Isaac Asimov, Ignorant, Hateful Atheist, Beloved by Leftists

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
38,920
Reaction score
4,709
Points
1,130
Another of your conspiracy theories.
What conspiracy theory?

We know through the methods of science that the planet is not a mere 6,000 years old. That’s just ridiculous.
If you give it some thought, the long time is all based on the assumption of ToE and uniformitarianism. That's the illusion. If that were true, then we would have a great amount of sedimentary buildup below the oceans. Instead, we have the mid-Atlantic ridge that goes around the world as evidence of catastrophism.

Science is the most successful way of learning about the world. Simply put, the methods of science are reliable. Through science, more knowledge of the world has been illuminated than with two thousand years of religiously based fears and superstitions. Through the enlightenment of science, people live through disease, we live longer. We can explain gravity and the motion of planets through science, more so than through astrology, alchemy, divination, or ritual. Deny it as you want but you appear literally Medieval doing so.
Sure, but not the science of ToE and uniformitarianism.

The creation science explains better and isn't based on fears and superstition. Yes, the Christians are the ones who found medicine and medical science so we live through disease and live longer -- The Christian Contribution to Medicine. None of it was based on atheism.

As for gravity and motion of planets through science, it was the Christians, too.

I think you'll have to take a leap of faith to finally admit that the Christians created science and the scientific method. Your history is all jumbled up.
You need to be honest with yourself and others about your conspiracy theories that all of evilution is fake. That tends to cast a lot of negative stereotypes on the hyper-religious.

You’re not clear on what you mean by “the long time”. As a YEC’ist you may insist on a literal 6,000 year old planet but that position is simply and literally untenable. Such a child-like refusal to accept the fact of an ancient planet is delusional.

I would suggest you abandon the “creation science’’ slogan as there is no such thing. We both know that such a slogan was invented in the hopes of forcing fundamentalist Christianity into the public schools and that effort has repeatedly been rejected by the courts.


It’s simply false to claim that “Christians found medicine”. There’s no evidence for that. Such nonsense again tends to cast a lot of negative stereotypes on the hyper-religious. The Greek pantheistic philosophers did more with medicine than the Church ever did during the 800 years of the Dark Ages when the Church persecuted the great thinkers, philosophers and mathematicians.
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
38,920
Reaction score
4,709
Points
1,130
I think you'll have to take a leap of faith to finally admit that the Christians created science and the scientific method. Your history is all jumbled up.
The Ivy League Colleges all have Christian Charters.
The Motto of Oxford University is "The Lord is our Light."

Godless Leftists cannot name one university founded with an atheist charter.

While incessantly professing their own intellectual superiority, atheists and Leftists mistake knowledge for wisdom. Bill Cosby has a PhD. So does the Unabomber, a former mathematics professor at UC Berkeley, who had a well worn copy of Al Gore's Earth in the Balance inside his rathole cabin.

I'll post notes from Gore's ignorati anon.
Hair on fire, screeching, Jimmy Swaggert wannabes. Good gawd what is their major malfunction?
 

james bond

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
9,730
Reaction score
1,127
Points
170
I'm here to cast pearls before swine,
It is I who is not to cast pearls before swine. For you, it is too late for me to quote Scripture. That is what Jesus teaches. Not to cast pearls of wisdom before swine like you.

a large part of our scientific method and math came from diverse and non-Christian sources. Everything from our numerical system..Arabic numbers, the zero and Algebra to Physics.....Pythagoras, Aristotle and Euclid. The early Greeks were not Christian...and neither were the Egyptians. The early Islamic era's made quite a lot of progress in medicine and engineering. The Romans..long before their conversion to Christianity were masters in engineering...after the fall of Rome, it was to be another 1,000 years before Europe reclaimed that knowlege..and the early Christian church was a major reason for the long delay.
You show yourself the pig you are when you discuss mathematics and you are wrong. You do not know prehistoric Mesopotamian and Egyptian societies likely made the largest advancements in early mathematics simply due to their age of existence and their overall size and resources.

"For the early years of math, cultures existed largely siloed into their own communities and geographical areas. This meant that each region developed its own means of doing math that slowly evolved to reflect the core principles of the mathematical laws of nature.

Each roughly 6000 years ago can be traced through a lineage of discovering addition, multiplication, and division."


It was Augustine (354-430) who placed the ideal world of eternal truths in the mind of God. He argued that eternal truths could not arise from material things or finite human minds. Rather, mathematical truths must depend on a universal and unchanging Mind that embraces all truth. Only God can have such a mind.

The early Greeks were not Christian...and neither were the Egyptians. The early Islamic era's made quite a lot of progress in medicine and engineering. The Romans..long before their conversion to Christianity were masters in engineering...after the fall of Rome, it was to be another 1,000 years before Europe reclaimed that knowlege..and the early Christian church was a major reason for the long delay.

In fact., given the anti-scientific bias in the early Christian church...it was not until well into the 14th century that Christians made any noticeable progress in the sciences.

In fact, one could, and many do, argue that Christianity actively tried to stifle scientific progress for well over 1,000 years! Remember the intense argument over Copernicus's assertion of the earth circling the sun? The church was not a fan of science nor the scientific method. Look how they treated Galileo?
The irony in that..was that a Greek, Aristarchus of Samos, had already proposed and presented proofs for that concept 1,800 years earlier!~
You are too ignorant asf. It was the Christians who came up with the greatest contributions to science including Galileo who was Christian -- List of Christians in science and technology - Wikipedia.

"Nicholas of Cusa (1401–1464): Catholic cardinal and theologian who made contributions to the field of mathematics by developing the concepts of the infinitesimal and of relative motion. His philosophical speculations also anticipated Copernicusheliocentric world-view."

What you want to believe are the lies that the atheist scientists put out there.
 

EvilEyeFleegle

Platinum Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2017
Messages
8,706
Reaction score
3,126
Points
375
I'm here to cast pearls before swine,
It is I who is not to cast pearls before swine. For you, it is too late for me to quote Scripture. That is what Jesus teaches. Not to cast pearls of wisdom before swine like you.

a large part of our scientific method and math came from diverse and non-Christian sources. Everything from our numerical system..Arabic numbers, the zero and Algebra to Physics.....Pythagoras, Aristotle and Euclid. The early Greeks were not Christian...and neither were the Egyptians. The early Islamic era's made quite a lot of progress in medicine and engineering. The Romans..long before their conversion to Christianity were masters in engineering...after the fall of Rome, it was to be another 1,000 years before Europe reclaimed that knowlege..and the early Christian church was a major reason for the long delay.
You show yourself the pig you are when you discuss mathematics and you are wrong. You do not know prehistoric Mesopotamian and Egyptian societies likely made the largest advancements in early mathematics simply due to their age of existence and their overall size and resources.

"For the early years of math, cultures existed largely siloed into their own communities and geographical areas. This meant that each region developed its own means of doing math that slowly evolved to reflect the core principles of the mathematical laws of nature.

Each roughly 6000 years ago can be traced through a lineage of discovering addition, multiplication, and division."


It was Augustine (354-430) who placed the ideal world of eternal truths in the mind of God. He argued that eternal truths could not arise from material things or finite human minds. Rather, mathematical truths must depend on a universal and unchanging Mind that embraces all truth. Only God can have such a mind.

The early Greeks were not Christian...and neither were the Egyptians. The early Islamic era's made quite a lot of progress in medicine and engineering. The Romans..long before their conversion to Christianity were masters in engineering...after the fall of Rome, it was to be another 1,000 years before Europe reclaimed that knowlege..and the early Christian church was a major reason for the long delay.

In fact., given the anti-scientific bias in the early Christian church...it was not until well into the 14th century that Christians made any noticeable progress in the sciences.

In fact, one could, and many do, argue that Christianity actively tried to stifle scientific progress for well over 1,000 years! Remember the intense argument over Copernicus's assertion of the earth circling the sun? The church was not a fan of science nor the scientific method. Look how they treated Galileo?
The irony in that..was that a Greek, Aristarchus of Samos, had already proposed and presented proofs for that concept 1,800 years earlier!~
You are too ignorant asf. It was the Christians who came up with the greatest contributions to science including Galileo who was Christian -- List of Christians in science and technology - Wikipedia.

"Nicholas of Cusa (1401–1464): Catholic cardinal and theologian who made contributions to the field of mathematics by developing the concepts of the infinitesimal and of relative motion. His philosophical speculations also anticipated Copernicusheliocentric world-view."

What you want to believe are the lies that the atheist scientists put out there.
First, you're a deceptive piece of shit to snip my quote in such a way as to change the meaning. Intellectually dishonest..which is not a surprise, since your positions are flat out insupportable.

I said that I'm NOT here to cast pearls before swine..but in truth..it appears I did just that. Enjoy your ignorant insular life..fake, wannabe defender of medieval ignorance.
 

james bond

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
9,730
Reaction score
1,127
Points
170
Another of your conspiracy theories.
What conspiracy theory?

We know through the methods of science that the planet is not a mere 6,000 years old. That’s just ridiculous.
If you give it some thought, the long time is all based on the assumption of ToE and uniformitarianism. That's the illusion. If that were true, then we would have a great amount of sedimentary buildup below the oceans. Instead, we have the mid-Atlantic ridge that goes around the world as evidence of catastrophism.

Science is the most successful way of learning about the world. Simply put, the methods of science are reliable. Through science, more knowledge of the world has been illuminated than with two thousand years of religiously based fears and superstitions. Through the enlightenment of science, people live through disease, we live longer. We can explain gravity and the motion of planets through science, more so than through astrology, alchemy, divination, or ritual. Deny it as you want but you appear literally Medieval doing so.
Sure, but not the science of ToE and uniformitarianism.

The creation science explains better and isn't based on fears and superstition. Yes, the Christians are the ones who found medicine and medical science so we live through disease and live longer -- The Christian Contribution to Medicine. None of it was based on atheism.

As for gravity and motion of planets through science, it was the Christians, too.

I think you'll have to take a leap of faith to finally admit that the Christians created science and the scientific method. Your history is all jumbled up.
You need to be honest with yourself and others about your conspiracy theories that all of evilution is fake. That tends to cast a lot of negative stereotypes on the hyper-religious.

You’re not clear on what you mean by “the long time”. As a YEC’ist you may insist on a literal 6,000 year old planet but that position is simply and literally untenable. Such a child-like refusal to accept the fact of an ancient planet is delusional.

I would suggest you abandon the “creation science’’ slogan as there is no such thing. We both know that such a slogan was invented in the hopes of forcing fundamentalist Christianity into the public schools and that effort has repeatedly been rejected by the courts.


It’s simply false to claim that “Christians found medicine”. There’s no evidence for that. Such nonsense again tends to cast a lot of negative stereotypes on the hyper-religious. The Greek pantheistic philosophers did more with medicine than the Church ever did during the 800 years of the Dark Ages when the Church persecuted the great thinkers, philosophers and mathematicians.
Well, the battle for the schools and young minds continues on. It's just a setback that the atheist scientists have won with the lies of evolutionary science. It is true all of evolution is fake. None of it except natural selection is demonstrable. Creation science includes natural selection. Medicine and mathematics was founded by different societies even before the Greeks. What the Christians found was modern medicine as practice today.


 

james bond

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
9,730
Reaction score
1,127
Points
170
I'm here to cast pearls before swine,
It is I who is not to cast pearls before swine. For you, it is too late for me to quote Scripture. That is what Jesus teaches. Not to cast pearls of wisdom before swine like you.

a large part of our scientific method and math came from diverse and non-Christian sources. Everything from our numerical system..Arabic numbers, the zero and Algebra to Physics.....Pythagoras, Aristotle and Euclid. The early Greeks were not Christian...and neither were the Egyptians. The early Islamic era's made quite a lot of progress in medicine and engineering. The Romans..long before their conversion to Christianity were masters in engineering...after the fall of Rome, it was to be another 1,000 years before Europe reclaimed that knowlege..and the early Christian church was a major reason for the long delay.
You show yourself the pig you are when you discuss mathematics and you are wrong. You do not know prehistoric Mesopotamian and Egyptian societies likely made the largest advancements in early mathematics simply due to their age of existence and their overall size and resources.

"For the early years of math, cultures existed largely siloed into their own communities and geographical areas. This meant that each region developed its own means of doing math that slowly evolved to reflect the core principles of the mathematical laws of nature.

Each roughly 6000 years ago can be traced through a lineage of discovering addition, multiplication, and division."


It was Augustine (354-430) who placed the ideal world of eternal truths in the mind of God. He argued that eternal truths could not arise from material things or finite human minds. Rather, mathematical truths must depend on a universal and unchanging Mind that embraces all truth. Only God can have such a mind.

The early Greeks were not Christian...and neither were the Egyptians. The early Islamic era's made quite a lot of progress in medicine and engineering. The Romans..long before their conversion to Christianity were masters in engineering...after the fall of Rome, it was to be another 1,000 years before Europe reclaimed that knowlege..and the early Christian church was a major reason for the long delay.

In fact., given the anti-scientific bias in the early Christian church...it was not until well into the 14th century that Christians made any noticeable progress in the sciences.

In fact, one could, and many do, argue that Christianity actively tried to stifle scientific progress for well over 1,000 years! Remember the intense argument over Copernicus's assertion of the earth circling the sun? The church was not a fan of science nor the scientific method. Look how they treated Galileo?
The irony in that..was that a Greek, Aristarchus of Samos, had already proposed and presented proofs for that concept 1,800 years earlier!~
You are too ignorant asf. It was the Christians who came up with the greatest contributions to science including Galileo who was Christian -- List of Christians in science and technology - Wikipedia.

"Nicholas of Cusa (1401–1464): Catholic cardinal and theologian who made contributions to the field of mathematics by developing the concepts of the infinitesimal and of relative motion. His philosophical speculations also anticipated Copernicusheliocentric world-view."

What you want to believe are the lies that the atheist scientists put out there.
First, you're a deceptive piece of shit to snip my quote in such a way as to change the meaning. Intellectually dishonest..which is not a surprise, since your positions are flat out insupportable.

I said that I'm NOT here to cast pearls before swine..but in truth..it appears I did just that. Enjoy your ignorant insular life..fake, wannabe defender of medieval ignorance.
It just goes to show that you are the swine and no amount of pearls of wisdom will change you. What I pointed out is you do not know that Jesus is the source for that quote.

Anyway, it is your arguments that are just snippets from sources which you cannot provide.
 

Concerned American

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2020
Messages
3,198
Reaction score
3,296
Points
1,893
Location
In your head
In 1984, I read his book, Counting the Eons.

It was the first book I ever read so full of nonsense and silliness that I took copious notes and critiqued it, then sent my notes to the publisher who forwarded them to Isaac Asimov.

First I will show you the postcard Isaac wrote to me and then I will critique his ignorant postcard, which by the way I sold on E-Bay for $75 ! Woot.

View attachment 445934

I covered over my name and address.

In his few sentences here, Asimov's ignorance is in full throat.

1. He blames the failure of religion on religion, neglecting the obvious fact that if you do not follow the precepts, the instructions, then you cannot blame the book which you purposely ignored and neglected.

2. On the subject of "humanity's social ignorance and weakness," consider that:
A. Isaac Asimov neglected his own family to pursue his passion of self-aggrandizing writing. His referenced book is 1230 pages in length, a horribly boring read. I quit after just a few dozen pages which blathered needlessly and said nothing anyone would care about.
B. Asimov's son, who he long neglected, was arrested in Northern California a few years ago for possession of child pornography on his computer. Shades of Hunter Biden! What kind of fathers raise these kinds of sons?
C. Asimov was SO INGNORANT that he refused to fly on any commercial aircraft, which happen to be ten times safer per passenger mile than driving a car.
D. Asimov became a fervent atheist after he prayed to God to help him pass a chemistry test in high school. After he failed it, he renounced God for the remainder of his miserable life. Asimov would show God, by God!

3. On the subject of my critique, Asimov completely ignored all of it, not because it was without merit, but because he had no answers and he knew it. I'll just provide a few examples for Asimov sycophants to grind their teeth on:

Page 12 "If the tube (used to breath through when underwater) is long enough and wide

enough, all the exhaled air remains in that long tube and you will breathe the same air over

and over again and it will not be long before you suffocate".



[Wrong again. If you extend a tube a mere 18" under water, and position yourself vertically

below it, the hydrostatic pressure precludes you from inspiring your first breath. I have tried it

as a scuba diver. EVEN IF that were not the case, his argument still fails. Exhale out your

nose.]


Page 21: "Raise the temperature of ice and it melts."


[Ice melts at a constant temperature - 0 degrees C.]

Page 150: ". . . there is an object a mile above the surface of the earth that is moving upward

at a constant speed. We can tell when it started its journey . . . there is nothing in the upward

direction to stop, we could conclude that it would travel forever and its journey would have no

end."



[Let's not complicate "science" with, oh say wind resistance, or even gravity. Such

oversights make his poor writing look as trivial as, "negative energy"!]
The last time I read anything by that author was when I was in the fourth grade in the early '60s. He appeals to young immature minds.
 

Concerned American

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2020
Messages
3,198
Reaction score
3,296
Points
1,893
Location
In your head
Another of your conspiracy theories.
What conspiracy theory?

We know through the methods of science that the planet is not a mere 6,000 years old. That’s just ridiculous.
If you give it some thought, the long time is all based on the assumption of ToE and uniformitarianism. That's the illusion. If that were true, then we would have a great amount of sedimentary buildup below the oceans. Instead, we have the mid-Atlantic ridge that goes around the world as evidence of catastrophism.

Science is the most successful way of learning about the world. Simply put, the methods of science are reliable. Through science, more knowledge of the world has been illuminated than with two thousand years of religiously based fears and superstitions. Through the enlightenment of science, people live through disease, we live longer. We can explain gravity and the motion of planets through science, more so than through astrology, alchemy, divination, or ritual. Deny it as you want but you appear literally Medieval doing so.
Sure, but not the science of ToE and uniformitarianism.

The creation science explains better and isn't based on fears and superstition. Yes, the Christians are the ones who found medicine and medical science so we live through disease and live longer -- The Christian Contribution to Medicine. None of it was based on atheism.

As for gravity and motion of planets through science, it was the Christians, too.

I think you'll have to take a leap of faith to finally admit that the Christians created science and the scientific method. Your history is all jumbled up.
You need to be honest with yourself and others about your conspiracy theories that all of evilution is fake. That tends to cast a lot of negative stereotypes on the hyper-religious.

You’re not clear on what you mean by “the long time”. As a YEC’ist you may insist on a literal 6,000 year old planet but that position is simply and literally untenable. Such a child-like refusal to accept the fact of an ancient planet is delusional.

I would suggest you abandon the “creation science’’ slogan as there is no such thing. We both know that such a slogan was invented in the hopes of forcing fundamentalist Christianity into the public schools and that effort has repeatedly been rejected by the courts.


It’s simply false to claim that “Christians found medicine”. There’s no evidence for that. Such nonsense again tends to cast a lot of negative stereotypes on the hyper-religious. The Greek pantheistic philosophers did more with medicine than the Church ever did during the 800 years of the Dark Ages when the Church persecuted the great thinkers, philosophers and mathematicians.
Well, the battle for the schools and young minds continues on. It's just a setback that the atheist scientists have won with the lies of evolutionary science. It is true all of evolution is fake. None of it except natural selection is demonstrable. Creation science includes natural selection. Medicine and mathematics was founded by different societies even before the Greeks. What the Christians found was modern medicine as practice today.


I really cannot understand why creationists cannot reconcile with evolution. The bible is clear re: the creation, however it does not state nor do we have any idea of how long God's day is. The creation day may be hundreds, thousands, even millions of years long and quite possibly involves evolution. Open your mind, the Lord works in mysterious ways.
 
OP
ChemEngineer

ChemEngineer

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2019
Messages
2,609
Reaction score
1,902
Points
1,940
I really cannot understand why creationists cannot reconcile with evolution. The bible (sic) is clear re: the creation, however it does not state nor do we have any idea of how long God's day is. The creation day may be hundreds, thousands, even millions of years long and quite possibly involves evolution. Open your mind, the Lord works in mysterious ways.
The more important question is why evolutionists can't reconcile with The Creator. I'm sure that some do, but the overwhelming majority are like Asimov, the SUBJECT of the thread. Stop derailing the thread and get back to the subject of the thread - Asimov's ignorance as shown through his published work. Like so many of his fellow hatefuls, he is smugly superior in all respects and never admits when he is wrong.
 

Burgermeister

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2021
Messages
196
Reaction score
202
Points
58
I miss Asimov and other Sci Fi writers from the golden age. Most recent Sci Fi is lefty crap.
 

Concerned American

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2020
Messages
3,198
Reaction score
3,296
Points
1,893
Location
In your head
I really cannot understand why creationists cannot reconcile with evolution. The bible (sic) is clear re: the creation, however it does not state nor do we have any idea of how long God's day is. The creation day may be hundreds, thousands, even millions of years long and quite possibly involves evolution. Open your mind, the Lord works in mysterious ways.
The more important question is why evolutionists can't reconcile with The Creator. I'm sure that some do, but the overwhelming majority are like Asimov, the SUBJECT of the thread. Stop derailing the thread and get back to the subject of the thread - Asimov's ignorance as shown through his published work. Like so many of his fellow hatefuls, he is smugly superior in all respects and never admits when he is wrong.
Sorry, I responded to the threads subject earlier, but james bond hijacked your thread and I was responding to him. Did you tell him to remain on topic?
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
38,920
Reaction score
4,709
Points
1,130
Another of your conspiracy theories.
What conspiracy theory?

We know through the methods of science that the planet is not a mere 6,000 years old. That’s just ridiculous.
If you give it some thought, the long time is all based on the assumption of ToE and uniformitarianism. That's the illusion. If that were true, then we would have a great amount of sedimentary buildup below the oceans. Instead, we have the mid-Atlantic ridge that goes around the world as evidence of catastrophism.

Science is the most successful way of learning about the world. Simply put, the methods of science are reliable. Through science, more knowledge of the world has been illuminated than with two thousand years of religiously based fears and superstitions. Through the enlightenment of science, people live through disease, we live longer. We can explain gravity and the motion of planets through science, more so than through astrology, alchemy, divination, or ritual. Deny it as you want but you appear literally Medieval doing so.
Sure, but not the science of ToE and uniformitarianism.

The creation science explains better and isn't based on fears and superstition. Yes, the Christians are the ones who found medicine and medical science so we live through disease and live longer -- The Christian Contribution to Medicine. None of it was based on atheism.

As for gravity and motion of planets through science, it was the Christians, too.

I think you'll have to take a leap of faith to finally admit that the Christians created science and the scientific method. Your history is all jumbled up.
You need to be honest with yourself and others about your conspiracy theories that all of evilution is fake. That tends to cast a lot of negative stereotypes on the hyper-religious.

You’re not clear on what you mean by “the long time”. As a YEC’ist you may insist on a literal 6,000 year old planet but that position is simply and literally untenable. Such a child-like refusal to accept the fact of an ancient planet is delusional.

I would suggest you abandon the “creation science’’ slogan as there is no such thing. We both know that such a slogan was invented in the hopes of forcing fundamentalist Christianity into the public schools and that effort has repeatedly been rejected by the courts.


It’s simply false to claim that “Christians found medicine”. There’s no evidence for that. Such nonsense again tends to cast a lot of negative stereotypes on the hyper-religious. The Greek pantheistic philosophers did more with medicine than the Church ever did during the 800 years of the Dark Ages when the Church persecuted the great thinkers, philosophers and mathematicians.
Well, the battle for the schools and young minds continues on. It's just a setback that the atheist scientists have won with the lies of evolutionary science. It is true all of evolution is fake. None of it except natural selection is demonstrable. Creation science includes natural selection. Medicine and mathematics was founded by different societies even before the Greeks. What the Christians found was modern medicine as practice today.


Your ''battle for the schools'' crusade was lost long ago. At least in part, that loss was a function of the various ID'iot creationer ministries and their ''lies of evolutionary science'' conspiracy theories. The Dover trial was the latest humiliation suffered by the ID'iot creationers. Even bringing in the grand old loons of the industry of fundamentalist Christianity did nothing to make a defendable case for attempting to push religion into the public school system. Christianity has been rebranded and relabeled so many times as a burqa to cover the creationer labels for their religion that Dover may be the last dying gasp of the Christian fundamentalists attempt to corrupt the public schools. There is a long history of fundamentalist Christians who reject evolutionary biology (and much of the rest of science) in favor of their ideological predispositions. They have made every effort to subvert the Constitution and force their non-scientific notions into science classrooms. They have invented any number of labels phrasing their religion as: "creation science", "scientific creationism", "evidence against evolution, "intelligent design", "teach the controversy", "academic freedom", and "viewpoint discrimination". These have all amounted to the same failed strategy: have evolutionary biology treated differently from other sciences in the public school curriculum and treat the alternative non-science: fundamentalist Christianity, as if it were science.

Creationers misuse a lot of terms such as 'lies of evolutionary science''. However, the definition of evolution as changes in populations over time was devised to discuss evolution in scientific contexts, not to convince creationists about gods and supernaturalism.

You need to rethink your false claim that ''What the Christians found was modern medicine as practice today.'' That simply isn't true which is why you made no effort to support such nonsense.
 
OP
ChemEngineer

ChemEngineer

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2019
Messages
2,609
Reaction score
1,902
Points
1,940
Sorry, I responded to the threads subject earlier, but james bond hijacked your thread and I was responding to him. Did you tell him to remain on topic?
James, please remain on topic, viz., Isaac Asimov's ignorance, errors, arrogance, and atheism. And hatefulness. Tangentially, atheists such as Asimov are irrepressibly militant evolutionists like Richard Dawkins, whose works I have similarly critiqued. I think he will be my next mark.
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
38,920
Reaction score
4,709
Points
1,130
Sorry, I responded to the threads subject earlier, but james bond hijacked your thread and I was responding to him. Did you tell him to remain on topic?
James, please remain on topic, viz., Isaac Asimov's ignorance, errors, arrogance, and atheism. And hatefulness. Tangentially, atheists such as Asimov are irrepressibly militant evolutionists like Richard Dawkins, whose works I have similarly critiqued. I think he will be my next mark.
Oh, my. The internet tough guy is on the loose.
 

james bond

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
9,730
Reaction score
1,127
Points
170
The last time I read anything by that author was when I was in the fourth grade in the early '60s. He appeals to young immature minds.
Asimov's guide to the Bible (from the secular viewpoint) has long been forgotten. Nobody equates that geezer with religion anymore. While he was a prolific writer of science fiction, his books are prolly being forgotten as we speak. I haven't read any since the 80s, maybe 90s (after he died)(?).

ETA: If you look at his introduction to Asimov's guide to the Bible, he writes:

"INTRODUCTION

The most influential, the most published, the most widely read book in the history of the world is the Bible. No other book has been so studied and so analyzed and it is a tribute to the complexity of the Bible and the eagerness of its students that after thousands of years of study there are still endless books that can be written about it.

I have myself written two short books for young people on the earlier books of the Bible* bat I have long wanted to take on a job of more ambitious scope; one that I can most briefly describe as a consideration of the secular aspects of the Bible.

Most people who read the Bible do so in order to get the benefit of its ethical and spiritual teachings, but the Bible has a secular side, too. It is a history book covering the first four thousand years of human civilization.

The Bible is not a history book in modern sense, of course, since its writers lacked the benefit of modem archaeological techniques, did not have our concept of dating and documentation, and had different standards of what was and was not significant in history. Furthermore, Biblical interest was centered primarily on developments that impinged upon those dwelling in Canaan, a small section of Asia bordering on the Mediterranean Sea. This area makes only a small mark on the history of early civilization (from the secular viewpoint) and modern histories, in contrast to the Bible, give it comparatively little space.

Nevertheless, for most of the last two thousand years, the Bible has been virtually the only history book used in Western civilization. Even today, it remains the most popular, and its view of ancient history is still more widely and commonly known than is that of any other.

So it happens, therefore, that millions of people today know of Nebuchadnezzar, and have never heard of Pericles, simply because Nebuchadnezzar is mentioned prominently in the Bible and Pericles is never mentioned at all.

Millions know of Ahasuerus as a Persian king who married Esther, even though there is no record of such an event outside the Bible. Most of those same millions never suspect that he is better known to modern historians as Xerxes and that the most important event in his reign was an invasion of Greece that ended in utter defeat. That invasion is not mentioned in the Bible."

It turns out that Pericles is a fictional character as Prince of Tyre :auiqs.jpg:.
 
Last edited:

Burgermeister

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2021
Messages
196
Reaction score
202
Points
58
Well, I had to abandon that Ringo book. I rarely do that. The search continues.
 
OP
ChemEngineer

ChemEngineer

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2019
Messages
2,609
Reaction score
1,902
Points
1,940
Asimov's fawning millions excuse his profound ignorance and hatefulness and simply make excuses for him. Deplorable. If he were as smart as atheists are constantly telling the world they are, then why did he write stupidity in his published books and practice stupidity in his own miserable but famous and wealthy life? It is a rhetorical question for his followers to ponder, not try to cover up or make excuses for.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top