has a substantial body of evidence to support it and can be used to make predictions.
An unsubstantiated hypothesis is just that, little or no evidence, little or no support in the scientific community and has not been used to make predictions.

I see plenty of serious and meaningful reasons for ID to stand as a scientific theory - or if you wish "Hypothesis".

This is simply wishful thinking and I suspect several examples of "arguments from ignorance"

Naturalist scientists and scholars will only add value to themselves and the Academic world if they will admit the meaningful value of ID. 

No they will not.
"After a searching review of the record and applicable caselaw, we find that while ID arguments may be true, a proposition on which the Court takes no position, ID is not science. We find that ID fails on three different levels, any one of which is sufficient to preclude a determination that ID is science. They are: (1) ID violates the centuries-old ground rules of science by invoking and permitting supernatural causation; (2) the argument of irreducible complexity, central to ID, employs the same flawed and illogical contrived dualism that doomed creation science in the 1980's; and (3) ID's negative attacks on evolution have been refuted by the scientific community. As we will discuss in more detail below, it is additionally important to note that ID has failed to gain acceptance in the scientific community, it has not generated peer-reviewed publications, nor has it been the subject of testing and research."
Judge John E. Jones III, from the Decision of the Court.

"We have concluded that it is not, and moreover that ID cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents."

"The citizens of the Dover area were poorly served by the members of the Board who voted for the ID Policy. It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy."

"The breathtaking inanity of the Board's decision is evident when considered against the factual backdrop which has now been fully revealed through this trial. The students, parents, and teachers of the Dover Area School District deserved better than to be dragged into this legal maelstrom, with its resulting utter waste of monetary and personal resources."

Kitzmiller v. Dover: Decision of the Court, Part 3


+777davidelijah
Evolution is a heavily tested, proven scientific fact. 100% indisputable fact. While there is a very slim chance that _theory of evolution_ will be altered in the future, nothing can change that evolution itself is a fact. Anyone who actually knows some rudimentary sciences would know that, so I won't hold it against you for not understanding.
ID couldn't even quality as a half-assed hypothesis. It's simply logic-defying absurdities as desperate attempt to keep religion somehow relevant in the classroom.
You might want to go back some 6th grade level science. Evolution is perhaps the most tested, and solid theory in all of science. A theory stronger than gravity. Since there are still aspects of gravity that haven't been tested, simply calculated.
It's quite simple, if you want proof of evolution, just get a simple blood test. Have your blood and your parent's blood drawn. If evolution isn't a fact, then there would zero change from parent to offspring. Since evolution is a change in allele frequencies in a population over time. (Luckily, evolution is so heavily tested, and consistently proven as fact, there are many ways to measure mutations from just one generation.) If evolution isn't a fact, then your DNA should be an exact 50/50% mix of your parents, with no new genetic information, no mutations, no change in allele frequencies. However, if there is a discernible difference between the blood samples, then you will understand that evolution is a fact. 



SuperDelusionist
Jul 23, 2014+

The whole of the universe was created by invisible mango like truck shaped beings.. this is a theory also. It should also be taught as an alternative in the classroom, you idiot.





777davidelijah
Jul 23, 2014

Having the guts to suggest that "God" is no better qualified than a "Mango" as a "theory" is an indication of how far the foolishness of the academic world has gone. It is not just "flower" of your "bag" as I can see your masters behind your skill.
Of course you would qualify for the 50% bonus to become a doctor in microbiology.
I can tell you that even if only a cabbage was born in during the night in the Universe… its cause should be explained…
There is where God comes in to the picture silly!


+777davidelijah

"Having the guts to suggest that "God" is no better qualified than a "Mango" as a "theory" is an indication of how far the foolishness of the academic world has gone"

- if you define the Mango as being resonsible for creating the universe then the explanatory power is the same, as is the likelihood.


Show less


LM
Jul 23, 2014
+777davidelijah Theory of evolution describes facts of evolution (genetics, fossils, mutations, ring species, etc). It's the foundation of modern biology. 





777davidelijah

Genetics, fossils, mutations, ring species and evolution are not necessarily the same thing.
Theory of Evolution describes hypothesis of the evolution. Still a theory but your Doctor not necessarily believes in it.





types10000
Jul 23, 2014
+777davidelijah

"Genetics, fossils, mutations, ring species and evolution are not necessarily the same thing"

- Sure, however evolution makes testable predictions about all of them and they overwhelmingly support it.

Infact many of these fields dont make sense unless evolution occurred:
- the distribution of organisms within the fossil record.
- Th genetic similarity between certain organisms (the relatedness for humans and chimps for instance is determined using the same technology as paternity tests).

"Theory of Evolution describes hypothesis of the evolution"
- No, the theory of evolution describes the scientific theory of evolution, (modern evolutionary synthesis i think)
- you're probably thinking of the origin of species, it was a hypothesis back then.

"Still a theory but your Doctor not necessarily believes in it."
- That's quite possible: If you dont know jack about a particular field you are much more likely hold stupid opinions about that field (regardless of whether you have qualifications in an unrelated field).

Thankfully my local doctor does accept evolution and was thus able to identify the vestigial flap in my neck that was hindering my ability to swallow. He probably would have been able to do this without evolution EVENTUALLY however in addition to taking additional time we would also have absolutely no fucking clue why it's there and why we shouldnt expect to see them all over my body.


777davidelijah
Jul 24, 2014
You keep your religion and I keep mine. If Isaac Newton was alive I do not doubt he would consider Evolutionism a working theory [to a degree]. Anyway, the experts here are Behe and Krauss. I do not believe the inanimate matter can produce any intelligent digital software to cause DNA and life.

types10000
Jul 24, 2014+


+777davidelijah

"You keep your religion and I keep mine."
- No, i'll keep to the science and you can keep deluding yourself into believing the science is a religion.

"If Isaac Newton was alive I do not doubt he would consider Evolutionism a working theory"
- I'm not sure what you mean by 'evolutionism'.
- It's quite possible he wouldnt accept evolutionary theory, after-all he was religious and didn't know anything about modern biology (that makes him fairly representative of most people who reject it)

"I do not believe the inanimate matter can produce any intelligent digital software to cause DNA and life."

- Evolution explains the diversity of life, not it's origin.
- Abiogenesis (the current best and most well evidenced explanation for the origin of life) explains how it formed via natural processes not 'inanimate matter'.
- There is no 'digital software' in DNA or necessary to produce it.

777davidelijah
Jul 24, 2014
"Evolution explains the diversity of life, not its origin" Not good enough for a theory claiming to be objective science! I leave the issue of the "Software" to the experts - the discussion is in progress… I didn't invent it.
Because I am not a biologist it doesn't mean I have to consider true what you say. You are not the Pope of Science and neither the lobby of all EV scientists. Science is science when it is really experimentally proved - not just "Explanation".
Science is not just formal description but also explanation of the origin.
There is a point where science becomes a religion… Evolutionism is a faith that to a certain degree offers solutions and explanations - to a certain degree…
EV should stop were the formal description ends, and leave the rest to an interdisciplinary investigation and discussion. 


LM
Jul 24, 2014
From Oxford Dictionary: "Biol. The transformation of animals, plants, and other living organisms into different forms by the accumulation of changes over successive generations; the transmutation of species (cf. transmutation n. 3f); the origination or transformation of an organism, organ, physiological process, biological molecule, etc., by such a series of changes."

You're of course free to come up with your own definition, but don't expect us to take you seriously.


SuperDelusionist
Jul 24, 2014

+777davidelijah
Damn you are one helluva dumb cunt.

777davidelijah
Jul 24, 2014
+LM "… Oxford Dictionary… Do not expect US to take you seriously…" Is "US" Pluralis Majestatis or Thou represent the Schola Universalis?

Did you ever think that ID doesn't necessarily support "Creationism" or "Evolutionism"… ?What essentially ID says is that there is an intelligent design!
Evolutionism could theoretical be the modular process for a Supreme Intelligence to create all beings.
Theistic Evolutionism doesn't convince me… but the sufficient theoretical credentials seem to be there….
Therefore all this opposition to ID spells something else: an atheistic agenda to eliminate from the picture God and all faiths.

For obvious reasons… in the big pot is especially Judeo-Christianity to get caught.

JC has historical credentials and has also the proved records of being at the foundation of Western freedom and constitutions.

Especially in the version of the "Pilgrim Fathers" JC has promoted Freedom of Science as it did with Religion.

The cultural invasion of Naturalism pushed to the extreme degree (basically a cultural monopoly) has provoked most of the social crisis derived from the attack to JC.

When we check in History how Europe (even if in the Middle Age stage) survived the Islamic Jihad, we cannot avoid the evidence that without Christianity non one battle could have been won.

Islam today is not the upgraded theocratic model of freedom produced by Western Christianity. Your "Schola Universalis" would have and has already [over there…] an hell of issues with free speech as you (THOU) must be very careful the way you could interfere with the Quran and the system it has produced. Never say that the Prophet was Psychiatrically sick or they would cut your (Thou) Head!

Once JC is completely out of the picture from the real forum of decisions and government… you'll (THOU) have an hell of troubles in surviving in a free society. I would not be surprised if your academia of scientists would not resist over 76 hours in defending the Western Civilisation in its true genuine version.

The signs of deterioration and compromise are already all there… before the final hit…

I was surprised to notice by direct experience how even the humanistic departments have been affected by Atheistic Evolutionism and Naturalism. During my tests about the Old Testament I was told that the Prophets were psychiatric cases as it is impossible that a mythological "God" might speak to a human being. It is redundant to say that I never concluded my studies in any of these sort of universities, as the clashes continued even in traditional Protestant colleges subdued by the "Divinity Department" of the secular University.

In this way the monopoly of your scientific departments moves into the humanistic departments and as consequence finish even in the theological colleges.

Once this procedure takes place… the same tradition orthodoxy of whatever Christian confession gets sick and start producing priests, pastors, elders, missionaries who do not believe anymore in the true Gospel.
In the next step the disease passes into the "Flock" and the society gets even more sick, weak and ready for any sort of appeasement with its own sin and with the forceful powers ready to take over globally.

Going back to the origins of the sickness - the phylogenesis of the pathology.
EV scientists have notices that all living being seem to be biological build in the same way and therefore they decided they are all relatives. This is the essential point of YOURS (THOU-THEE) profound Scientific Vision. It comes from the intuition of Darwin.

Ever come across the Myth of the Cave. I believe you did and know well what Plato meant with it.
Our senses skew reality, filter out data and info and then reduce human capability to grasp the actual reality. The point of Plato is that theoretical mind (ideas) have he best chance to penetrate through the walls of the cave an understand the real Truth.
Atheistic EV has crippled the philosophical discourse, the Art of Pure Reasoning and reduced all to descriptive reasoning.
This is why Thou do not see the Intelligence behind the formal description. EV Scientists have become like the civil notary in the paint of Quentin Massys
Civil law notary - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- thou take notice and describe the naturalistic evidence of biological life and make conclusions based upon the wall of the Cave of Plato. Then you store the lot in the safe and the acts sent to the Registry Office for eternal title.

Atheistic EV in its purrs Naturalist version has basically weakened the spiritual fabric of the Western World and paved the way for an imminent detrimental and destructive autocracy.

I respect the capability of Naturalist Scientist to investigate and research, but you (Thou) know what? I do not take their Schola Universalis seriously. I am looking for a new world and I do not feel frustrated to be institutionally out of your Academia.

777davidelijah
Jul 24, 2014

+SuperDelusionist Your vocabulary doesn't reflect my vision of Ethics and Freedom. In my world the philosophical discourse is still alive - we do not swallow your assumptions as the sheep of your ideal society do.
I see what is useful and productive in Naturalism, but the rest is not of its competence.
Ever heard about disciplines like: Cosmology, Theology, Philosophy…?
Leave to others what is not of your competence and you'll do good in your realm of science!
The Truth is that Naturalism is incompetent to discuss the true Anthropologic substance and origins of mankind, as it is not competent to discuss issues like "GOD".
Naturalist Anthropology can only be descriptive of what mankind appears to be.
Description of the appearance is not Science in the ultimate sense.
It is like when you call the electrician and he starts telling you what electricity is, while with all amusement you enjoy a cup of tea and listen to the lecture.



walkergarya
Aug 10, 2014

+777davidelijah You are a long winded blow hard but you manage to say very little worth reading.
Natural Science is rational, repeatable and it works. The complex systems you use in your daily life are proof of this.
Your computer, your flat screen tv, the old cathode ray tv you used to own, the GPS in your car, the mp3 player, your cell phone, the medicine in your cabinet, the surgical techniques used to save people's lives from disease or injury, I could go on and on.
Science works, creationism does NOTHING.

777davidelijah
Aug 10, 2014

+walkergarya Judeo-Christians do not have to feel they are the parasites of Science. Christians were scientists long before your stock came to existence. Middle Age as seen Christianity defending your own civilisation from Islam centuries before Illuminism and eventually promoted freedom from Middle Age monarchies. Your Naturalism has gone overboard and indirectly via a pervasive atheistic culture has created the condition for Europe to be abused by other sub-cultures of which your stock is become the facilitator.
The anti-Christian agenda has been spiritually and ethically weakening the West.
Nobody denies your right for scientific freedom, but your stock should learn not to overstep the legitimate borders.
Cell phones? Surgical techniques? If you do not like checking amongst the Christian scientists well mixed with others in a free society built by the Pilgrim and Funding Fathers… then give a look to some Isareli innovations.
Made in Israel ? The top 64 innovations developed in Israel | ISRAEL21c 


types10000
Aug 11, 2014+

+777davidelijah

"Judeo-Christians do not have to feel they are the parasites of Science."
- It's not so much that they are parasites as it is the fact that their bronze-age myths didnt contribute anything to it.

"Christians were scientists long before your stock came to existence"
- Absolutely, and their supernatural beliefs never once contribtued to their scientific research.
- Infact, they utilised a methodology that specifically excluded the supernatural such that their beliefs could not interfere with their research.

"Your Naturalism has gone overboard and indirectly via a"
- How exactly can not beleiving in magic (aka. the supernatural) 'go overboard'?

"The anti-Christian agenda has been spiritually and ethically weakening the West."
- Considering the former is imaginary and the latter was never really influenced by religion anyway i think we will be fine.

ie. Religious people are not more moral/ethical than non-religious people, infact statistically religious people are incarcerated for crimes at a disproportionately larger rate.

"Nobody denies your right for scientific freedom, but your stock should learn not to overstep the legitimate borders."
- LOL i believe the church said something similar to Galileo.

"Cell phones? Surgical techniques? If you do not like checking amongst the Christian scientists"

- The problem with your argument is that the fact they were christian is as inconsequential as whether they had a beard ie. bearded-scientists, because that attribute is superfluous to their scientific findings.

777davidelijah
Aug 11, 2014

+types10000 I find your reply disconnected from my statements. Let me put it short and clear!
Illuminism could not create a working democracy. Napoleon restored de facto the monarchy becoming the Emperor and called back the Pope to clean the social mess.
However I am not Catholic… but without the Christian (Catholic) kings I do not have any doubt you would today speak Arabic/Turkish (as you were graced twice) and recite the Book before talking science.
You would also still work with numerals and not with Newtonian calculus. Ethics would still be that of Patricians, Slavery and Plebeians, and of course of the traditional beheading without even the privilege of the Guillotine.
And now please do me a favour - I mean your stock - ... please continue in your stubbornness… and remember what I am telling you now: the time will come that an alternative and autocratic religion will require from you full obedience and submission.
You will miss the grace and the freedom of Judeo-Christianity but you will not find anymore. You and your stock will have no more than 76 hours to make a switch to this new edition of Caesar.
Your Science will roll back to the Ethics of the High Middle Age… and before going for a longer "scientifically" piss you'll be required the special permission of the new Roman Pontifical Caliph.
… And now please - all of you - let me be in peace in my best suitable Arcadia of a simple life. Please play the scientist in the meantime as the freedom to do so will not last for long. 

types10000
Aug 11, 2014

+777davidelijah


"Illuminism could not create a working democracy."
- I contested your claims regarding christianity. for being logically flawed. I'm not particularly concerned with the conspiracy theories you have regarding the Illuminati.

"the Christian (Catholic) kings...Newtonian calculus..."
- These are people with power who happened to be catholic. Their catholicism isnt anymore relevant than the fact they had beards.

"Ethics would still be that of Patricians, Slavery and Plebeians, and of course of the traditional beheading without even the privilege of the Guillotine."
- Slavery can exist perfectly happily within christian societies and did for the bulk of the time christianity has existed.
- Christianity (and religion in general) do not impact morality/ethics, every good value they advocate is independently accessible through logic and reasoning (no sky-daddy required).

"You will miss the grace and the freedom of Judeo-Christianity"

- Christianity is a religion and is ambivalent with regard to what political system exists: monarchy, democracy, dictatorship .etc.

"Your Science will roll back to the Ethics of the High Middle Age"
- no, the only difference between you and me, is that i dont have an illogical belief in magic (the supernatural).

"And now please - all of you - let me be in peace in my best suitable Arcadia of a simple life."
- Simple indeed, come back when you can provide evidence for your claims.


777davidelijah
Aug 11, 2014

I think we are going in circle here. You believe in magic much more than me. I know a culture with a strange believe: the old people believe that if you leave dirty shirts with soiled white collars overnight in a sealed and well chilled cellar… in the morning you'll find mice born overnight.

The evidences of ID are everywhere but you need the eyes to see them.
You believe that all things come by chance and you want universal submission to such a magic theory. You say all the evidences are there and are Science. I say your supposed evidences could be proved with a theory which non necessarily is EV. and still agrees with the principle of modification in the same species. You say EV has the monopoly of scientific truth in its pocket… I say that EV has the right to coexist but the monopoly is delusional as there are no proved scientifically facts.

I say that EV could not establish a safe alternative to Judeo-Christian Ethics, but you refer to Middle Age Christian theocracies to prove otherwise.
I said I acknowledge the immense sacrifice done by the Catholic Church to defend Europe… but the New World (I say) was essentially started and based upon the Evangelical faith of the Pilgrim Fathers… eventually merged in the civic prototype of Philadelphia (1682, William Penn) to serve as capital to Pennsylvania Colony… as also related to other similar experiences e.g. the Plymouth Colony and later to the Constitution of the New England. I say that the free world you enjoy and the Ethics promoted for Human Rights have their true foundations in these sort of records.
When Ev came into the picture, the world started to experience the collapse of morals and decent behaviour… to a degree that now the fabric of the Western world has been weakened and made ready for regression in a new middle age. Judeo-Christendom has been a pool of moral majority to preserve the Western freedom, progress and jurisprudence.

Of course illustrious representatives of Illuminism (FM) were well tolerated and coexistent in the Christian and successfully multicultural Philadelphia of Mr Penn… and that's why Mr Franklin & Co (Founding Fathers) could find the best scenario for a successful revolution, while avoiding the outcome of savagery and napoleonic enterprises.
Europe had to wait for the American to find a way out from the disease of destructive and deadly ideologies - which eventually were wounded but restored themselves in power again.

I say to you: "Good Luck"… but the smell of what is coming is not good at all.
I said what I can see coming… Maybe the International Socialists will give the Ev scientists a safe pass… Who knows… maybe Mr Obama will come out with some magic solution… maybe an initial syncretism as an aperitif to swallow the big pill later!

I kindly put and end to my conversation here.
Keep your monopoly: I do not give a dam anymore!

walkergarya
Aug 11, 2014

+777davidelijah The thing that you said in your above post that is the most silly to me is your objection to the Theory of Evolution because it has no value to morality.

The Theory of Gravity works to predict to orbit of the Earth around the Sun, the Moon around the Earth, the satellites around the Earth and Moon and Sun. It is known to be true because it has been tested and it works. It too has no value to morality.

Why is the Theory of Evolution invalid because it has no value for morality that has nothing to do with Evolution. The Germ Theory of Disease has nothing to do with philosophy. Atomic Theory has nothing to do with making soup, but that does NOT invalidate Atomic Theory. 

[david777]

777davidelijah
Aug 11, 2014
+walkergarya True! I did not say that EV theory is wrong because the poor ethical outcome but that EV had/has also a rather destructive and weakening effect on Ethics and Society.

Where Ethics and Society becomes ethically poor even freedom and human rights regress.
My human perception tells me that where Truth is - whatever Scientific of Spiritual - Ethics and Civil harmony produce real peace, mutual respect, genuine coexistence and balanced freedom and free speech.
All this is now at risk and the alternative supposed to be implemented and facilitated shows barbaric characters.
Thank you! If you do not mind… I prefer to wish Good Luck once more and end it here. 

walkergarya
Aug 11, 2014

+777davidelijah Sorry but I disagree. I see the assault on science and Atheism by the religious right in the US as the single greatest threat to human rights in the US today. There are states where there are laws against Atheists holding public office.
If I can be forbidden to hold office, then I do not have freedom of Religion or of speech.
Ethics are NOT dependent on spiritual belief. 

poseidon
Aug 18, 2014+

+777davidelijah
oh yeah you know jack shit about science. Actually you are wrong. The theory of gravity (general relativity) is not on the same level as evolution. Evolution has much more predictions that can be tested, it is the unifying theory of whole biology and it is a whole lot more developed. You said "scientifically speaking" and you gave the link to a book by some random guy. How scientifically illiterate can people get. Get this moron, when people "speak scientifically" they cite experiments, observations, theoretical models, computational models all published in scientific articles (and no national geographic is not a scientific journall. Nature, cell, genome research, systematic biology etc. are examples scientific journals).

Martyn Jones
Aug 22, 2014
+777davidelijah Put the dictionary down and stop the drugs!
ID is not a theory, evolution is. Evolution is more provable than gravity (or at least in how it works).
No way should both be taught in science classes - Why?
Well ID is backdoor creationism from one of 2 or 3 monotheistic religions - none of which have any evidence of their gods existing.
So if you demand the teaching of ID, you should also demand the teaching of Aboriginal Australian, Inca, Greek, Norse, Pagan, African tribal, etc. etc. etc creation myths (1000s+).
These are history lessons, not science - but each of these myths have exactly the same amount of evidence as each other. None.
Evolution has testable evidence.
Most of your text is a meaningless ramble. So I suspect you of being a mental case. Pull yourself and your brain together. Stop those drugs!!! 


Joseph Carrion
Aug 22, 2014+


+777davidelijah Kitzmiller v. Dover 2005 


pedrosura
Aug 29, 2014

Intelligent Design is not a theory. I could propose a theory that says that the God Igor has the job of designing every living organism in the Universe. This is why organisms are perfectly designed. I can offer no tests, no access to Igor and proclaim that my theory and evolution are both theories therefore both should be taught in schools. Theories are never proven. You can only design experiments and over time show that what the theory describes agrees with experiments. So, my Igor theory is just like ID: both a non theories. If parents want their kids to learn ID and can not accept evolution, I would suggest that you just take them to Church. It will have the same effect, the advantage, however, is that they won't be fooled into thinking that they are learning Science. There is a place for God in a classroom, it is called religion class.


Joseph Carrion
Aug 29, 2014+


+777davidelijah Sir, a "scientific theory" in science means that all of the thousands upon thousands of proven Evolutionary facts give credibility to the theory! The truth is a "theory" in the natural world has a totally different meaning then a "scientific theory" in the science department. Look up both definitions. 


pedrosura
Aug 29, 2014
If you are suggesting that you teach evolution in Science class and ID in religion class, I don't have a problem. If you are suggesting that you teach ID in Science class, I'll tell you that you should only teach SCIENTIFIC theories in Science class. There are too many important scientific theories to learn in Science class, there is no time to waste in theories that you well admit are non scientific.

Joseph Carrion
Aug 29, 2014

+777davidelijah Sir, read Kitzmiller v. Dover 2005 and you'll find that Intelligent Design is truly only pseudo-science! For instance, Intelligent Design is not even considered a scientific theory. In fact, as "walkergarya" stated: Intelligent Design is no more than creationism rebranded! Read the complete court case Kitzmiller v. Dover 200 before you respond.


pedrosura
Aug 30, 2014
A lot of people think erroneously that gravity is a much more better understood and proven theory than evolution and they think that because they understand neither one. Evolution is a much better proven and understood theory than gravity. We do not know how gravity works, what particle carries the force, why is it so weak, how is it related to the other forces.. In evolution we discovered the DNA molecule, we have a wealth of fossil evidence and there is little Scientific controversy if any. All the controversy in evolution is not scientific. It is all religious and political.


777davidelijah
Aug 30, 2014
+pedrosura

Science doesn't know fully what electricity is and fully implies either. My teacher was used to tell me that he could not answer all question because "We do not know what it is… but works and it occurs…"
The theoretical value of gravity can be practically checked by jumping from the Eiffel tower while for EV such a value is especially "theoretical".
ID is not necessarily creationism as it would also virtually adapt to EV as long the "Intelligentsia" (theoretically and practically) detected and observed in the organic world and especially in some "irreducible complexities" is agreed.

ID is nothing else that the "Experimental Observation" that an "Intelligence" is implied and necessary in the reality of the world.

ID doesn't believe therefore that the organic world is "stupid" and self-caused by chance, but it doesn't say either that YHWH or "god Igor" did it.

The concept of "creationism" is involved of course, but in the sense that somebody has at least designed what appeared intelligently put together.

Therefore the case of "Kitzmiller V. Dover could be somehow resolved as the "Federal District Court" did, as ID implies "somehow" a "form of creationism".

So what? What's the problem? The EV Scientists can't suffer the smell of a creator or a new generation of free demigods feels uncomfortable with the idea of somebody checking over their upgraded ethics?

My point in former posts has been that Judeo-Christianity reached to such a civil settlement of the new world that freedom and human right had been finally implemented in the judicial system and a civil constitution which inspired the entire Western Civilisation.

Yes, I believe that the French Revolution could't and did's achieve any genuine democracy and balanced freedom… In fact Illuminism pushed Europe to a new Napoleonic imperialism.

Scientific Research has enjoyed a couple of century of full freedom in the Western world due to the positive influence of Judeo-Christianity.

The new positivistic ideologies formed in such a time of civilisation has in time reached the point that Science adopted a new monopolistic attitude of Naturalist inspiration.

Religions have as a result been flattened on the same level of "Mythological Dignity" and affected the safety of Multiculturalism in such a way that those new indiscriminately welcome and adopted cultures in the West did not reciprocated freedom and human rights in the countries were originally they come from… and slowly started to harass J-Xtianity even in the West.

My point is that in Science every unbalanced philosophy or delusional monopoly will have social consequences and even deadly outcome.

"Science" (as conceived by the EV scientists) claims to be independent and objective, but when we scratch under the skin we find plenty of anti-Christian agenda.

I suggest that this type of Science has exposed the Western world to a weak spiritual character and poor identity… to a degree that now "certain" new culture - groomed and spoiled in the West in decades of politically and unreciprocated correct Multiculturalism - is claiming the right to establish its own theocracy - which means rolling back to the Middle Age autocracy of the type frozen in Vienne and Poitiers…

I am stunned that all these superior and ineffable scientific minds do not seem willing or capable to put the dots together.

Science is at risk of compromising its freedom due to the abuse and monopolistic interference of a re-shaped naturalistic and positivistic science acritically driven by Darwinism.

It has been suggested that I represent the right wing of Conservative agenda.

Yes, I am a conservative but I have been on the side of social-democracy until I noticed the abuse committed in EU and by certain presidential administration… and witnessed the way the petro$ and certain "Brotherhood" have been allowed to get so far and deeply in the fabric of the Western society and governments.

I noticed how the abuse of social-democracy has been driven by a mix of socialist and muslim agenda in the West… how "Mare Nostrum" - combined with the special advocacy of Pope Francis - in Italy has opened indiscriminately the doors of Europe.
The Left, New Age, Pacifism, Socialism, Evolutionism, EWcumenism, Syncretism, UN. EU and now U.S. have gone too far and confused Human Right and rescue of refugees (or economic migrants) with messing-up the Western Civilisation delivered by our fathers and defended throughout the Middle Age and delivered to an degree in the New World.
Science in the new shape of Positivism has a lot to do with the crisis developing daily under our own eyes.
Judeo-Christianity has become the common enemy to be eliminated, as it has become trendy to believe that conservative understanding of the Bible leads to "Capitalism" and "Injustice in the World". while in reality the agenda is that until Judeo-Christianity will be strong… no delusional, sick, barbaric and beast like autocracy will have the chance to exist and prosper.

"Sceince" is responsible for what is happening under our own eyes…
At the end of the day if all this "ISM" and "SLAM" wants to join together and this is what the People really want… then they can please themselves, as am not "…phobic" of anything… It only that I am sorry for all the disaster, killing, martyrdom and tyranny waiting around the corner… in the name of "ISM & SLAM".

… and You EV Scientists… are not innocent of all this!



. 


pedrosura
Aug 30, 2014
"Science" is responsible for what is hapening under our own eyes? As someone brought up with "christian" values I can tell you that most christians do not follow Jesus example I have to honestly say. Many Christians specially on the far right are selfish, racist, xenophobic, intolerant, sexist and homophobic. Do they follow Jesus model and example? No. BTW, other religions are not better. They all have their religious biases.
I don't care about EV. If someone comes along tomorrow with a better theory that matches the observable, testable World, I' will drop it in a second. It is not an agenda. It is just reason and rational thought. If you can not accept EV because of your pastor or your Bible, that is fine. Just keep it out of the Science class. It is clear that you do not care about Science anyway. Stay out of it. We live in a free country. We are all entitled to our views. But we need to at least agree on what Science is and is not. Is there a place for religious teaching in schools? I think there is. It is not just Science class.



pedrosura
Aug 30, 2014
BTW Science doesn't fully know anything. It's just approximations trying to model the World and get a little better understanding. It is Religion that claims to know things in an absolute sense. Whatever Science thinks it's right today will change in just 10 years. The path to understanding the Universe is a long road with no finish line. 


poseidon
Aug 30, 2014+

+777davidelijah
Try to keep the answers short. We will answer it. If I have to read something, I'd rather it be something useful.

777davidelijah
Aug 30, 2014
+poseidon
I believe in Evangelical simplicity but "Scientific Intelligentsia" made things complicated and dangerous.
If I must reply than I cannot leave hair in my stomach.
I confirm my accusation to Atheistic Evolutionism and Positivistic ideologies in general… that the Immune System of the Western World has been severely weekend because their pseud-sceintific + monopolistic insolence. Lack of humility, invasion of humanistic academic fields (like History, Philosophy, Theology, Sociology…) and disgracefully induced shift in Ethics… Jurisprudence... weakened the fabric of our culture and morals… the Western Civilisation.

The West is not fit to face the enemy that wants to conquer it by the inside-out.

All this has much to do with Science… do not tell me that scientists are not ethically responsible for the poison produced as a result of their ideologies and values.

As you can appreciate… it is hard for me to contain the disappointment and the sadness… due to what I can see coming as the logical and mechanical result of the gross mistakes committed by our academic and political institutions.

Western Intelligentsia proved to be blind and sick - poisoned by false ideologies of the XX century. 


poseidon
Aug 30, 2014+


+777davidelijah You are not actually talking about the theory here. And I don't have to prove scientific methodology and its validity to someone who has never step inside academia.

Mike Secorsky
Sep 10, 2014+

Scientifically speaking, there is no Scientific Theory of Intelligent Design. None. Scientific Theories are the best set of explanations of observed phenomena. Evolution is observed phenomena, the theory of evolution best explains that observation.

pedrosura
Sep 10, 2014+

+Mike Secorsky Well said. However, people that do not accept evolution don't know that theories are never proven. That is why they say," it's just a theory". All our understanding of the Universe from gravity, to evolution to quantum mechanics to dark matter to electromagnetism to dark energy is just a theory. The only thing that is not just a theory is Intelligent Design (It's just Creationism and more plainly Religion). Well, I'm not sure why I am throwing knowledge and facts into an unintelligent debate. Scientifically speaking evolution is not even a controversial theory. It is a well established and accepted theory. It's going to take an act of God to have something replace it (pun intended) The ID crowd had a chance before they discovered DNA. After that it was game over. Evolution is all over the DNA code. Too bad ID people., hate to break the bad news...


SyncopatedFin
Sep 26, 2014
+777davidelijah But your post proves that you don't understand what you're talking about. I'm not going to address the rest of your post at this time, but in science a theory (and please remember that in science a theory has a very different meaning than if you were talking to someone on the street) is actually considered a much better thing to have than simple facts.

Let's give a quick example -

A fact would be that there are earthquakes

A theory about tectonic plates would combine many facts, measurements and observations about our universe and would figure out a framework in which all of those things make sense.

A fact tells us what the universe is, a scientific theory tells us how.

777davidelijah
Sep 26, 2014

Evolution's Achilles' Heels (2014) - IMDb

Recently 15 PH.D scientists exposed the weaknesses in modern evolutionary theory.
"Evolution's Achille's Heels"
Evolution's Achilles' Heels (2014) - IMDb

Maybe I can't match the Misteries of the EV Theory but I do not believe all these PH.D objectors have gone suddenly stupid.

Any theory must remember that what essentially makes it great is not just the complexity and an appearent predictability level. The consistency of a theory must in time show or indicate that what predicts or rejects is existing or not existing for real…. and if it is not capable to do so it must humbly allow more space for other alternatives.

It is possible to create theories based on A Priori ideas assumed as facts… especially when to a certain degree the idea proves prolific.

Evolutionism seems so well settled as its inspiring Naturalism is capable to touch the human senses and pragmatic experience much better than any other school of thoughts… as it happens in many other situations in life.

Platonic approaches to reality are instead harder in intelligibility… because the philosopher first and then the scientist must be willing to see the reality behind the shades [in the Cave] of the tangible world.

That's why it is easier to play the champion of science for those based on Naturalism.

When the "Championship" reaches the "Monopoly"… then the derived "mechanical" damages become inevitable.

Amongst these various damages… the societal degenerations and vulnerability to dangerous cultures are the most serious.

The weakening of the Western Civilisation finds in these logical processes its prime causes. 

poseidon
Sep 26, 2014

+777davidelijah Scientific papers you moron. Not films. How Stupid and scientifically ignorant can people get?

poseidon
Sep 26, 2014

+777davidelijah
No I don't agree with 15 of your so called phds. If you have actually done phd or in the process of getting a phd, you know it doesnt mean anything. It's actually your work that matters. Everything else is just your opinion. So I say again. SCIENTIFIC PAPERS YOU MORON. NOT FILMS.
You get scientific responses, whe you do something scientifically i.e., you set up experiments, acquire results, process them and publish it. Nobody in the academia has the time to respond to FUCKING MOVIES.

777davidelijah
Sep 27, 2014

The movie is linked to a book. Your quick assessment and lack of curiosity tells me you are too busy with your experiment and publication. I am sure you are excellent in your field. However the balance of the scientific outcome might/should require the assessment of the entire interdisciplinary academic community. Yes, PHDs do not mean everything… but "Experimentalism" should make sure not to jump the fence.
The patience required in Academic Forums needs a quite spirit on top of a controlled tongue. 

poseidon
Sep 27, 2014

+777davidelijah
Okay. I'll tell this once more. People in academia don't care about books or movies. We are not curious about every stupid book or movie that comes along. Any idiot can write a book or make a movie. There are books and movies on why the earth is flat.


You need detail a theory, design experiments, make observations and process the outcomes for it to be scientific. Not all PhD's are created equal. The first thing we do when we look at scientist is his work. His publications and more importantly his citations, which is a measure of how important his work is.
SO SEND ME SCIENTIC PAPERS. WE DON'T CARE ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE.

777davidelijah
Sep 27, 2014

These people are PHDs.We are discussing about this video on Youtube and not about my research. The point is that the Academic World is divided about EV. You do not like it and your tongue shows it well. See the point?
EV is a debated theory not an experimental fact as you think.

poseidon
Sep 27, 2014

+777davidelijah
I don't care what degree they hold. IT IS ALL ABOUT THEIR WORK. There are people who have phds in my field who don't know half as much as i do about my work. It doesnt matter what your qualifications. That is jus the illusion of the poeople who don't know much about academy

I know this is kind of a difficult one for people ignorant about scientific methods to understand, but scientists settle their debates with scientific publications. I can tell exactly about the stuff scientists agree on in my field because it is in the literature. If it isn't, your word isn't worth anything. And there isn't a single piece of article in any of the reputed international journals that challenges the notion of evolution by natural selection.

SO I SAY AGAIN. GET ME A SCIENTIFIC PAPER

poseidon
Sep 27, 2014

777davidelijah
Sep 27, 2014
Your comment tells me you missed the all controversy generated by biochemist Michael Behe and biologist Jonathan Wells.
The controversy is primerily between Intel Design ed EV and not between religion and non religion.
Intelligent Design Network
EV should of course continue to be part of the academic curriculum but in a critical context.
In other words EV lost the "monopoly" and this is good for all. The damage to be repaired is especially in the West.


777davidelijah
Sep 27, 2014
The scientific work comes from your PHDs colleagues but you are too deaf and self-centred to see it.
Theoretically, ID is not even absolutely against EV as long the Intel Designer is in the background.
I do not believe is this the case… but the theoretical possibility of a theistic EV is still there.
Anyway - I think I have been for too long in this thread. 


Show less


poseidon
Sep 27, 2014+777davidelijah
You idiot. Scientific work comes from scientific literature. NOT FILMS. Not even if Einstein does it. What he did scientifically is science, what he did otherwise is just his opinion and while his opinions were interesting, that isn't science. How ignorant can people get about science and its methodology?


777davidelijah
Sep 27, 2014e respond appropriately to your nasty incivility and rudeness! I am even surprised how an anthropomorphic masterpiece of your stock can be even tolerated in the Academic world. Is this the way you speak and deal with your colleagues when they do not agree with your supreme wisdom?
I might be wrong as all the ID scholars and supporters could be… but you do not have any right to address me in such a way, as my view was not born like a cabbage overnight. People much more prestigious than you and your "Most Equal PHDs" believed in ID and Sir Newton was only one of them. You must be really blind or rationally handicapped if you do not see the wonder of the intelligent architectures of the biological reality as a plenty motivation to theorise an intelligent cause in the Universe.
How low and blind human arrogance can get when in the pride of knowledge and science it cannot anymore see the obvious so intelligibly clear to the simple bumpkin.
Likely Darwin himself would review his position if he was alive and aware of all the microbiological modern knowledge.
Of course ID doesn't have all the paper accumulated by EV, but the vision and the relevant reasons are still there and relevant - give some time and you'll have more paperwork.
He was the one who introduced the "Irriducibility" discriminant in biology… not me or any other common yokel.
I advice to end it here and cure your tongue. 

Nikhil Thilakan
Sep 27, 2014

+777davidelijah let me respond to that drivel that you call a response. My colleges understand the scientific method. They might have their views but they don't push it as science. Now while it is okay not know about stuff, it drives me up the wall when people are ignorant on purpose. You don't know what those "PhDs" have done in their career. You don't even know anything about any of their work. You are just spouting ignorance based on a fucking film even though you've been repeatedly told that films and book like that hold no value in the academic area. That is the mark of a true moron.

You wanna know about other ideas that newton didn't believe in? Quantum mechanics, lasers, atoms, wave particle duality of light, DNA. Because all these ideas, along with evolution by natural selection was proposed after HE WAS DEAD. Bloody hell. Never underestimate the stupidity of people

777davidelijah
Sep 27, 2014
You need a hot foot-bath! You live in the delusion that EV is proved experimental science while it is not. IT IS A THEORY! Weak Up!
Without Newton and all the Judeo-Christian thinkers… Science wold be still at the stage of Classic Philosophy.
Christianity and Technological Advance - The Astonishing Connection

Even if EV was an experiment truth… this would not invalidate the evidence and the theoretical chance of theism.
ID scholars do not need to be necessarily alternative to EV, but they get ridiculed anyway and demoted.
I do not want to continue this discussion… but I wonder how an experimentalist scientist can witness a bacteria flagella and motor and still think that ID people are idiots.
I do not really figure out how you might really think that rotors turbo, propellers and spark plugs can be born by chance… in a primordial soup… I'll give a chance as a theoretical correctness… but I'll confidentially tell you that I intimately consider this chance supremely idiotic.

Nikhil Thilakan
Sep 27, 2014

You need a head exam. You are under the impression that you know anything about science. You fucking idiot, in science, theory means explanation. Not a guess. We know more about evolution than we know about gravity. But you wouldn't know that because you wouldn't be able to understand a scientific paper, if your life depended on it.

Without the Greeks, Indians and Babylonians, you will still be doing maths with your fingers.

Who said anything about a god? The catholic church is not an atheistic organisation. They accept evolution.

777davidelijah
Sep 27, 2014theistic EV has corrupted the Western Civilisation and needs a good check! It exposed all of us to dangerous cultures by creating a spiritual and ethical vacuum.
If we let EV continue to teach our children without critical discussions… the days of the final collapse of the West is around the corner.
If I had the political power to restrain EV… I would immediately strip its scientific monopoly.
The Catholic Church and other churches are prone to Ev but it doesn't mean they accepted it in its atheistic version.
Actually the crisis of J-Xnity is part of the damage… as many Christians are confused and unable to address the serious problems of our generation, after centuries of ideological poison.
What I reject is EV by chance without an intelligent cause, but I am prone to reject it all together as it doesn't make sense and creates monsters and collapse of advanced and balanced civilisations.
Now go in peace and talk to your intelligent colleagues and to all those who do not need any head exam.
I have got enough of your arrogance and pride…
You could be fantastic technicians of Science, but in my understanding a scientist is much more as he is called to make sense of his investigations and discovering in the balance of the meaning of human existence.

I'll not respond to further replies.

poseidon
Sep 27, 2014
+777davidelijah
Unscientific nonsense. Wasn't expecting much anyway.

Your understanding of pretty much everything is stupid. So don't worry if you don't understand science and evolution by natural selection

777davidelijah
Sep 27, 2014
You do not understand the main issues in Philosophy. Philosophy delivered the scientific criteria and categories… but you are a technician and I can understand you do not understand. You are a "Sperimentalist"!
I believe you are technically evolved and of course you know a lot in spite you do not know the difference between erudition and culture - which is the price we all pay and we will further pay in our sick society.

PS
Still interested in your experimental assessment of the bacterial flagella + motor.
Tell me if EV built the rotor first and how long before the propeller. 


poseidon
Sep 27, 2014

+777davidelijah Well for you to learn something, you have to go back to primary school. Start with what science is.

777davidelijah
Sep 27, 2014

+poseidon Newton's Laws are widely known by now but then his faith in a reasonable god was the way to get to them. Some call HIM "The Omnipotent Architect of the Universe"…
(the I-Designer)
When you read the Newton's Eschatology you'll possibly appreciate how Newtonian Judeo-Christian Logic delivered the calculus to reach the stars and study the bacteria. Newton's Maths has a spiritual-logical background you are not presently fit to understand even if you can use the calculus.
*Advertisement
Op-Ed: Sir Isaac Newton?s Theology and Eschatology
I wish you to study Newton more deeply… and you'll see how beneficial will also be for your charitable manners.
Sir Isaac Newton was really a noble model as a Judeo-Christian English Gentleman.
For sure he would have dealt with you in a better way than I did - and not just because I am not an "Anglo-Saxon". For that I should apologise… but still I am not willing to do so.

poseidon
Sep 27, 2014
+777davidelijah
Then again, most of them are wrong or don't give you the complete picture. His idea about fluids, gravitation etc are wrong. You wouldn't have the number system today if it weren't for the hindus

That's the thing about science. Nobody is infallible. We don't have prophets. Everybody is fair game.

And please don't tell me you understand Newton's law unless you can resonably derive a mathematical model. Shut up.

777davidelijah
Sep 27, 2014
Again: you can say "Shut Up" to your donkey… and if you do not have one… to yourself.

I did not say the Indus or the Babylonians were stupid. It is a fact that Science in a modern sense is born in the Judeo-Christian environment of the Western Civilisation.
The Greek-Roman mediated the Babylonian -Middle East and Egyptian knowledge preparing the way with especially Aristoteles and Plato, but it is with European/Florentine Renaissance that the environment for modern Science is ready.
You can put History of Science upside-down like a sock… but you'll not escape the fact that Judeo-Christian Logic has produced modern science and the free Western Civilisation by finding the way to consistently reform and drive the old continental theocracies out of despotism and autocracy to a New World, where Illuminism did not succeed. 

Nikhil Thilakan
Sep 27, 2014
I don't have a donkey. I have a stupid I'm talking to.

Europeans has no input pretty much any field is mathematics and science until the middle ages. They would have nothing to work on if the Greeks, the Indians and the Babylonians hadn't already established mathematics. Then the Europeans took over. Now no religion can claim any authority in science. People from all religions and non religions contribute to it. 
poseidon
Sep 27, 2014777davidelijah
You started this comment thread by saying "scientifically speaking". But you have said nothing in terms of science (your stupid films don't count and you are too ignorant to look for a scientific paper). You ran away from it when it got too hard for you so I can't expect much.

777davidelijah
Sep 27, 2014
The film and the related paper you talk about was just something I signalled. Because this documentary is new I simply suggested it was part of the debate. You instead focused on it and pumped it up like if it was the only thing the ID could produce… and kept repeating over and over again. I believe I/we have said enough to make our point… It is time for me to really "shut-up" as more will give ground to extra childish toy-grabbing games.
Yes… I understand the EV Community feels frustrated and often is prone to kick back as the "Toy" is at risk. Got the point! For me enough! 

777davidelijah
Sep 27, 2014
+Nikhil Thilakan
You went over the red line! I was not even talking to you! You are presently unfit for Science as you are unfit for civility.
My advice to you is: lock yourself in your room for a week and check if your science has made you a better man of those you offend and despise.
Only when your "Civitas" can match mine come back to me! 

[david777]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Jerusalem

Spero che siano gli ultimi posts di questa aspra discussione youtube.
Se il relativo video dovesse ripartire, dovrebbe essere su questo link.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ox8zY-YaZFo


L'ipotesi di uno scontro nei termini PIKE-MAZZINI - vedi i precedenti post - non sembra più impossibile od improbabile.
Il mondo occidentale come lo ricordano le generazioni fino alla mia sembra seriamente in crisi con esiti molto preoccupanti.
I conflitti sono su troppi fronti a partire da quello interno. L'MD CODE ha avviato la discussione di tale crisi globale ed ha provato a risolverla nell'unico modo teoricamente possibile dal punto di vista giudeocristiano. Vedo nel breve-medio termine la possibilità di reagire contrattaccare su tutti i fronti aperti - ma alla fine la soluzione apocalittica sarà inevitabile… Ed è a questa soluzione e speranza che approda l'MD CODE, indicando possibile tempi, modi e strategie.
Per questo l'Apocalittica Giudeocristiana e biblica in particolare diventa contesto del libro del Profeta Daniele e delle previsioni apocalittiche in esso contenute. Il messaggio è semplice: prepararsi ad uno scontro di proporzioni apocalittiche con esiti umanamente incredibili.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0EwSC9X4WXQ

L'intelligentsia esoterica degli Illuminati ipotizzava una leadership eticamente responsabile in grado di gestire la conoscenza eticamente, invece ha dimostrato quel che il Cristianesimo ha sempre sostenuto: la "NUOVA NASCITA" non si attua e realizza coi rituali, bensì soltanto attraverso la redenzione nell'opera di Cristo sulla Croce. La Nuova Nascita del Sapiente Esoterico deve fare i conti con la propria natura umana, la cui condizione è la causa della condizione precaria e disperata del mondo. Si era già capito comunque che l'ottimismo degli Illuminati aveva già fallito con la violenta e pagana Rivoluzione Francese. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEq_lAx3ssE

Ecco l'Ottimismo Esoterico.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7AGKfbCKDE



oseidon
Sep 27, 2014
+777davidelijah
Like every idiot who ran away from science because he is too stupid for it.

777davidelijah
Sep 27, 2014
+poseidon The film and the related paper you talk about was just something I signalled. Because this documentary is new I simply suggested it was part of the debate. You instead focused on it and pumped it up like if it was the only thing the ID could produce… and kept repeating over and over again. I believe I/we have said enough to make our point… It is time for me to really "shut-up" as more will give ground to extra childish toy-grabbing games.
Yes… I understand the EV Community feels frustrated and often is prone to kick back as the "Toy" is at risk. Got the point! For me enough! 

poseidon
Sep 27, 2014
+777davidelijah
There was no "related paper" you moron. You kept going on and on about that and your 15 "phds". ID hasn't produced anything scientific. There is nothing in the entire international scientific literature that supports ID. You would know this if you weren't too stupid to read and understand a scientific papaer

777davidelijah
Sep 27, 2014
There is a book for sale related to this movie.
The 15 PHDs mentioned are not a capital sin.
They show that the Academic world is divided and this is for a reason. I am not impressed by your primitive manners. The beginning of Science is humanity. Without it… science is a waste of time. To make the point with you I had to adapt my manners to yours…

777davidelijah
Sep 27, 2014
+poseidon
There is a book for sale related to this movie.
The 15 PHDs mentioned are not a capital sin.
They show that the Academic world is divided and this is for a reason. I am not impressed by your primitive manners. The beginning of Science is humanity. Without it… science is a waste of time. To make the point with you I had to adapt my manners to yours…

poseidon
Sep 27, 2014
+777davidelijah
Again. You scientific illiterate moron, academia doesn't care about films or the books or your 15 "PhDs". Can you name a single scientifc work these "PhDs" have done? I didn't think so because 1. they have done any 2. you are too ignorant to look it up even if they did.

Science is a methodology that does it's best to take human bias out of it. You wouldn't have had quantum mechanics and as a result, this computer to spout this nonsense on if it weren't for this methodology. It might've started as philosophy but now we understand human common sense has its limits and we are evolved to make sense of medium energies and when you go into the low and high energy range, our common sense is the last thing you should be putting your cards on. Thus we left the ideas of philophy back long ago. But people are still fed that by teachers because you shouldn't feel so bad about yourself just because you are too stupid to learn science.

777davidelijah
Sep 27, 2014
You are angry not because any paperwork missing of provided… but because the list of scientists critical of EV is increasing.

You sound like a NAZI who believes to be superior in his IQ. The way you talk I am not impressed at all. I suspect it is you who needs a medical check for anger management.

poseidon
Sep 28, 2014
+777davidelijah
Do you have any statistics to back that claim up. Like every single one of your claim you moron. Thereis not a single article in the entire scientific literature that supports ID. If you weren't too stupid to read it, you could check that yourself.

More drivel who ran away from science because he is way too stupid

777davidelijah
Sep 28, 2014
Let's finish with this ridiculous expectation that I have to provide back-ups. I am not a scientist… but the "Public Opinion"… the entity - amongst billions of people - who is called to form a responsible opinion of what the scientists do and think.
I am entitled to form an impression and a responsible opinion of what people like you say and the way they say it. I am qualified to tell you that you are poorly civilised in spite you could do research.
I just make sense of what EV says and what ID says. I also take notice that many scholars are increasingly objecting to EV. I am not running away from science but just becoming critical of EV and aware of the damage atheistic EV produced to society.
I asked you to provide your experimental assessment of the bacterial flagella and motor… but you missed to deal with only thing you allege to be an expert.
Full stop. 

poseidon
Sep 28, 2014777davidelijah
If you are not a scientist, stop arguing about stuff you don't understand. It is okay to not know about stuff. I don't know about a lot of stuff. I don't know much about shakespeare for example. But I don't go arguing about stuff I that I don't know about. I trust the experts to do that job or if I am going to argue about it, I make sure that I know what I am talking about. If I can't, I am making a fool of myself That is the first thing you learn when you step in academia.

Liu. R, Ochman, H "Stepwise formation of the bacterial flagellar system" Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2007

Blocker, Ariel, Kaoru Komoriya, and Shin-Ichi Aizawa. 2003. Type III secretion systems and bacterial flagella: Insights into their function from structural similarities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 100(6): 3027-3030.

Kuwajima, G. 1988. Construction of a minimum-size functional flagellin of Escherichia coli. Journal of Bacteriology 170: 3305-3309.

Cavalier-Smith, T. 1987. The origin of eukaryote and archaebacterial cells. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 503: 17-54.

777davidelijah
Sep 28, 2014
I asked for your evaluation and not bibliography.

People who studied at the High School science, maths and physics are not scientists but can have a sufficiently qualified IQ and knowledge to make sense of what the specialised scientists do and think.
I repeated several times that I am in Humanities and not Science. I even said that EV invaded my field of humanities by imposing a cultural monopoly even on History, Sociology, Psychology, Philosophy... and Theology.
EV is the invader and the "KNOW-IT-ALL"…

Why should I trust and believe the evaluation of EV scientists when they do not stop just at the observation but allege to have the data to decide the anthropologic origin of mankind and the first cause of organic life.

This is invasion… as scientists do not have the skill and the data to make such statements.

Scientists are divided when it comes to make sense of the findings and the observations… and it is understandable they are so.

Scientists are not safe "Ontologists"… and that's why Humanities, Philosophy, Theology, etc are still relevant.

However ID are part of your scientific stock and involved in the same research you do.
You do not like them and get angry because your own stock is increasingly in doubt.

These scientists have witnessed that EV has showed discrepancies and inconsistencies.
These scholars have stated that the evidence of intentional ID in organic life is serious and needs to be addressed.

I listen to all these witnesses and have the right to form a responsible opinion after checking at least the cream of both sides.

For what I listen and understand… the ID is a sufficient proposal to be taken in consideration. Darwin started with an idea… which in ti;e became a formed and developed theory. ID is doing the same.

Data and research are in common of course, but the balance atheistic EV come to does't make much sense to me. You do not get Ferrari Turbo-Flagella from primordial soups.

poseidon
Sep 28, 2014
+777davidelijah
Read it moron. You are ignorant and I don't intend you to teach biochemistry in a youtube form. The idea that a bacterial flagellum is irreducibly complex is wrong. It is detailed in those papers. That is what real scientists do. That is a real source too. NOT FUCKING MOVIES.

People with high school education of science, know jack shit to make any arguments on established ideas. Even People with undergraduate education know jack shit with minor exceptions. It's when you get to your post graduate thesis that you start doing enough to mean anything. The rest is just basic qualifications to meet the demands of the employers.

ID is not science. It is not featured in any of the scientific publications. Of course in an ideal world, every idea can be considerd but the proposal must be scientific. ID is not.

Now you scientifically ignorant moron. Find me a single paper in any of the respected international journals that support ID. I'm sorry, you are too stupid to read, mu bad.

777davidelijah
Sep 28, 2014What is a Scientific Theory? | Definition of Theory

Refresh the memory of your definitions… Masterpiece of Arrogance! Stop suggesting that only the Sancta Sanctorum of the EV Scholars can understand the "Mysteries" (the definition) of a Scientific Theory.
Instead of flooding me with swearing… you should facilitate YOUTUBE discussions like this one by refreshing the definitions. This is YOUTUBE and not the "Normale" of Pisa!
We do not need your Technical Priesthood to tell the world your biased definition of theory in order to deny the right of other uncomfortable scientists to academically exist.
EV started too with an intuition/idea and kept collecting "evidences" in time.
ID is doing the same and is getting formed based on the "intuition" - I would say the "idiot-proof evidence" - that a clear D is reminding to a Foundational Intelligence not explained by chance.
You cannot show-off your degree and tell everybody to shut-up because we have to submit to the "clergy-specialist".
Your EV theory has not become "LAW" yet and the "Method" is still in common with the ID. Is the "Explanation" (the "Theory") under dispute and as such and until it has not become "LAW" exists to rights to say EV is an hypothetical explanation and as such only entitled to co-existing in Science.
EV cannot be dismissed of course but it cannot have the monopoly in Science.
The ID "theory" has the right to grow in time and by now exist already a body of "Explanations" - that's why this video took place.
ID "Theory" can be falsified… just prove the "Design" is by chance… maybe you can produce yourself a bacteria by facilitating its ingredients in a chimical soup... and get the Nobel. If (in my understanding) a bacterial flagella motor in laboratory is produced from scratch… then EV will get easily to the status of "LAW" - but it should be without the provision of intelligent codes or controlled by chemical synthesised genomes.

Thanks for the list of research about the Bacterial Flagella Motor - I wanted your fresh opinion but thanks I'll check further the matter.
The explanation that the flagella motor formed by itself doesn't make any sense to me.
I will also check if the principle of "Irriducibility" is really non applicable to the case - it doesn't convince me just by the smell of it!

gigi malva
Yesterday 102 PM
SERIOUSELY? Are you comparing scientifically proven theorem, with a suggestion of "non-demonstrable" matters in the essence of a God? Why your God and not mine? I can say your one is a fake while mine is the real existing God, as the same you can, So?

777davidelijah
12:18 AM
Not scientifically proven! A theory is not "Scientific Law" until proven and not just established by conventional majority.
ID shares - in my understanding - the same EV methodology, but it indicates that what EV believes to be coincidental has instead an Intelligent Design - which in my view is an idiot proof evidence!

God comes into the pictures as logical implication of Theism. Nothing to do if "mine" or "your" is fake or true!
The way to get to "my" God is not via "Laboratory" - other neglected disciplines have much to say about God and how to get to him. History and theology are in my opinion the best tools to get to God.


poseidon
12:22 AM
+777davidelijah Evolution by natural selection is the most tested theory in science as it has to account for everything in biology. No other idea comes close to that.

I'VE DESCRIBED YOUR STUPIDITY IN YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF A LAW AND A THEORY FROM THE VERY WEBSITE YOU SOURCED AND YOU HAVE DELETED COMMENT. WHICH IS WHAT IDIOTS LIKE YOU DO WHEN YOU HAVE NOTHING ELSE TO SAY.

poseidon
12:24 AM
+777davidelijah
from the same website your provided you insufferable moron.

"While a scientific theory can become a scientific law, it does not happen often and each process has a revered and separate purpose as part of the scientific method. A common misconception is that a theory becomes a law after a certain amount of data has accumulated. That is not the case."

777davidelijah
126 AM

Once proved, a theory doesn't need more amount of data. EV might have a lot of data but is not proved. This is a fact!
I did not delete anything!
You might be a scientist and of course I respect your eminent IQ. The problem is your low civility and your overall unsuitability to academic manners. You could be an Einstein but for sure you cannot be a teacher.

ID scientists use your own scientific method.

I already said I am not a scientist but it doesn't mean I cannot form my opinion or impressions.
If there was one, surely you do not appear qualified to be a noble sample of the Scientific Priesthood.
Knowledge without charity and ethics is a disaster of bestiality.
I was anyway replying to gigi malva… and here we are you jump in once more to reiterate your dose of "moronic" incivility.
Here is night - my last thoughts will be about you and how suitable would be an academic selection for future scientists not just based on IQ level and corn flakes in the morning.
Can you picture yourself getting a Nobel? I don't!


gigi malva
1:45 AM
Evolutionism is proved by things like: we are taller than our grand-parents; we are smarter then our grand-parents; we live longher then our parents; we look like our parents ... but we are different; fossisl and vestigal anatomic parts; the progression of a colony of bacteria; the capability of viruses to become stronger and stronger generation after generation; the anatomic parts we share with other living beings; common DNA between us and a lot of other animals ... need more? Oh, yhea ... probably the most important thing: it has been proved that chemicals that there were in the earth billions of year ago if stimulated with electicity, generate .... amminoacids! Tha base of live.

poseidon
14 AM
+777davidelijah
Again I pose the question.

How scientifically illiterate can you get? There is no point where scientists go "oh well, now that theory is proved, we don't need any more data". WRONG. Every theory has to explain experimental results. That is how we know NEWTON'S LAWS OF GRAVITATION is WRONG. It doesn't account for experimental data. And as such evolution is the most tested idea in science. There are tens of thousands of experiments going on every day. There is not a single result that challenges the core idea of evolution.

777davidelijah
92 AM
You twist my words. Enough data to be "LAW"… I did not mean research or data are finished there. I got to the point that "Law" here has nothing to do with the Law of the Pope. I am also aware that the "Experimental Phenomenon" doesn't finish with the first level of "LAW" an the matter could be revised at later stage.
… This argument is then valid for even the most established theory. 

poseidon
10:20 AM
+777davidelijah

Let's again start with. How scientifically ignorant can you get?

I didn't twist your words. You completely lack the understanding of the scientific method and too stupid to admit it.

I'll give you an example of a law. Newton's second law F=ma. Example of a theory. Atomic theory. Laws are something that can be written down in a sentence or an equation. No matter how much the atomic theory is, as you stupidly put it, "proved" it will never become a law. Law is a description, while theory is an explanation of a phenomena.

777davidelijah
104 AM
+gigi malva I agree the amazing similarities between creatures and especially mammals do suggest a common ancestor based upon the evolutionist idea, but this level of the "perceivable phenomenon" could be deceptive, as the "modular" is also evident at every level of biology. I am not an expert of course and therefore I do not speak with the authority of a "Poseidonian Papacy"… but I am aware that modular structure in common - e.g. - with bacteria have been detected in the micro-levels of life.

The amazing similarities between monkey and humans could hide a similar modular design.
We can also see how common is in nature the vast list of similarities and the genetic functioning, but this undebatable arguments could also be used by the ID scientists.
What I would not adventure in objecting is that the way evolutionism has practically "settled" the various disciplines derived from Biology… it works indeed… and when we ("THEY" - the Poiseidonian Priests) apply the principles of "Phylogenesis" and "Ontogenesis" it would be unwise to object and find other ways.

… But this "settlement" doesn't mean that the modular doesn't hide a deeper reality of an ID at the foundation of Life.

Following this reasoning… I can also see the chance that ID and Ev are not necessarily exclusively alternative to each other, due to the theoretical possibility that the same "Modular Designer" could have used the same fundational structures and genetic organisation to spark a general-ordinary evolution and possible directly intervened to produce in "Laboratory" entities based on the same pre-existing modules.

If God or Gods… or heloim or even superior ET civilisation could have done this… still the ID and EV could be consistent with each other… but still the evidence of ID structures and modules speaks by itself.

ID is not specifically the exclusive representative of YHWH as the Designer.

The evidences of EV could also be explained in the way of Mendel - considered the father of genetics.

The Genesis of the Bible indicates the possibility of an "ordinary evolution" sparked by a base or precondition in the "water [and the] earth produce..." - Genesis 1:21-24

Interestingly the water "brings forth" also the fowls as the earth produces living creatures of all other type… but "after his kind".

In the case of Adam the intervention of God appears instead direct… but the Bible itself leaves open the chance that other humanoids had been produced in the general production.

"Production of the same kind" indicates "specific ancestral pools" and therefore the compatible EV possibly implied seems to me more compatible with the Mendel's idea.

You'll not find many "creationists" so much inclined to get theoretically so far,but I do not see why not of this Biblical exegesis.

ID is not only the possibility of "Creationism" but also theoretical coexistent with EV and Mendel.

Of course I can speak freely because I am not locked by any academic or church institution… and therefore nobody can "give me the sack" or disqualify, demote or discredit me in any way.

In "Poiseidonian" Language I would say that "Moronite Opinionists" can afford the luxury of weird and uncomfortable "crazy" ideas.

I am free to think and engage in evaluating everybody's ideas without fear of excommunications by ancient and new priests.

[david777]

… L'attuale amministrazione americana non ha perso tempo! E' palese che l'amicizia con la Russia promossa dal Cavaliere non era benvenuta…
Ragioni strategiche, geopolitiche, interessi macroeconomici, politica energetica - banche centrali, poteri occulti e sistema finanziario inclusi - e direi pressioni da parte di certi potentati ideologico-religiosi ed alleati dell'America nel Golfo - non Israele - … hanno provocato la frattura con Mosca e l'esasperazione del radicalismo islamico contro l'Europa ed il Giudeocristianesimo.

La risposta dell'Europa dovrebbe essere quella di riorganizzare l'alleanza della Cristianità in Asia, Medio Oriente ed Occidente per promuovere una classe politica in grado di rispondere alla nuova dottrina presidenziale americana.
In America il conservatorismo Giudeocristiano deve riorganizzarsi ai livelli necessari per far fronte agli attacchi strategici in atto ormai da anni...
Putin è nell'attuale stato di cose proprio il cardine di questa alleanza e non il nemico dell'Europa e dell'Occidente.

Tale risposta europea dovrebbe essere condivisa tra le varie parti politiche e non esclusivo interesse della destra moderata.

Purtroppo a SX sono in pochi a poter condividere una strategia "bipartisan" in difesa dell"Europa e della Sua più autentica e vitale identità.
Gli U.S.A so sono avventurati per una brutta strada e purtroppo i poteri che ne dirigono la stragi a dietro le quinti hanno chiaramente indicato che il Giudeocristianesimo è un ostacolo sulla loro strada, e che la Russia è un potenziale alleato dell'Europa da isolare. Al contrario è vitale che la Russia e l'Europa si uniscano sulla base della stessa tradizione e civiltà.


Impero bizantino - Wikipedia

L'Europa ha già pagato caro il prezzo della divisione tra Roma e Bisanzio con le tragiche conseguenze per il tardivo soccorso e soluzione dei conflitti.
In questo nuovo quadro strategico, l'Islam rischia di essere strumento da utilizzare a piacimento e poi da liquidare anch'esso a servizi compiuto.
L'impoverimento dell'identità spirituale dell'Europa è pure obiettivo strategico per rendere l'Europa vulnerabile ai nuovi obiettivi geopolitici di un nemico che si è purtroppo consolidato all'interno del tessuto occidentale.
L'Europa deve sapere che senza il cemento unificante del Giudeocristianesimo il suo destino sarà miserabile ed umiliante.

Ecco dunque che si spiegherebbe benissimo il mistero di stati radicali spuntati come broccoli durante il week-end in Medio oriente.

Sono sempre stato critico nei confronti di Berlusconi - ed infatti sarei tuttora scettico… - ma in politica estera sta dimostrando più fiuto di chi governa l'Europa.
Mi piacerebbe conoscere l'opinione di Marine Le Pen sulla visione strategica di Berlusconi - io direi di amicizia - con Putin e la Russia.
Penso che l'Europa debba rivolgersi alla destra moderata per uscire da questa situazione di disastro strategico e geopolitico.
Mi sorprendo che i leaders EU non abbiano fiutato il bruciato nella fretta di Mr Obama nel voler attaccare Putin.

Temo che gli USA avranno due anni difficili in attesa delle prossime presidenziali - e spero che nel frattempo la libertà di eleggere il nuovo presidente non verrà ostacolata con attacchi mirati alla distruzione della vita democratica...

Forse l'Intelligentsia Europea si sta svegliando dal sonno mortale del XX secolo.
Speriamo che a SX il risveglio non arrivi in ritardo.
Una volta partito il Cristianesimo dall'Europa stiamo pur certi che non vi ritornerà più se non nel Millennio - dopo il gran disastro della Grande Tribolazione prevista dalle Sacre Scritture. Sono "Premillenarista"? Certamente - come per l'MD CODE - e le vicende ne confermano l'attendibilità.
Ricordo che nel 1984 qualcuno - conoscendo la dottrina dei Plymouth & Messianic Brethren - sorrideva alla mia posizione circa la ricostruzione del Tempio Ebraico in tempo per la Grande Tribolazione ed il ritorno di Cristo all'inizio del Millennio. Ancora oggi la questione - unitamente alla dottrina del "Rapimento" - è oggetto di ironia e sarcasmo, oppure formale e "riformata" distanza.
Rapture Doctrine invented by John Darby in 1830 AD
HOW DID WE GET THE IDEA OF THE PRE-TRIB RAPTURE, By Sandy Fiedler

Gian Micalessin - da "Il Giornale"
Caro direttore, ecco perché vado in Siria - IlGiornale.it


"… per quasi tre anni in Italia e in Europa molti hanno interpretato la genesi di quel mostro come un anelito di libertà e democrazia. Ottenebrati da questa svista fatale siamo riusciti a dimenticare le nostre radici, a scordare che qui, sulla strada di Damasco, è iniziata la tradizione cristiana. Da quella tradizione, dalla simbiosi di fede e ragione, dalla capacità d'interpretare il mondo non attraverso i dettami di un libro, ma attraverso la compassione e la comprensione dell'altro sono nati il pensiero liberale, gli Stati nazionali europei e il rispetto per i diritti umani.
Eppure invece di batterci per i cristiani del Medio Oriente e per la nostra tradizione abbiamo preferito schierarci al fianco di chi uccide il prossimo nel nome di Dio. Per tre lunghi anni abbiamo cullato il mostro scambiando il fanatismo per democrazia e libertà. Ora il mostro è tra di noi e il risultato sotto gli occhi di tutti."

[Eric Draven]

in pratica cosa sarebbe questo Califfato creato dall'IS

[david777]

in pratica cosa sarebbe questo Califfato creato dall'IS

Hi Eric - con ritardo provo a risponderti, e con brevità.
Il Califfato non è il ritorno al mondo aulico, esotico e magico delle Mille ed Una Notte e del sogno dorato di Al-Andalus.
Anzi, è meglio dire che questo modo magico, poetico ed immobile della notte dei tempi prende gradualmente forma in seno al Califfato ma ne rappresenta la sua componente meno ortodossa ed elitaria. In questo sogno arabo anch'io mi ci sono immerso nella giovinezza, ma la realtà era che persino Harun Al Rashid Harun al-Rashid - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



in tutta la sua splendida illuminata sapienza rappresentava un mondo ostile alla Grazia ed alla Libertà che il Mondo Occidentale stava per partorire - non senza persecuzioni e grandi sofferenze - in uscita dal Medioevo e poi dagli eccessi e dagli abusi delle monarchie e delle teocrazie europee.




Il Califfato vuole riportarci indietro nel tempo ed alla logica che una volta era la "nostra" nel Medioevo: ossia quella dell'autarchia religiosa vestita dei panni dell'ortodossia teocratica - però nella versione islamica, e dunque non più governata dalle Leggi Vaticane, bensì regolata dalla Sharia sotto il vigile controllo del Califfo. In altre parole il Califfato sarebbe l'equivalente del Papato, unitamente a tutto quel programma di governo e disciplina, di cui l'Inquisizione si presenta soltanto quale pallido esempio per darci un'idea di quanto miserabile la vita dei cristiani, delle minoranze degli uomini miseri diventerebbe nel caso della sopravvivenza a quella transizione che ormai si reclama con voce sempre più insistenza e specialmente nel "Levante".

La sostanza del califfato non è la Grazia del Vangelo e neppure la Reciprocità del Diritto e della Libertà sancite nelle costrizioni civili dell'Occidente. La sostanza è un'altra: garantire l'unità della "Ummah" - la Nazione o Comunità Islamica - e garantire l'applicazione della Legge di "DIO" (la Sharia), dove per "Dio" si intende Allah. Il "Regno di Dio e la Sua Giustizia" del Vangelo di Matteo ritrovano nel Califfato un similare obiettivo, il quale idealmente dovrebbe essere identico o perlomeno compatibile a quello biblico di YHWH. "Grazie" alla difficoltà di provarne l'incompatibilità l'Islam ha trovato invece la maniera di crescere e conquistare. La debolezza, la corruzione e spesso l'ignoranza teologica dei regni cristiani e dunque della Cristianità… hanno sempre fornito all'Islam il pretesto, la strada, i mezzi e l'occasione per estendersi.



BBC News - What's the appeal of a caliphate?




In Europa tale debolezza e corruzione si è fatta più grande nonostante la forza apparente della cultura e delle istituzioni secolari.
Il problema è che l'Islam alla lunga non si può fermare con la semplice forza delle armi e degli eserciti - e l'Islam ne è perfettamente consapevole.
Di conseguenza l'Islam in Europa non ha avuta gran fretta se non quando si è reso conto che l'Occidente si è attrezzato per emanciparsi dal petrolio islamico e ha intrapreso un procedimento informatico di una sofisticazione inedita e capace di sondare la verità in tutti i meandri della conoscenza e dunque della teologia e della storia compresi. Nel momento in cui la Cristianità ha intrapreso la strada del recupero della propria memoria e della sua diffusione… le porte dell'inferno si sono aperte sotto ogni versante e profilo… La politica non è rimasta isolata in tale reazione feroce al recupero della memoria da parte della Cristianità più conservatrice ed in grado di rispondere alle sfide ideologiche e teologiche del XXI secolo.

Ogni qualvolta l'America ha segnalato l'esistenza di un governo di maggioranza cristiana il modo islamico ha cercato di opporsi fin dai tempi delle "Barbary Wars" https://history.state.gov/milestones...9/barbary-wars la cui metafora forse si è conclusa con l'attuale Presidenza...

Per l'Occidente è stata una necessità strategica e vitale l'abrogazione del Califfato Ottomano quasi un secolo orsono Caliphate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ma l'Islam naturalmente l'ha presa molto male con reazioni e tentativi di restaurazione fino a qualche mese fa sempre senza successo. I tentativi ed il lavoro per far riprendere la strada al Califfato si sono fatti negli ultimi anni intensi e sempre più strategici… e naturalmente questa volta non è mancato il sostegno delle forze che in Occidente hanno preso posizioni di potere a sostegno dell'Islam.

Ecco qui mi fermo in quanto in questo thread credo di aver scritto a sufficienza per suggerire che l'Occidente e la Cristianità sono sotto attacco anche sul versante interno… L'inconsapevolezza o l'ignoranza dei veri termini storici, strategici e teologici della questione non ha aiutato affatto nel ricostituzione un un solido sistema immunitario.
Non è sfuggita l'impreparazione proprio dell'Italia che è tra i paesi più esposti (eppure impreparati) al fenomeno immigratorio dai paesi islamici. Cultural conflict between Muslims and Christians in Italy

Ho provato a spiegare nei post precedenti che tale impreparazione non è soltanto storica, bensì teologica ed ideologica.
L'impreparazione ideologica è dovuta al fatto che lo strapotere del materialismo e del naturalismo hanno finito per avvelenare il Giudeocristianesimo - che è la sola forza dimostratasi all'altezza di opporre una efficace e duratura resistenza alla Jihad Islamica nei secoli passati.


Oggi l'Occidente è sotto ricatto: Ecco quel che ho scritto nelle ultime ore in risposta al monito di Nelofera Pariza in seguito all'attentato subito dal Canada. Questo spiega quanto siano confuse le idee in Occidente nella capacità di identificare il nemico.


Ottawa Attack Is Canada's Fault Says Leading Muslim Journalist

Ottawa Attack Is Canada's Fault Says Leading Muslim Jour...Afghan-Canadian journalist Nelofer Pazira has told the Independent that yesterday's attack in Ottawa happened because the country's Conservative Prime Minister Step...
View on www.breitbart.com	Preview by Yahoo

Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant

Mark Steyn and Ezra LevantMark Steyn and Ezra Levant mock and malign Obama’s incessant pandering to Muslims even after recent Muslim terrorist attacks in Canada and the U.S. Just doing he...
View on sheikyermami.com	Preview by Yahoo

Byron wrote at 22.00pm on the 26th October 2014


"… Muslim members of the security services might change sides unless the country drops its opposition to ISIS.
Although Paziri is generally accepted to be a moderate she did try to return to Afghanistan when the Taliban were in charge."


Essentially the request is for Canada to be "NEUTRAL"…


Such a neutrality implies persecution and killing of Christians and minorities.
It implies also that the rising caliphate should be established, grow and gradually extended to all the "Levant"… and eventually exported to all Muslim countries and even exported to all ex-Muslim land by resuming all positions lost up to Poitiers and Vienna.


The neutrality required from Canada and all Western countries today implies therefore the same neutrality tomorrow as the "Caliphate" resumes its islamic historical positions.


The warning of Paziri and reprimand to Canada is essentially equivalent to what the Ottomans aspected from Europe when instead the German Roman Holy Empire and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth intervened to save Vienna and causing the weakening of the Turkish army in the Balkans.


The message of Canada to Nelofer Pazira and associates should be simple and clear: if you DO NOT LIKE Multiculturalism in the borders of the principles of the Western Constitutions and Civilisation you are in the wrong place… if your "moderation" is just a soft strategy for Islam to seize power in the West and implement its theocracy and incompatible Sharia… then you are enemies undercover dressed with moderation.


Canada is becoming aware that the red line to divide between real moderate and liberal Muslim from radical orthodox and pseudo-moderate… is simply the partial or full objective of Sharia and the Jihad in it implied in its various moderate, strategic or violent forms.
Application of sharia law by country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
National Secular Society - Here is why Sharia Law has no place in Britain or elsewhere


The same red line is a divider for legitimate and safe coexistence.
Nelofera Pariza, alike and her Associates... should understand that the time has come to reciprocate the favour and the hospitality enjoyed in Canada and the West… or leave.

<font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: verdana">

[david777]

l libro di Daniele interroga le nostre “verità” complessive, e talvolta si risponde cercando di strumentalizzarlo nella versione del misticismo oppure di osteggiarlo nel disegno ambiguo, sottile, determinato edambizioso di “divorare tutta la terra”, “modificare i tempi ela legge”. La disputa storiografica cela in realtà ben altri moventi ed interessi. Tutto è in gioco: dalla filosofia della storia all’etica finanziaria, dalla politica economica alla struttura industriale, dalla dottrina dello stato alla ricerca scientifica, oltre i confini individuali e nazionali. La chiave d’entrata nel fenomeno spirituale, all’origine di tali conseguenze culturali e politiche, consiste nell’energia messianica che pervade il libro diDaniele, alla base, con gli altri contributi similari nell’A.T., del messianismo giudeocristiano di tutti i tempi. Non è un caso che tra il libro di Daniele e lo stato teocratico ginevrino esista un rapporto mediato da Giovanni Calvino.
E’ necessario verificare in quale misura la società è in sintonia con l’etica messianica, se lo è mai stata e se vi sono oggi le condizioni per esserlo. Dovremmo anche chiederci quali conseguenze potrebbero derivare da una situazione di incompatibilità con la stessa. Insomma, la discussione sul libro diDaniele è un indizio che siamo in epoca di fermento, di disagio e di mutamenti politici, una cui ipotesi di superamento, tra le altre, coincide con l’avvento dell’era messianica. In tutto ciò la storia è in sostanza la stessa: crisi politica e fermenti messianici, ai tempi di Daniele, di Antioco IV, come sempre e dovunque fino allo svelamento del senso della storia dell’uomo. Se il libro di Daniele si spiega da un punto di vista patriottico, il periodo maccabeo non è più critico per il popolo ebraico, di quello babilonese, persiano o romano. MD CODE



Questo testo indirizza verso il coinvolgimento politico in un'epoca di fermento, di disagio e di mutamenti politici… mentre tutto è in gioco…

All'epoca (1983) non si vedeva ancora la fondatezza e la gravità di tali affermazioni, ma il tempo è passato nel sonno tranquillo di milioni di giudeocristiani i quali ormai si erano convinti che le istituzioni, la sicurezza, la pace e la tranquillità internazionali fossero nelle buone mani di politici secolari che ormai erano stati forgiati dalla tradizione giudeocristiana e dal liberalismo politico, seppure talvolta nella versione socialdemocratica e finanche socialista e progressista.

Gli anni ed i decenni sono passati… ed un giorno i cristiani si sono svegliati con la tragedia del martirio e dell'invasione all'ora di colazione così come si dice di "Bella Ciao".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CI3lhyNKfo

I cristiani hanno faticato a rimettersi in moto ancora frastornati per il tradimento crescente di politici secolari che ormai svendono libertà in cambio di affari e petrolio. I cristiani si sono resi conto che l'Occidente va nuovamente difeso in prima persona.

Partiti cristiani sono sbocciati relativamente in fretta in vari luoghi del mondo libero mentre migliaia di cristiani venivano sgozzati nel ricorrente silenzio dei media.

Naturalmente gli USA erano e sono i più competenti nel mettere in campo politici cristiani competenti ed organizzati, ma anche l'Europa non scherza nonostante la crisi spirituale che infuria a gran forza.

L'accusa nei confronti dei politici cristiani è di incompetenza tecnica ed accademica e purtroppo tale accusa non è spesso soltanto insinuazione.

Ma la visione e la vocazione politica sono autentiche.

Ecco un articolo
http://onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=15722

By Bernard Gaynor



che commenta la scesa in campo dei politici cristiani in Australia, a cui segue la risposta di un politico italo-australiano dell'ultima ora - benché a lungo incubato… - … di un candidato in una regione metropolitana del Victoria in lista per la "Upper House" - equivalente statale (Legislative Council) del Senato Federale - Upper House.



https://plus.google.com/108271102084...ts/Ymx4r6JbFte

[david777]

La disputa storiografica cela in realtà ben altri moventi ed interessi. Tutto è in gioco: dalla filosofia della storia all’etica finanziaria, dalla politica economica alla struttura industriale, dalla dottrina dello stato alla ricerca scientifica, oltre i confini individuali e nazionali. La chiave d’entrata nel fenomeno spirituale, all’origine di tali conseguenze culturali e politiche, consiste nell’energia messianica che pervade il libro diDaniele, alla base, con gli altri contributi similari nell’A.T., del messianismo giudeocristiano di tutti i tempi. Non è un caso che tra il libro di Daniele e lo stato teocratico ginevrino esista un rapporto mediato da Giovanni Calvino.
E’ necessario verificare in quale misura la società è in sintonia con l’etica messianica, se lo è mai stata e se vi sono oggi le condizioni per esserlo. Dovremmo anche chiederci quali conseguenze potrebbero derivare da una situazione di incompatibilità con la stessa. Insomma, la discussione sul libro diDaniele è un indizio che siamo in epoca di fermento, di disagio e di mutamenti politici, una cui ipotesi di superamento, tra le altre, coincide con l’avvento dell’era messianica. In tutto ciò la storia è in sostanza la stessa: crisi politica e fermenti messianici, ai tempi di Daniele, di Antioco IV, come sempre e dovunque fino allo svelamento del senso della storia dell’uomo. MD CODE

Questo testo indirizza verso il coinvolgimento politico in un'epoca di fermento, di disagio e di mutamenti politici… mentre tutto è in gioco…

All'epoca (1983) non si vedeva ancora la fondatezza e la gravità di tali affermazioni, ma il tempo è passato nel sonno tranquillo di milioni di giudeocristiani i quali ormai si erano convinti che le istituzioni, la sicurezza, la pace e la tranquillità internazionali fossero nelle buone mani di politici secolari che ormai erano stati forgiati dalla tradizione giudeocristiana e dal liberalismo politico, seppure talvolta nella versione socialdemocratica e finanche socialista e progressista.

Gli anni ed i decenni sono passati… ed un giorno i cristiani si sono svegliati con la tragedia del martirio e dell'invasione all'ora di colazione così come si dice di "Bella Ciao".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CI3lhyNKfo

I cristiani hanno faticato a rimettersi in moto ancora frastornati per il tradimento crescente di politici secolari che ormai svendono libertà in cambio di affari e petrolio. I cristiani si sono resi conto che l'Occidente va nuovamente difeso in prima persona.

Partiti cristiani sono sbocciati relativamente in fretta in vari luoghi del mondo libero mentre migliaia di cristiani venivano sgozzati nel ricorrente silenzio dei media.

Naturalmente gli USA erano e sono i più competenti nel mettere in campo politici cristiani competenti ed organizzati, ma anche l'Europa non scherza nonostante la crisi spirituale che infuria a gran forza.

L'accusa nei confronti dei politici cristiani è di incompetenza tecnica ed accademica e purtroppo tale accusa non è spesso soltanto insinuazione.

Ma la visione e la vocazione politica sono autentiche.

Mayflower Compact - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




Il seguente post dice in sostanza che la lunga vacanza del Giudeocristianesimo conservatore dalla politica è finita con un brusco ritorno in Ufficio di Lunedì e con nuvoloni neri.

https://plus.google.com/108271102084...ts/ZaSP2jnui3S