Comments Posted By The MaryHunter
Displaying 91 To 100 Of 181 Comments
Bill Kristol on Fox News Sunday predicted something to the effect that the political fallout for Sheehan's growing wackiness could well be more of a detriment to the Democrats, precisely because of her lunatic fringe following. After reading this post, I'm inclined to (hopefully) agree.
Comment Posted By The MaryHunter On 15.08.2005 @ 10:14
HOW HARD SHOULD HAWKS BE ON CINDY SHEEHAN?
Rick, I kinda feel silly commenting on this issue since, given my week-long news blackout, the first I really heard about it was when I saw your cross-post on my blog. I've somehow gotten a running conversation going with my buddy Mike on Hilton Head Island at your cross post that you might be interested in seeing.
That said, I'm tending to agree with North Dallas Thirty here -- He's spot-on, but what a row that would start. Hard to believe after London 7-7, but re-education about why we're in Iraq is definitely in order (and Bush is failing on that home front -- dammit, learn from Blair, W!).
Also, Sheehan's odd change of heart plus the family's disagreement with her should get more airplay, to at least to add perspective and counter the current wall-to-wall protesting. This is something the leftwing lamestream media won't bother doing of course. The cat's out of the bag, so simply leaving her alone isn't possible anymore, either.
Comment Posted By The MaryHunter On 13.08.2005 @ 14:06
I only learned of Jenning's death when I logged onto the Wide Awakes group this am, for a quick goodbye note before or flight. This is the first detailed obituary that I've read -- in fact, it was pretty much the obituary for weeknight MSM news broadcasts, if you think about it.
There were a lot of ways you could have taken this post, Rick. Indeed, you were noble. As always, a smooth and educational read. Thanks.
Comment Posted By The MaryHunter On 8.08.2005 @ 22:50
Tres encouraging, Rick, despite the caveats. The WaPo has something on this, and I'll see if I have anything to add later, but I'm guessing you've got it pert-near all covered -- I would expect no less. ;-)
I'm still packing and prepping for our trip tomorrow, AND have another evolution-related post in the works, so I'm a wee swamped...
Comment Posted By The MaryHunter On 7.08.2005 @ 06:17
I feel like I'm gonna need the goggles and surgical gloves before even mousing over most of those links... for a few, breathing apparatus.
Priceless resource, Rick... simply priceless. Thank you for risking life and limb to prepare it for us.
Comment Posted By The MaryHunter On 6.08.2005 @ 16:40
THE ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY, VERY, VERY, LAST THING I HAVE TO SAY ABOUT ID AND EVOLUTION
Thank you Rick, for launching this valuable debate, and the other commentators. I especially thank folks like Jay, Thomas (really spot on, Tom!), Cap'n Wolff, and my colleague Bergbikr, who held firm and argued their reasonable points against the buffets and spitting from those who dismiss ID as kookish at best, and scientific blasphemy at worst.
I am a molecular biologist, an honorary medical geneticist, and a dedicated Roman Catholic, who sees Genesis stories as just that: valuable myths told to Man by God about his origins, the right story at the right time. (Plenty of other cultures have their parallel creation stories, and all in context.) What has unfolded as Scientific Objectivity vis a vis Man's growing capacity to understand his own vast domain called Universe has, basically since the enlightenment (give or take), increasingly striven to deny God a role in this Universe other than perhaps a silent observer. (Though Darwin and Einstein, the two fathers of 20th Century science, were fierce believers, if I'm not mistaken.)
To deny God a role in Creation is, for a Believer, illogical. And, there are ever so many believers out there... so what to do? Simply find that all believers must be illogical? Are we all wrong, because there is no "objective" proof of God's existence? (Yea, and I'd like to see some objective proof for String Theory, or it's latest mathematical enabler, Membrane Theory.) Or shall we believers simply hush up, go underground, pretend there is no God when it comes to Science?
Methinks we who care about this issue should, as Bergbikr suggests, go read Teilhard. Me also thinks, as Rick does, that biomedical science is clearly the very backbone of our economy ca. 21st Century.
However, as a scientist I see utterly no threat from ID. The argument that fundamentalist zealots will undermine science education is hogwash. Science is about being excited by your world and wanting to learn more. Both my children are terribly fascinated with their world, as my wife and I were as kids, and we both read plenty of Bible Stories as children… as ours do now.
Maybe it's because I'm a Believer that I have faith in Mankind's power to put the puzzle together in the ways that are necessary to cure cancers, better understand what genetics are behind predisposition to heart disease and stroke, help the Parkinson patient to walk again, create bioprocessors far faster than silicon chips, engineer crops to feed a hungry third world (if the freaking moonbats will let us do it, that is!).
And improbable as it may seem to some, I guarantee it's true that none of this future technological glory will be threatened or precluded by a belief that God Himself intervened with that last, crucial step that got those monkeys to figure out that the bone was a tool, after all. Because that's what I see this whole argument is about, after all: becoming human. And human pride.
Do I resent those who have summarily dismissed me and my brethren as ignoramii? Not really. The intellectual challenge is fun (more so when free of insults, but no matter). Rather, I am cheered to imagine God smiling down, watching with love and pride as we little humans, with all our egos, pick around His wondrous creation and piece the puzzle together, in between bickering.
I'm also pleased to know of so many biologists, physicians, chemists, engineers, and mathematicians who are Believers and even still don't let it get in the way of their goal: to be the very best they can be at pushing back the frontiers of the Scientific Enterprise.
Comment Posted By The MaryHunter On 4.08.2005 @ 22:40
DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: SHUT YOUR YAP!
Rick bud, if you think that I'm going to get drawn into this one right now, then I've got an ID textbook to sell ya. Cheap. ;-)
No, really, what a great debate you've got going here. Hat's off.
Comment Posted By The MaryHunter On 3.08.2005 @ 19:18
Yours is a valid point, Rightismight. My concern though is that too much thinking this way by The Powers That Be could result in not enough attention to the threat... and that third-world countries already saddled with high AIDS infection rates and general ill health could be devastated by a pandemic that still dinks the first world mightily. (whoops, I showed my soft spot for the third world and health issues... evil Conservative that I am)
Then, what happens when we're asked to bail out the developing countries when we have our own serious health issue to deal with? (ah, atta boy, Conservative Principles arise)
Actually I would love to see some data that correlate a country's per capita wealth with death rates for flu, any flu. From the death rate in "young healthy adults" (data about which I am still dubious) I am beginning to wonder just how indescriminate a killer modern flu pandemics are from a socioeconomic standpoint. The 1918 data probably hold some clue (even tho dated), since if I recall, generally the death rate per capita in the US was far lower than less industrialized countries. I just haven't had time to investigate this.
Rick, did I miss something painfully obvious?
Comment Posted By The MaryHunter On 1.08.2005 @ 18:12
THIS AIN'T YOUR MAMA'S HILL STREET BLUES
Rick, I wasn't really thinking about this series until I read your post. Now pehaps I'll try to evaluate it as you've chosen to do.
Not being a prick here, but just asking: I wonder if there are any war series or movies that the military really appreciates -- that is, any modern ones.
The thought of bringing bathroom habits into the 'real life' that is TV is intriguing. All part of life...
Comment Posted By The MaryHunter On 30.07.2005 @ 06:48
LIBERALS DENIED ABU GHRAIB DOG AND PONY SHOW
This all adds to the clear argument over why our judicial system needs a serious high colonic, to expunge crusty turds such as "Judge" Hellerstein. Great reporting, Rick.
Comment Posted By The MaryHunter On 23.07.2005 @ 08:28
