Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Compulsive profanity

2008-04-28T03:35:08Z

DPearce: spelling and is 'dim-witted participants' really encyclopaedic language?

'''Compulsive profanity''' is a characteristic common to [[public school]] cultures, [[Hollywood values]], and [[liberal]] internet users. It consists of nonstop profanity and vulgarity. Dim-witted participants may find humor in it, and cult shows like [[Comedy Central]] cater to this constituency.

Profanity is virtually non-existent in [[homeschooling]] cultures.

Talk:Essay:Extraterrestrial Life and the Bible

2008-04-26T10:25:05Z

DPearce: /* Columbus */

== Logic ==

If I were a carpenter, and I said to you "I made this chair", would that rule out the possibility that I had ever made any other chairs in my career?

By the logic of this essay, the answer is "yes". [[User:Nematocyte|Nematocyte]] 11:08, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:[[Bobby Darin|If I were a carpenter, and you were my lady]], would you think I had other women in my life? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 11:35, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

== Clarification ==
Excuse me if I don't understood this well. Is TerryH saying that the existence of Extraterrestrial races implies that the Bible is wrong and vice versa, that if the Bible is right then Extraterrestrial races don't exist?.[[User:Crossx14|Crossx14]] 00:31, 24 April 2008 (EDT)
:Yes. The very existence of an extraterrestrial ''race'' implies that [[Jesus Christ]] would have to have died twice—once for us and another time for that race. Or if that other race never fell, then [[God]] would have told them to stay at least a hundred [[Star#Measuring stellar distances|parsecs]] away from us.--[[User:TerryH|TerryH]][[User talk:TerryH|Talk]] 09:36, 24 April 2008 (EDT)
::Excuse me on more time. I don't know about you, but I'm a Christian and I can't agree with you because such categorical affirmation is pretty dangerous for my faith, it's very risky. I could understand your point if you are an Atheist trying to defy my faith, but if you're a Christian too, I think your perspective is counterproductive. Remember Galileo's trial and how harmful it was, and it still is, for the Christian faith. I mean, what if an ET appeared tomorrow and said "Hello"?. Should we throw the Bible to the trash along with 2000 years of Christianity and 6000 years of Judaism?. (Atheists would smile with pleasure). I don't think so, I'm not ready for that. Instead, as a Christian, in order to strengthen my faith, before being charged of lack of imagination, I'd better try to imagine a way to make the Bible compatible with ETs (just in case), to include them, not to exculde them because perhaps by exculding them I'd be excluding myself (I mean isolating myself, becoming a kind of tiny marginal fundamentalist sect, easily destructible because of being separated from the society). That would be a prudent and conservative perspective, not a reckless one. I think it's too risky to stretch my faith far away from what is matter of the Christian faith, its core (Jesus, his existence, his divinity, his teachings, etc). ETs don't matter. They could exist or they could not, but none of both possibilities would invalidate my faith. If I say "to be Christian is to not believe in ETs" I'm creating a new dogma, a superfluous one, hence a false one, I'm adding a new card on a castle of cards upon moving sands. It's too risky. Just a blow and the whole castle of false dogmas will collapse along with my faith. I'd never say ETs are "kosher" nor ETs aren't "kosher" (OK, allowed). For me, to be Christian is to believe in Jesus, and a Christian person could or could not believe in ETs without to stop of being Christian, because my faith has nothing to do with believing in ETs or not, it is not incompatible with them. For me, to be Christian has more to do with being compassionate, which is incompatible with some well known Politics, policies and politicians. You know what I mean, I wrote an Essay about this right [[Essay:About the emotional basis of Political power|here]]. That is my opinion. Best regards. [[User:Crossx14|Crossx14]] 23:47, 24 April 2008 (EDT)
:::Your greatest error lies in accepting as truth the blandishments of "modern science." The same (pseudo)scientists who tell you that "with a hundred jillion [[star]]s in our [[galaxy]] alone, intelligent life beyond the [[earth]] is an odds-on favorite" are the same ones telling you that "the present is the key to the past" here on earth. And they're the same ones telling you about [[dark matter]] and [[dark energy]] comprising a whopping 96% of the known [[universe]].
:::For your information, the [[Sun]] exists in a very narrow "habitable ring" that might be no broader than the difference between the peri[[apsis]] and apoapsis of the sun's orbit around the galactic core. Furthermore, the sun is in a sparsely populated portion of the galaxy, away from most of the very harmful radiation that stars put out.
:::I am, in short, ready to declare that ET's do not exist. So I don't need to prepare for "ET" saying "hello." And if he did, then he is a [[demon]] anyway. Demons, I'm sure, would love to manifest to an [[atheism|atheistic]] scientist as an ET, complete with his/her/its own scoutcraft. (And did you ever notice that nearly all the [[Hollywood]] versions of ET's look a little ugly?)
:::We don't need to prepare for the "case" (as in "just in") of the absurd.--[[User:TerryH|TerryH]][[User talk:TerryH|Talk]] 00:08, 25 April 2008 (EDT)

::: I'm with TerryH on this one. You're correct, Crossx14, that this is not an article of faith. Christians are Christians regardless of what they believe on this issue. But the idea of alien beings is definitely incompatible with biblical teaching, even though it's not ''explicitly'' denied in the Bible (just like the Trinity is biblical teaching although it's not ''explicitly'' mentioned). See also [http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/4412/ here] for another treatment of this. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 04:22, 25 April 2008 (EDT)

== Columbus ==
I hope you weren't serious about arriving aliens treating us as Columbus did the natives. In which case we can expect to be raped, pillaged, plundered, executed for our religious beliefs and then die from some strange alien disease? It might be great if they were like [[Albert Schweitzer]], but if they come barging in here like the so-called civilised explorers of old, we, my friend, are up a certain creek without a paddle. [[User:DPearce|DPearce]] 10:01, 25 April 2008 (EDT)
:Laying aside your unfounded accusations against Christopher Columbus, remember that I also said that an ET scout might have a commission from a commander more like [[Alexander the Great]] or [[Napoleon Bonaparte]] or maybe even [[Adolf Hitler]].--[[User:TerryH|TerryH]][[User talk:TerryH|Talk]] 10:08, 25 April 2008 (EDT)
::Unfounded? So the decimation of the local population by smallpox and syphilis after his arrival was a coincidence? Not to mention persecution by the Catholic Church. However, that was made tongue in cheek, but seriously, if there are beings out there with the technology to travel here and they aren't exactly of a friendly nature, then it doesn't matter who they take after - we're in trouble. A bit like that Twilight Zone episode "To Serve Man." [[User:DPearce|DPearce]] 10:13, 25 April 2008 (EDT)
:::Now your "serious" point ''is'' well-taken. It is exactly my point. By what arrogance does anyone suppose that we could "take those guys" if they showed up? Of course, I don't believe that they will, because I see no evidence of "them." Even Stephen Hawking has given up on the idea, after Project SETI has utterly failed to turn up a convincing positive finding.--[[User:TerryH|TerryH]][[User talk:TerryH|Talk]] 11:35, 25 April 2008 (EDT)
::So, Terry, are you saying that the Europeans did not do these things against the Native population of the Americas?[[User:AliceBG|AliceBG]] 10:24, 25 April 2008 (EDT)
:::Yes. And if you have any proof otherwise, you'd better show it--and probably take this to [[Talk:Christopher Columbus]], which is where this belongs.--[[User:TerryH|TerryH]][[User talk:TerryH|Talk]] 13:16, 25 April 2008 (EDT)
Oh dear - what rubbish are they teaching the kids these days? Here's some sources (that took about 30 seconds to find) that might enlighten you. [latinamericanhistory.suite101.com/article.cfm/genocide_in_the_new_world]
[http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/ah/1975/6/1975_6_4.shtml]
[http://web.mit.edu/thistle/www/v9/9.11/1columbus.html]
[http://www.dennisfox.net/columns/columbus.html]
[http://www.religioustolerance.org/genocide5.htm] Given his history of atrocities, he's been compared to Himmler (amongst others) by historians, so sorry to burst your bubble, but denying his genocide is something akin to denying the Holocaust and immensely offensive to the indigenous inhabitants of the Americas. Columbus paved the way for the later Conquistadors to commit equally heinous crimes. He also started the slave trade from the Americas. As he said in his own diary, writing of the native inhabitants, “They would make fine servants. With 50 men we could subjugate them all and make them do whatever we want.” He proceeded to do just that by kidnapping 25 natives and taking them back to Spain. When Columbus returned to Hispaniola in 1493, he had an unquenchable lust for gold and violently forced the native Arawak Indians to provide impossible amounts. He enslaved 1,500 inhabitants and required all persons 14 years and older to collect a certain quantity of gold every three months. To ensure the cooperation of the Indians, Columbus made examples of those who refused his demands by cutting off their ears, hands and noses. Oh, by the way, you do know that Columbus didn't discover North America, right? He only ever got as far as the Caribbean and claimed to his dying day he'd found Asia, not a new continent. [[User:DPearce|DPearce]] 06:23, 26 April 2008 (EDT)

Talk:Essay:Extraterrestrial Life and the Bible

2008-04-26T10:23:58Z

DPearce: /* Columbus */

== Logic ==

If I were a carpenter, and I said to you "I made this chair", would that rule out the possibility that I had ever made any other chairs in my career?

By the logic of this essay, the answer is "yes". [[User:Nematocyte|Nematocyte]] 11:08, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:[[Bobby Darin|If I were a carpenter, and you were my lady]], would you think I had other women in my life? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 11:35, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

== Clarification ==
Excuse me if I don't understood this well. Is TerryH saying that the existence of Extraterrestrial races implies that the Bible is wrong and vice versa, that if the Bible is right then Extraterrestrial races don't exist?.[[User:Crossx14|Crossx14]] 00:31, 24 April 2008 (EDT)
:Yes. The very existence of an extraterrestrial ''race'' implies that [[Jesus Christ]] would have to have died twice—once for us and another time for that race. Or if that other race never fell, then [[God]] would have told them to stay at least a hundred [[Star#Measuring stellar distances|parsecs]] away from us.--[[User:TerryH|TerryH]][[User talk:TerryH|Talk]] 09:36, 24 April 2008 (EDT)
::Excuse me on more time. I don't know about you, but I'm a Christian and I can't agree with you because such categorical affirmation is pretty dangerous for my faith, it's very risky. I could understand your point if you are an Atheist trying to defy my faith, but if you're a Christian too, I think your perspective is counterproductive. Remember Galileo's trial and how harmful it was, and it still is, for the Christian faith. I mean, what if an ET appeared tomorrow and said "Hello"?. Should we throw the Bible to the trash along with 2000 years of Christianity and 6000 years of Judaism?. (Atheists would smile with pleasure). I don't think so, I'm not ready for that. Instead, as a Christian, in order to strengthen my faith, before being charged of lack of imagination, I'd better try to imagine a way to make the Bible compatible with ETs (just in case), to include them, not to exculde them because perhaps by exculding them I'd be excluding myself (I mean isolating myself, becoming a kind of tiny marginal fundamentalist sect, easily destructible because of being separated from the society). That would be a prudent and conservative perspective, not a reckless one. I think it's too risky to stretch my faith far away from what is matter of the Christian faith, its core (Jesus, his existence, his divinity, his teachings, etc). ETs don't matter. They could exist or they could not, but none of both possibilities would invalidate my faith. If I say "to be Christian is to not believe in ETs" I'm creating a new dogma, a superfluous one, hence a false one, I'm adding a new card on a castle of cards upon moving sands. It's too risky. Just a blow and the whole castle of false dogmas will collapse along with my faith. I'd never say ETs are "kosher" nor ETs aren't "kosher" (OK, allowed). For me, to be Christian is to believe in Jesus, and a Christian person could or could not believe in ETs without to stop of being Christian, because my faith has nothing to do with believing in ETs or not, it is not incompatible with them. For me, to be Christian has more to do with being compassionate, which is incompatible with some well known Politics, policies and politicians. You know what I mean, I wrote an Essay about this right [[Essay:About the emotional basis of Political power|here]]. That is my opinion. Best regards. [[User:Crossx14|Crossx14]] 23:47, 24 April 2008 (EDT)
:::Your greatest error lies in accepting as truth the blandishments of "modern science." The same (pseudo)scientists who tell you that "with a hundred jillion [[star]]s in our [[galaxy]] alone, intelligent life beyond the [[earth]] is an odds-on favorite" are the same ones telling you that "the present is the key to the past" here on earth. And they're the same ones telling you about [[dark matter]] and [[dark energy]] comprising a whopping 96% of the known [[universe]].
:::For your information, the [[Sun]] exists in a very narrow "habitable ring" that might be no broader than the difference between the peri[[apsis]] and apoapsis of the sun's orbit around the galactic core. Furthermore, the sun is in a sparsely populated portion of the galaxy, away from most of the very harmful radiation that stars put out.
:::I am, in short, ready to declare that ET's do not exist. So I don't need to prepare for "ET" saying "hello." And if he did, then he is a [[demon]] anyway. Demons, I'm sure, would love to manifest to an [[atheism|atheistic]] scientist as an ET, complete with his/her/its own scoutcraft. (And did you ever notice that nearly all the [[Hollywood]] versions of ET's look a little ugly?)
:::We don't need to prepare for the "case" (as in "just in") of the absurd.--[[User:TerryH|TerryH]][[User talk:TerryH|Talk]] 00:08, 25 April 2008 (EDT)

::: I'm with TerryH on this one. You're correct, Crossx14, that this is not an article of faith. Christians are Christians regardless of what they believe on this issue. But the idea of alien beings is definitely incompatible with biblical teaching, even though it's not ''explicitly'' denied in the Bible (just like the Trinity is biblical teaching although it's not ''explicitly'' mentioned). See also [http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/4412/ here] for another treatment of this. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 04:22, 25 April 2008 (EDT)

== Columbus ==
I hope you weren't serious about arriving aliens treating us as Columbus did the natives. In which case we can expect to be raped, pillaged, plundered, executed for our religious beliefs and then die from some strange alien disease? It might be great if they were like [[Albert Schweitzer]], but if they come barging in here like the so-called civilised explorers of old, we, my friend, are up a certain creek without a paddle. [[User:DPearce|DPearce]] 10:01, 25 April 2008 (EDT)
:Laying aside your unfounded accusations against Christopher Columbus, remember that I also said that an ET scout might have a commission from a commander more like [[Alexander the Great]] or [[Napoleon Bonaparte]] or maybe even [[Adolf Hitler]].--[[User:TerryH|TerryH]][[User talk:TerryH|Talk]] 10:08, 25 April 2008 (EDT)
::Unfounded? So the decimation of the local population by smallpox and syphilis after his arrival was a coincidence? Not to mention persecution by the Catholic Church. However, that was made tongue in cheek, but seriously, if there are beings out there with the technology to travel here and they aren't exactly of a friendly nature, then it doesn't matter who they take after - we're in trouble. A bit like that Twilight Zone episode "To Serve Man." [[User:DPearce|DPearce]] 10:13, 25 April 2008 (EDT)
:::Now your "serious" point ''is'' well-taken. It is exactly my point. By what arrogance does anyone suppose that we could "take those guys" if they showed up? Of course, I don't believe that they will, because I see no evidence of "them." Even Stephen Hawking has given up on the idea, after Project SETI has utterly failed to turn up a convincing positive finding.--[[User:TerryH|TerryH]][[User talk:TerryH|Talk]] 11:35, 25 April 2008 (EDT)
::So, Terry, are you saying that the Europeans did not do these things against the Native population of the Americas?[[User:AliceBG|AliceBG]] 10:24, 25 April 2008 (EDT)
:::Yes. And if you have any proof otherwise, you'd better show it--and probably take this to [[Talk:Christopher Columbus]], which is where this belongs.--[[User:TerryH|TerryH]][[User talk:TerryH|Talk]] 13:16, 25 April 2008 (EDT)
Oh dear - what rubbish are they teaching the kids these days? Here's some sources (that took about 30 seconds to find) that might enlighten you. [http://latinamer[i][/i]icanhistory.suite101.com/article.cfm/genocide_in_the_new_world]
[http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/ah/1975/6/1975_6_4.shtml]
[http://web.mit.edu/thistle/www/v9/9.11/1columbus.html]
[http://www.dennisfox.net/columns/columbus.html]
[http://www.religioustolerance.org/genocide5.htm] Given his history of atrocities, he's been compared to Himmler (amongst others) by historians, so sorry to burst your bubble, but denying his genocide is something akin to denying the Holocaust and immensely offensive to the indigenous inhabitants of the Americas. Columbus paved the way for the later Conquistadors to commit equally heinous crimes. He also started the slave trade from the Americas. As he said in his own diary, writing of the native inhabitants, “They would make fine servants. With 50 men we could subjugate them all and make them do whatever we want.” He proceeded to do just that by kidnapping 25 natives and taking them back to Spain. When Columbus returned to Hispaniola in 1493, he had an unquenchable lust for gold and violently forced the native Arawak Indians to provide impossible amounts. He enslaved 1,500 inhabitants and required all persons 14 years and older to collect a certain quantity of gold every three months. To ensure the cooperation of the Indians, Columbus made examples of those who refused his demands by cutting off their ears, hands and noses. Oh, by the way, you do know that Columbus didn't discover North America, right? He only ever got as far as the Caribbean and claimed to his dying day he'd found Asia, not a new continent. [[User:DPearce|DPearce]] 06:23, 26 April 2008 (EDT)

Talk:Essay:Extraterrestrial Life and the Bible

2008-04-25T14:13:53Z

DPearce: /* Columbus */

Talk:Essay:Extraterrestrial Life and the Bible

2008-04-25T14:01:54Z

DPearce: Columbus? really?

Talk:Writing Homework Nine

2008-04-17T15:37:55Z

DPearce: thank you

==Public school problem?==
What do you mean by that? What is this supposed problem? o_0 [[User:Kektklik|Fuzzy|AFD]] 17:27, 6 April 2008 (EDT)

: By "public school problem" I mean the general problem of censorship of what parents would like to happen in public school (e.g., prayer) and the imposition of many things parents would not like to happen in public school (e.g., liberal propaganda).--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 17:31, 6 April 2008 (EDT)

::Question 3 looks a bit odd. John must have been a child at some point. Is something missing? [[User:DPearce|DPearce]] 09:00, 17 April 2008 (EDT)

::: Wow, some people are ''sooo'' literal. I've learned from this site that [[liberals]] take things more literally than [[conservatives]] do.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 09:23, 17 April 2008 (EDT)

::::I'm sorry? I was referring to the "Was John the Apostle a child?" question. It makes no sense and was wondering if a word or phrase has been omitted. Please could you clarify the actual meaning for me then. Thanks [[User:DPearce|DPearce]] 10:15, 17 April 2008 (EDT)

::::: Keep trying. I'm confident you can figure it out.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 10:24, 17 April 2008 (EDT)

::DPearce, see [[Mystery:Was John a Child?]]. [[User:BethanyS|~BCS]][[User talk:BethanyS|Talk2'''ME''']] 10:54, 17 April 2008 (EDT)

:::Thank you Bethany, that's all I wanted to know. [[User:DPearce|DPearce]] 11:37, 17 April 2008 (EDT)

Talk:Writing Homework Nine

2008-04-17T14:15:06Z

DPearce:

Talk:Writing Homework Nine

2008-04-17T13:00:30Z

DPearce: Question 3 - Was John a child? Easy answer is yes, at some point.