Comments on: Instapundit’s Moral Vacuum http://thinkprogress.org/2005/08/19/instamorals/ Thu, 26 Nov 2009 19:45:07 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Preteen Preteen Lolitas Innocent Preteens http://thinkprogress.org/2005/08/19/instamorals/comment-page-5/#comment-4888828 Preteen Preteen Lolitas Innocent Preteens Sun, 13 Apr 2008 12:20:14 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/?p=1609#comment-4888828 <strong>Preteen Preteen Lolitas Innocent Preteens</strong> I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view Preteen Preteen Lolitas Innocent Preteens

I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view

]]> By: Kds Bbs Pics Russian Child Models Ls Girls http://thinkprogress.org/2005/08/19/instamorals/comment-page-5/#comment-4888174 Kds Bbs Pics Russian Child Models Ls Girls Sun, 13 Apr 2008 11:16:08 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/?p=1609#comment-4888174 <strong>Kds Bbs Pics Russian Child Models Ls Girls</strong> I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view Kds Bbs Pics Russian Child Models Ls Girls

I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view

]]> By: Distance Learning Teachers Having Sex With Students Very Hot School Girls http://thinkprogress.org/2005/08/19/instamorals/comment-page-5/#comment-4881832 Distance Learning Teachers Having Sex With Students Very Hot School Girls Sat, 12 Apr 2008 18:57:05 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/?p=1609#comment-4881832 <strong>Distance Learning Teachers Having Sex With Students Very Hot School Girls</strong> I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view Distance Learning Teachers Having Sex With Students Very Hot School Girls

I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view

]]> By: Young Girls Young Girl Models Young Puffy Nipple http://thinkprogress.org/2005/08/19/instamorals/comment-page-5/#comment-4876720 Young Girls Young Girl Models Young Puffy Nipple Sat, 12 Apr 2008 02:26:22 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/?p=1609#comment-4876720 <strong>Young Girls Young Girl Models Young Puffy Nipple</strong> I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view Young Girls Young Girl Models Young Puffy Nipple

I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view

]]> By: Jessie http://thinkprogress.org/2005/08/19/instamorals/comment-page-5/#comment-4867124 Jessie Fri, 11 Apr 2008 16:06:15 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/?p=1609#comment-4867124 <strong>Jessie</strong> Did you get this off MSN? Jessie

Did you get this off MSN?

]]> By: Teen Petite Teens Teen Titans Hentai http://thinkprogress.org/2005/08/19/instamorals/comment-page-4/#comment-4863602 Teen Petite Teens Teen Titans Hentai Fri, 11 Apr 2008 12:05:39 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/?p=1609#comment-4863602 <strong>Teen Petite Teens Teen Titans Hentai</strong> I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view Teen Petite Teens Teen Titans Hentai

I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view

]]> By: Kds Bbs Pics Underage Porn Kid Sex http://thinkprogress.org/2005/08/19/instamorals/comment-page-4/#comment-4747930 Kds Bbs Pics Underage Porn Kid Sex Sat, 05 Apr 2008 10:22:34 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/?p=1609#comment-4747930 <strong>Kds Bbs Pics Underage Porn Kid Sex</strong> I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view Kds Bbs Pics Underage Porn Kid Sex

I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view

]]> By: Kentucky Web Site Design http://thinkprogress.org/2005/08/19/instamorals/comment-page-4/#comment-4739040 Kentucky Web Site Design Fri, 04 Apr 2008 23:37:42 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/?p=1609#comment-4739040 <strong>Kentucky Web Site Design</strong> Extremely interesting post. A little bit different from my point of view but neverless an interesting opinion. Kentucky Web Site Design

Extremely interesting post. A little bit different from my point of view but neverless an interesting opinion.

]]> By: Nude Pamela Anderson Nude Nude Boy http://thinkprogress.org/2005/08/19/instamorals/comment-page-4/#comment-4714206 Nude Pamela Anderson Nude Nude Boy Thu, 03 Apr 2008 17:55:44 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/?p=1609#comment-4714206 <strong>Nude Pamela Anderson Nude Nude Boy</strong> I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view Nude Pamela Anderson Nude Nude Boy

I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view

]]> By: Auto Loan http://thinkprogress.org/2005/08/19/instamorals/comment-page-4/#comment-4622936 Auto Loan Sat, 29 Mar 2008 19:25:17 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/?p=1609#comment-4622936 <strong>Auto Loan</strong> Browse a car loan to have a chance to come across an old fashion Lincoln tomorrow using a special office. Auto Loan

Browse a car loan to have a chance to come across an old fashion Lincoln tomorrow using a special office.

]]> By: Business Plans For Dummies http://thinkprogress.org/2005/08/19/instamorals/comment-page-4/#comment-4445874 Business Plans For Dummies Mon, 24 Mar 2008 00:24:38 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/?p=1609#comment-4445874 <strong>Business Plans For Dummies</strong> Your blog makes very interesting reading. I'm sure others will think so too I look forward to reading their comments. Business Plans For Dummies

Your blog makes very interesting reading. I’m sure others will think so too I look forward to reading their comments.

]]> By: ann bancroft nude http://thinkprogress.org/2005/08/19/instamorals/comment-page-4/#comment-4348008 ann bancroft nude Wed, 19 Mar 2008 11:33:42 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/?p=1609#comment-4348008 <strong>ann bancroft nude</strong> Man i love reading your blog, interesting posts ! ann bancroft nude

Man i love reading your blog, interesting posts !

]]> By: 0204 http://thinkprogress.org/2005/08/19/instamorals/comment-page-4/#comment-4339274 0204 Tue, 18 Mar 2008 23:58:43 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/?p=1609#comment-4339274 <strong>0204</strong> 0204

]]> By: Joe http://thinkprogress.org/2005/08/19/instamorals/comment-page-4/#comment-147595 Joe Mon, 26 Sep 2005 05:51:25 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/?p=1609#comment-147595 Wow, Clyde... I have no agenda, but just disagreeing with an IDist will get you that accusation. This is not a canned response, I assure you. ID is NOT a theory in the same context as Evolution. Evolutions 'problems' are NOT even close to the same category of problems with ID/Creationism (for one, Evolutionary theory doesn't exist SOLELY by making false claims of failure in another theory). Evolution has it's own errors that layman and creationist have no clue about, because they are scientific problems that you must understand science before even beginning to speak authoritatively on the problems within. ID’s problems are easy to see, even by the layman, IF he understands science. ID is not science, and as I said before, it’s basis is SOLEY on lying about evolutionary theory. Nothing, I repeat NOTHING IDists have said for problems within evolutionary theory are true, or ‘all of the story’. But layman who drink up ID propaganda do not know how to test this. They don’t know how to find out. ID is NOT science, and when layman (usually fundamentalist Christian layman) say the theories are equal, have no idea what science is. They demonstrate that instantly when they think ID is a ‘theory’. It isn’t. It’s a hypothesis as best, unable to be tested to graduate to a theory. The word “theory’ is often used improperly by layman everyday, when it’s true origin and current usage in the body of science means a very robust, tested process was needed to get to a ‘theory’. Theories are not whimsical ‘ideas’ like IDist like to make them seem to their willing adoring audiences. Laymen do not understand this, and until they do, they will continue to think that Evolutionary theory and ID ideology are in some ridiculous way, equal. Joe Wow, Clyde… I have no agenda, but just disagreeing with an IDist will get you that accusation. This is not a canned response, I assure you. ID is NOT a theory in the same context as Evolution. Evolutions ‘problems’ are NOT even close to the same category of problems with ID/Creationism (for one, Evolutionary theory doesn’t exist SOLELY by making false claims of failure in another theory). Evolution has it’s own errors that layman and creationist have no clue about, because they are scientific problems that you must understand science before even beginning to speak authoritatively on the problems within. ID’s problems are easy to see, even by the layman, IF he understands science. ID is not science, and as I said before, it’s basis is SOLEY on lying about evolutionary theory. Nothing, I repeat NOTHING IDists have said for problems within evolutionary theory are true, or ‘all of the story’. But layman who drink up ID propaganda do not know how to test this. They don’t know how to find out. ID is NOT science, and when layman (usually fundamentalist Christian layman) say the theories are equal, have no idea what science is. They demonstrate that instantly when they think ID is a ‘theory’. It isn’t. It’s a hypothesis as best, unable to be tested to graduate to a theory. The word “theory’ is often used improperly by layman everyday, when it’s true origin and current usage in the body of science means a very robust, tested process was needed to get to a ‘theory’. Theories are not whimsical ‘ideas’ like IDist like to make them seem to their willing adoring audiences. Laymen do not understand this, and until they do, they will continue to think that Evolutionary theory and ID ideology are in some ridiculous way, equal.

Joe

]]> By: Eric in Atlanta http://thinkprogress.org/2005/08/19/instamorals/comment-page-4/#comment-116217 Eric in Atlanta Tue, 30 Aug 2005 22:08:45 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/?p=1609#comment-116217 Demanding Glenn Reynolds to 'correct the record' is ridiculous. This website has offered no evidence contrary to the claims found in Reynold's site. None of Reynolds' claims are 'smears', regardless of their truth. The claims of this website are on the public record so long as this site is up, as are Reynolds' claims. There has been extensive cross linking between both sites. Clearly, there is a debate here on matters concerning Gorelick, and both sides are available for anyone to view. In observing the reaction to this debate on both sides, it's apparent that the side represented by this website is guilty of doing exactly what it wrongly accuses the other side of doing. All of which further indicates that this comment will not be allowed to remain on this page for long, which is why I bothered in the first place. Prove me wrong. Demanding Glenn Reynolds to ‘correct the record’ is ridiculous. This website has offered no evidence contrary to the claims found in Reynold’s site. None of Reynolds’ claims are ’smears’, regardless of their truth. The claims of this website are on the public record so long as this site is up, as are Reynolds’ claims. There has been extensive cross linking between both sites. Clearly, there is a debate here on matters concerning Gorelick, and both sides are available for anyone to view. In observing the reaction to this debate on both sides, it’s apparent that the side represented by this website is guilty of doing exactly what it wrongly accuses the other side of doing.

All of which further indicates that this comment will not be allowed to remain on this page for long, which is why I bothered in the first place. Prove me wrong.

]]> By: Sixth Sense http://thinkprogress.org/2005/08/19/instamorals/comment-page-4/#comment-106811 Sixth Sense Mon, 22 Aug 2005 14:05:04 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/?p=1609#comment-106811 Wow, I've found a crowd of cynics worse than I. To all concerned, my definitions of Creationism and Intelligent Design are based on my understanding of those terms. You will probably find others, some from a scientific viewpoint, and some with a political agenda. Either way, you will probably find different definitions. I will agree in part with what Clyde the Ripper says. The debate over origin of life is no longer faith vs. science, or even science vs. science; it's faith vs. faith. Rattle that in your heads for awhile and get back to me. Wow, I’ve found a crowd of cynics worse than I.

To all concerned, my definitions of Creationism and Intelligent Design are based on my understanding of those terms. You will probably find others, some from a scientific viewpoint, and some with a political agenda. Either way, you will probably find different definitions.

I will agree in part with what Clyde the Ripper says. The debate over origin of life is no longer faith vs. science, or even science vs. science; it’s faith vs. faith. Rattle that in your heads for awhile and get back to me.

]]> By: Clyde the Ripper http://thinkprogress.org/2005/08/19/instamorals/comment-page-4/#comment-106193 Clyde the Ripper Sun, 21 Aug 2005 22:14:23 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/?p=1609#comment-106193 It seems my whimsical post, #166, of yesterday concerning the source of DUHbya's charms, rattled a few cages, busted a few patents, loosened a few UFOs, and evoked Satan himself (puns intended). The thread seems to have evolved (again intended) into the battle of the four theories--Creationism, Inteligent Design, Evolution, and the Big Bang. Personally, I have no promlem accepting any one in terms of the others or any other theory you may wish to add. The fact remains that they are all theories and each has its own unique problem or question of creditability when it comes to proving one over the others. The mathematicians jump over that hurdle with the statement: "It is intuitively obvious that..." while any of the theories here must be accepted on "Blind Faith" to accomplish that leap. The truth is that evolution did not produce the monkey; the monkey produced the thoery of evolution. An Inteligent Designer did not create DUHbya Bush; DUHbya Bush, et al, created the Inteligent Designer. The Big Bang did not cause the man-in-the-moon; the man-in-the-moon caused the Big Bang theory. God did not create George Burns; George Burns created God. In actuality each of the theories is just an attempt by man to understand and/or justifiy his inability to understand, that which is beyond the nature of man to understand. It is the nature of man to be an"est" while another man must be the opposite "est." "I am biggest, you are littlest;" "I am prettiest, you are ugliest;" "I am smartest; you are dumbest." Each "est" feels he will not be believed unless he can cite a reference to a link to an overall authority. And then we get to "My Daddy can steal more oil than your Daddy." Only when we realize that it doesn't make any difference whose Daddy is the biggest or whose diety is the holiest can we have a win/win situation. Now how's that for a sunday sermon. Just say Amen! It seems my whimsical post, #166, of yesterday concerning the source of DUHbya’s charms, rattled a few cages, busted a few patents, loosened a few UFOs, and evoked Satan himself (puns intended). The thread seems to have evolved (again intended) into the battle of the four theories–Creationism, Inteligent Design, Evolution, and the Big Bang. Personally, I have no promlem accepting any one in terms of the others or any other theory you may wish to add. The fact remains that they are all theories and each has its own unique problem or question of creditability when it comes to proving one over the others. The mathematicians jump over that hurdle with the statement: “It is intuitively obvious that…” while any of the theories here must be accepted on “Blind Faith” to accomplish that leap. The truth is that evolution did not produce the monkey; the monkey produced the thoery of evolution. An Inteligent Designer did not create DUHbya Bush; DUHbya Bush, et al, created the Inteligent Designer. The Big Bang did not cause the man-in-the-moon; the man-in-the-moon caused the Big Bang theory. God did not create George Burns; George Burns created God. In actuality each of the theories is just an attempt by man to understand and/or justifiy his inability to understand, that which is beyond the nature of man to understand. It is the nature of man to be an”est” while another man must be the opposite “est.” “I am biggest, you are littlest;” “I am prettiest, you are ugliest;” “I am smartest; you are dumbest.” Each “est” feels he will not be believed unless he can cite a reference to a link to an overall authority. And then we get to “My Daddy can steal more oil than your Daddy.” Only when we realize that it doesn’t make any difference whose Daddy is the biggest or whose diety is the holiest can we have a win/win situation. Now how’s that for a sunday sermon. Just say Amen!

]]> By: Ann OutHouse http://thinkprogress.org/2005/08/19/instamorals/comment-page-4/#comment-106154 Ann OutHouse Sun, 21 Aug 2005 19:28:36 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/?p=1609#comment-106154 <em>God just spoke to me and said he doesn’t exist. Now what the hell should I believe?</em> Most people who hear voices get meds from the medic and this advice from the cynic: Don't believe anything you read or hear and only half of what you see. God just spoke to me and said he doesn’t exist. Now what the hell should I believe?

Most people who hear voices get meds from the medic and this advice from the cynic:

Don’t believe anything you read or hear and only half of what you see.

]]> By: Eddie http://thinkprogress.org/2005/08/19/instamorals/comment-page-4/#comment-106106 Eddie Sun, 21 Aug 2005 17:48:56 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/?p=1609#comment-106106 befuddled wrote "God just spoke to me and said he doesn’t exist. Now what the hell should I believe?" Did he disapear in a puff of logic, or did it set up some kind of weird causal loop? befuddled wrote

“God just spoke to me and said he doesn’t exist. Now what the hell should I believe?”

Did he disapear in a puff of logic, or did it set up some kind of weird causal loop?

]]> By: befuddled http://thinkprogress.org/2005/08/19/instamorals/comment-page-4/#comment-106034 befuddled Sun, 21 Aug 2005 15:56:03 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/?p=1609#comment-106034 God just spoke to me and said he doesn't exist. Now what the hell should I believe? "we could plan a murder, or start a religion..." The Lizard King, Angels and Sailors God just spoke to me and said he doesn’t exist. Now what the hell should I believe?

“we could plan a murder, or start a religion…”

The Lizard King, Angels and Sailors

]]>