From: David.Rice@ofa123.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Robert Bales: nitwit or confusoid?
X-Sender: newtout 0.05 Dec 30 1992
Date: 01 Jan 93  10:57:30

Who: danwell@IASTATE.EDU (Daniel A Ashlock)
ID: <1992Dec22.092456@iastate.edu>
 
DA> "[I'm riping off David Rice's quote of the indefadigable
DA> Robert Bales]"
 
Ouch! That hurt. . . .
 
>RB> "The claims may be the same, but they are certainly not old
>RB> and tired. The creationists' claims are basically that
>RB> theories and conclusions about origins should be based on
>RB> all of the observed facts and not be restricted to the one
>RB> theory that happens to be popular."
 
DA> This was such a remarkable sentence I had to comment. It makes
DA> or implies the following false assertions:
DA>   (I) Theories are a form of fact.
DA>  (II) Scientific theories of origins conceal or hide substantial
DA>       bodies of fact.
DA> (III) Creationists do not conceal or supress facts.
DA>  (IV) There are original creationists positions actually put forth 
DA>       (other than by people making fun of creationists) in the last
DA>       oh, say, decade.
 
Even more damning, he implies that there is more than one theory for
the origins of species, which there is not: there are Creationists and
theistic anti-evolutionists =CONJECTURE=, but they have no theory.
He also implies that all theories should be assigned the same or
similar level of consideration no matter how inane or impossible
or improbable or just plane WRONG a theory may be--- Creationism is
much like believing in invisible pink unicorns being responsible
for pregnancy: "we must give the Pink Unicorn Theory equal time with
the Copulation Nine Months theory! (because god said we must)."
 
DA> I'm afraid I must concur with Jim Merrit; the man is hopeless.
DA> (I) shows that Bales is mouthing formula phrases without bothering
DA> to understand what he is saying. I mean I you don't know the
DA> _definitions_ how can you debate? (II) is a GOD DAMNMED LIE for
DA> which everyone from Lionel Tun to Jim Loucks has been unable to
DA> provide and evidence at all. I guess that proves Bob Bales is
DA> not only a liar but a stale, unoriginal liar as well. (III) is
DA> an obvious, pathetic lie. We've seen creationists attempt to
DA> ignore of supress facts by appeal to authority repeatedly right
DA> here on talk origins. (IV) I can personally testify that every
DA> scientific argument for creation and all the theistic anti-
DA> evolution arguments I've heard on talk origins I heard in
DA> highschool (not, thank God, from my teachers). The formet
DA> is, of course, and empty set :).
 
He is mostly harmless, until he tries to force his religion
(Cretionism) into the public school system. He has the right to
worship as he pleases, yet there is a large body of precident that
limits that right of every citizen--- the "Mormon polygamy" laws
were one of the firsts. Since Mr. Bales wishes to worship ignorance,
propaganda, lies, deceit, and stupidity, he has every right to do
so; just keep it out of my kids schools, Bales, damn your eyes!
 
DA> In other news, did you know that any attempt to teach anything
DA> not sanctioned in the bible is part of a one-world-government-
DA> PETA-philosophy-communist-whichcraft-new-age-conpiracy dating
DA> back to mesopotamia? I read that in the paper this morning as
DA> a quote from a member of a "christian" organization here in
DA> Iowa thats trying to do cirriculum reform for the public schools.
DA> The organization is anti-evolution as well. Given this kind of an
DA> intellectual base is it any wonder that creationists display the 
DA> originality of peanut butter and jelly on white bread?
 
They didn't mention Feminism? Have they forgotten us already?!
 
There was a time when I supported PETA financially. One day the
PETA magazine showed up, and in it was the claim that Satanists
run around the neighborhood kidnapping cats, specifically black
cats, and this threat was very great--- great enough to hide black
cats in doors at night. I wrote two letters to PETA asking for
proof or evidence of their assertion, and gave them two phone
numbers of people in the FBI and California Department of Criminal
Justice Planning, and I suggested they call these numbers and get
the facts. I told PETA that a cat, no matter what color, is far,
far more likely to be killed by lightning or a falling aircraft
than for religious reasons.
 
Their reply? They suggested I was a Satanist, and asked me "why
I didn't want people to know about all the cats that Satanists
kill every year." Was I "hiding something?" "Trying to protect
my cat-killing Satanist buddies?"
 
Needless to say, I stoped sending them money. The PETA folks
would make EXCELLENT creationists. . . the facts are percieved as
a threat, and nay-saying is percieved as proof of The Great
Satanic/Evolutionists Conspiracy.
 
DA> Dan
DA> Danwell@IASTATE.EDU