The Dishonest Creationist Tactic of 'Quote Mining'

OP
abu afak

abu afak

ALLAH SNACKBAR!
Joined
Mar 3, 2006
Messages
3,335
Reaction score
850
Points
315
The truth is that GOD provided the inspiration.
...... And if you don't believe me, read the story in the Bible of Jacob.....
CLASSIC CIRCLE JERK!

CIRCULAR REASONING
circulus in demonstrando
......​
Description: A type of reasoning in which the Proposition is Supported by the Premises, which is Supported by the Proposition, creating a Circle in reasoning where NO Useful information is being shared.
This Fallacy is often quite Humorous.
......​
Example #2:​
The Bible is the Word of God because God tells us it is... in the Bible.
Explanation: This is a very serious circular argument on which many people base their entire lives.​
This is like getting an e-mail from a Nigerian prince, offering to give you his billion dollar fortune -- but only after you wire him a “good will” offering of $50,000. Of course, you are skeptical until you read the final line in the e-mail that reads “I, prince Nubadola, assure you that this is my message, and it is legitimate. You can trust this e-mail and any others that come from me.” Now you know it is legitimate... because it says so in the e-mail.​


`
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: cnm

LittleNipper

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
4,733
Reaction score
574
Points
130
The truth is that GOD provided the inspiration.
...... And if you don't believe me, read the story in the Bible of Jacob.....
CLASSIC CIRCLE JERK!

CIRCULAR REASONING
circulus in demonstrando
......​
Description: A type of reasoning in which the Proposition is Supported by the Premises, which is Supported by the Proposition, creating a Circle in reasoning where NO Useful information is being shared.
This Fallacy is often quite Humorous.
......​
Example #2:​
The Bible is the Word of God because God tells us it is... in the Bible.
Explanation: This is a very serious circular argument on which many people base their entire lives.​
This is like getting an e-mail from a Nigerian prince, offering to give you his billion dollar fortune -- but only after you wire him a “good will” offering of $50,000. Of course, you are skeptical until you read the final line in the e-mail that reads “I, prince Nubadola, assure you that this is my message, and it is legitimate. You can trust this e-mail and any others that come from me.” Now you know it is legitimate... because it says so in the e-mail.​


`
Circle reasoning... Isn't that like when a fossil is dated by the strata it is found in and the strata is dated by the fossils found in it... That kind of circular reasoning?
 

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
100,391
Reaction score
34,436
Points
2,260
Location
Brooklyn, NY
The truth is that GOD provided the inspiration.
...... And if you don't believe me, read the story in the Bible of Jacob.....
CLASSIC CIRCLE JERK!

CIRCULAR REASONING
circulus in demonstrando
......​
Description: A type of reasoning in which the Proposition is Supported by the Premises, which is Supported by the Proposition, creating a Circle in reasoning where NO Useful information is being shared.
This Fallacy is often quite Humorous.
......​
Example #2:​
The Bible is the Word of God because God tells us it is... in the Bible.
Explanation: This is a very serious circular argument on which many people base their entire lives.​
This is like getting an e-mail from a Nigerian prince, offering to give you his billion dollar fortune -- but only after you wire him a “good will” offering of $50,000. Of course, you are skeptical until you read the final line in the e-mail that reads “I, prince Nubadola, assure you that this is my message, and it is legitimate. You can trust this e-mail and any others that come from me.” Now you know it is legitimate... because it says so in the e-mail.​


`
Circle reasoning... Isn't that like when a fossil is dated by the strata it is found in and the strata is dated by the fossils found in it... That kind of circular reasoning?

Of course.


“No fossil is buried with its birth certificate. That, and the scarcity of fossils, means that it is effectively impossible to link fossils into chains of cause and effect in any valid way... To take a line of fossils and claim that they represent a lineage is not a scientific hypothesis that can be tested, but an assertion that carries the same validity as a bedtime story—amusing, perhaps even instructive, but not scientific.”― Henry Gee, In Search of Deep Time: Beyond the Fossil Record to a New History of Life
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
37,256
Reaction score
4,020
Points
1,130
The truth is that GOD provided the inspiration.
...... And if you don't believe me, read the story in the Bible of Jacob.....
CLASSIC CIRCLE JERK!

CIRCULAR REASONING
circulus in demonstrando
......​
Description: A type of reasoning in which the Proposition is Supported by the Premises, which is Supported by the Proposition, creating a Circle in reasoning where NO Useful information is being shared.
This Fallacy is often quite Humorous.
......​
Example #2:​
The Bible is the Word of God because God tells us it is... in the Bible.
Explanation: This is a very serious circular argument on which many people base their entire lives.​
This is like getting an e-mail from a Nigerian prince, offering to give you his billion dollar fortune -- but only after you wire him a “good will” offering of $50,000. Of course, you are skeptical until you read the final line in the e-mail that reads “I, prince Nubadola, assure you that this is my message, and it is legitimate. You can trust this e-mail and any others that come from me.” Now you know it is legitimate... because it says so in the e-mail.​


`
Circle reasoning... Isn't that like when a fossil is dated by the strata it is found in and the strata is dated by the fossils found in it... That kind of circular reasoning?

Of course.


“No fossil is buried with its birth certificate. That, and the scarcity of fossils, means that it is effectively impossible to link fossils into chains of cause and effect in any valid way... To take a line of fossils and claim that they represent a lineage is not a scientific hypothesis that can be tested, but an assertion that carries the same validity as a bedtime story—amusing, perhaps even instructive, but not scientific.”― Henry Gee, In Search of Deep Time: Beyond the Fossil Record to a New History of Life
The above is another “quote” taken from Harun Yahya. Here again, the “quote miner” takes a “quote” in isolation from the greater topic.

Here is a link to Gee’s book. I’ll let the reader decide the context.

 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
37,256
Reaction score
4,020
Points
1,130
The truth is that GOD provided the inspiration.
...... And if you don't believe me, read the story in the Bible of Jacob.....
CLASSIC CIRCLE JERK!

CIRCULAR REASONING
circulus in demonstrando
......​
Description: A type of reasoning in which the Proposition is Supported by the Premises, which is Supported by the Proposition, creating a Circle in reasoning where NO Useful information is being shared.
This Fallacy is often quite Humorous.
......​
Example #2:​
The Bible is the Word of God because God tells us it is... in the Bible.
Explanation: This is a very serious circular argument on which many people base their entire lives.​
This is like getting an e-mail from a Nigerian prince, offering to give you his billion dollar fortune -- but only after you wire him a “good will” offering of $50,000. Of course, you are skeptical until you read the final line in the e-mail that reads “I, prince Nubadola, assure you that this is my message, and it is legitimate. You can trust this e-mail and any others that come from me.” Now you know it is legitimate... because it says so in the e-mail.​


`
Circle reasoning... Isn't that like when a fossil is dated by the strata it is found in and the strata is dated by the fossils found in it... That kind of circular reasoning?

Of course.


“No fossil is buried with its birth certificate. That, and the scarcity of fossils, means that it is effectively impossible to link fossils into chains of cause and effect in any valid way... To take a line of fossils and claim that they represent a lineage is not a scientific hypothesis that can be tested, but an assertion that carries the same validity as a bedtime story—amusing, perhaps even instructive, but not scientific.”― Henry Gee, In Search of Deep Time: Beyond the Fossil Record to a New History of Life
ID’iot creationist Jonathan Wells of the Disco’tute is badly misrepresenting Henry Gee. Even if it weren't obvious from understanding biological evolution which the hyper-religious “quote-miners” do not, I can figure this out by consulting the words of... Henry Gee. He has become so frustrated at the persistent misrepresentation of his work, he finally felt compelled to



As such, I regard the opinions of the Discovery Institute as regressive, repressive, divisive, sectarian and probably unrepresentative of views held by people of faith generally. In addition, the use by creationists of selective, unauthorized quotations, possibly with intent to mislead the public undermines their position as self-appointed guardians of public values and morals.
 

LittleNipper

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
4,733
Reaction score
574
Points
130
The truth is that GOD provided the inspiration.
...... And if you don't believe me, read the story in the Bible of Jacob.....
CLASSIC CIRCLE JERK!

CIRCULAR REASONING
circulus in demonstrando
......​
Description: A type of reasoning in which the Proposition is Supported by the Premises, which is Supported by the Proposition, creating a Circle in reasoning where NO Useful information is being shared.
This Fallacy is often quite Humorous.
......​
Example #2:​
The Bible is the Word of God because God tells us it is... in the Bible.
Explanation: This is a very serious circular argument on which many people base their entire lives.​
This is like getting an e-mail from a Nigerian prince, offering to give you his billion dollar fortune -- but only after you wire him a “good will” offering of $50,000. Of course, you are skeptical until you read the final line in the e-mail that reads “I, prince Nubadola, assure you that this is my message, and it is legitimate. You can trust this e-mail and any others that come from me.” Now you know it is legitimate... because it says so in the e-mail.​


`
Circle reasoning... Isn't that like when a fossil is dated by the strata it is found in and the strata is dated by the fossils found in it... That kind of circular reasoning?

Of course.


“No fossil is buried with its birth certificate. That, and the scarcity of fossils, means that it is effectively impossible to link fossils into chains of cause and effect in any valid way... To take a line of fossils and claim that they represent a lineage is not a scientific hypothesis that can be tested, but an assertion that carries the same validity as a bedtime story—amusing, perhaps even instructive, but not scientific.”― Henry Gee, In Search of Deep Time: Beyond the Fossil Record to a New History of Life
ID’iot creationist Jonathan Wells of the Disco’tute is badly misrepresenting Henry Gee. Even if it weren't obvious from understanding biological evolution which the hyper-religious “quote-miners” do not, I can figure this out by consulting the words of... Henry Gee. He has become so frustrated at the persistent misrepresentation of his work, he finally felt compelled to



As such, I regard the opinions of the Discovery Institute as regressive, repressive, divisive, sectarian and probably unrepresentative of views held by people of faith generally. In addition, the use by creationists of selective, unauthorized quotations, possibly with intent to mislead the public undermines their position as self-appointed guardians of public values and morals.
We already know how you feel; however, don't evilutionuts (I did this to mimic your comic relief) do the very same thing. They reject a CREATOR because HE is immaterial. They have built theories of exclusion. They ignore written history. They ridicule personal character rather than stick to the data and interpretation of the data. They even hide data and objects that contradict their research rather than incorporating such things. I don't see creationists doing that; however, they do bring up the weakest points of the opposition and expound on them.
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
37,256
Reaction score
4,020
Points
1,130
The truth is that GOD provided the inspiration.
...... And if you don't believe me, read the story in the Bible of Jacob.....
CLASSIC CIRCLE JERK!

CIRCULAR REASONING
circulus in demonstrando
......​
Description: A type of reasoning in which the Proposition is Supported by the Premises, which is Supported by the Proposition, creating a Circle in reasoning where NO Useful information is being shared.
This Fallacy is often quite Humorous.
......​
Example #2:​
The Bible is the Word of God because God tells us it is... in the Bible.
Explanation: This is a very serious circular argument on which many people base their entire lives.​
This is like getting an e-mail from a Nigerian prince, offering to give you his billion dollar fortune -- but only after you wire him a “good will” offering of $50,000. Of course, you are skeptical until you read the final line in the e-mail that reads “I, prince Nubadola, assure you that this is my message, and it is legitimate. You can trust this e-mail and any others that come from me.” Now you know it is legitimate... because it says so in the e-mail.​


`
Circle reasoning... Isn't that like when a fossil is dated by the strata it is found in and the strata is dated by the fossils found in it... That kind of circular reasoning?

Of course.


“No fossil is buried with its birth certificate. That, and the scarcity of fossils, means that it is effectively impossible to link fossils into chains of cause and effect in any valid way... To take a line of fossils and claim that they represent a lineage is not a scientific hypothesis that can be tested, but an assertion that carries the same validity as a bedtime story—amusing, perhaps even instructive, but not scientific.”― Henry Gee, In Search of Deep Time: Beyond the Fossil Record to a New History of Life
ID’iot creationist Jonathan Wells of the Disco’tute is badly misrepresenting Henry Gee. Even if it weren't obvious from understanding biological evolution which the hyper-religious “quote-miners” do not, I can figure this out by consulting the words of... Henry Gee. He has become so frustrated at the persistent misrepresentation of his work, he finally felt compelled to



As such, I regard the opinions of the Discovery Institute as regressive, repressive, divisive, sectarian and probably unrepresentative of views held by people of faith generally. In addition, the use by creationists of selective, unauthorized quotations, possibly with intent to mislead the public undermines their position as self-appointed guardians of public values and morals.
We already know how you feel; however, don't evilutionuts (I did this to mimic your comic relief) do the very same thing. They reject a CREATOR because HE is immaterial. They have built theories of exclusion. They ignore written history. They ridicule personal character rather than stick to the data and interpretation of the data. They even hide data and objects that contradict their research rather than incorporating such things. I don't see creationists doing that; however, they do bring up the weakest points of the opposition and expound on them.
Unless you believe in the gods of competing religionists, you may have evilutionist tendencies.

All seriousness aside, I think religionists of all stripes and caliber of weapons object to science requiring a standard of demonstration. There is nothing that separates your alleged gods from any of the other versions of gods. Your immaterial gods are no better demonstrated from any of the other immaterial gods.

Science, on the other hand, has methods to test claims and assertions provided those claims and assertions do not rely on an a priori commitment to belief in supernaturalism. Obviously, when you’re dealing with infallible humans, there will be those who for various reasons will attempt to “fudge” the data. The difference that separates appeals to supernaturalism as opposed to rational discourse is that science will peer review.

If you don’t see the creation ministries as the worst offenders of dishonestly manipulating data to suit their agenda, you should read the “Statement of Faith” that is a part to these creation ministries.

Please identify the research facilities, peer reviewed papers and accredited academic programs that creation ministries sponsor at any of the research / teaching universities in the U.S.
 
OP
abu afak

abu afak

ALLAH SNACKBAR!
Joined
Mar 3, 2006
Messages
3,335
Reaction score
850
Points
315
Circle reasoning... Isn't that like when a fossil is dated by the strata it is found in and the strata is dated by the fossils found in it... That kind of circular reasoning?
No you idiot.
You of course know nothing about evolution or even basic science.
plants and animals of similar age are found at same levels of strata worldwide and never found with creatures that aren't.
(the 70mya K-T/meteor impact being marker worldwide)
When Isotopic dating came along like Carbon (C14) dating it just CONFIRMED Evolutions dates.
Now many longer-lived isotopes are used to Confirm dates.


And I might add, we have overlapping tree ring dating chains of 10,000 years or more. Older than YEC's 6000 years, and even YOU could understand tree rings. No?

`
 
Last edited:

LittleNipper

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
4,733
Reaction score
574
Points
130
Circle reasoning... Isn't that like when a fossil is dated by the strata it is found in and the strata is dated by the fossils found in it... That kind of circular reasoning?
No you idiot.
You of course know nothing about evolution or even basic science.
plants and animals of similar age are found at same levels of strata worldwide and never found with creatures that aren't.
(the 70mya K-T/meteor impact being marker worldwide)
When Isotopic dating came along like Carbon (C14) dating it just CONFIRMED Evolutions dates.
Now many longer-lived isotopes are used to Confirm dates.


And I might add, we have overlapping tree ring dating chains of 10,000 years or more. Older than YEC's 6000 years, and even YOU could understand tree rings. No?

`
You just might wish to consider:

As for tree rings going back 10,000 years. Why not further? Let's consider the reality that since GOD created trees, HE would have created some fully grown. Adam and Eve likely looked like a fully mature and healthy couple of 30 years old. So, if GOD created a fully mature human, why wouldn't GOD create some fully mature trees for man to wander among. And as such, certainly they would have possessed rings. The prototype would mimic those that grew later. Now, the interesting question would be if the rings of those trees with "10,000" year old rings differ in appearance structurally from those that would have grown and matured after the initial CREATION. Might they be more uniform, healthier looking. That would be interesting research. Of course idiots like me like to think outside the preconceived academic box.
 

james bond

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
8,645
Reaction score
890
Points
170
Jonathan Wells of the Disco’tute is badly misrepresenting Henry Gee.
"Dr. Jonathan Wells, in his book Icons of Evolution, declares that the ultimate evolutionary icon is to show that man descended from apes. It is an attempt that, given the lack of evidence, is doomed to failure. Wells cites Henry Gee, chief science writer for the prestigious science journal, Nature: To take a line of fossils and claim that they represent a lineage [from ape to man] is not a scientific hypothesis that can be tested, but an assertion that carries the same validity as a bedtime story—amusing, perhaps even instructive, but not scientific."


Nothing wrong with Wells' statement. He says that it can't be tested. My complaint is we do not see bipedalism in monkeys today. Then what we get is the fraudulent transitional fossil thing which we just discussed. What does Gee say about that? What has Gee presented so far, i.e. lineage of fossils, to back him up?

I wish you explain briefly or paste and paragraph or two instead of linking whol papers.
 

james bond

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
8,645
Reaction score
890
Points
170
Please identify the research facilities, peer reviewed papers and accredited academic programs that creation ministries sponsor at any of the research / teaching universities in the U.S
You've been getting them, but then post stupid asf links to talkorigins which you can't or won't explain in your own words.
 

james bond

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
8,645
Reaction score
890
Points
170
You of course know nothing about evolution or even basic science.
Why should we know what you know? We have to read a link to get what you mean? Fark that. You should be able to put together a point or argument based on what you read and have the link back you up. We don't even get that.

I basically know about evolution through my UC Berkeley website and when I use it, most of the time I find you and the evos here don't know squat. It's why you can onl reply to my posts with a smilie. You're the one who knows nothing about evolution or even basic science, Mr. Smiey :laughing0301:.
 
  • Funny
Reactions: cnm

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
37,256
Reaction score
4,020
Points
1,130
Jonathan Wells of the Disco’tute is badly misrepresenting Henry Gee.
"Dr. Jonathan Wells, in his book Icons of Evolution, declares that the ultimate evolutionary icon is to show that man descended from apes. It is an attempt that, given the lack of evidence, is doomed to failure. Wells cites Henry Gee, chief science writer for the prestigious science journal, Nature: To take a line of fossils and claim that they represent a lineage [from ape to man] is not a scientific hypothesis that can be tested, but an assertion that carries the same validity as a bedtime story—amusing, perhaps even instructive, but not scientific."


Nothing wrong with Wells' statement. He says that it can't be tested. My complaint is we do not see bipedalism in monkeys today. Then what we get is the fraudulent transitional fossil thing which we just discussed. What does Gee say about that? What has Gee presented so far, i.e. lineage of fossils, to back him up?

I wish you explain briefly or paste and paragraph or two instead of linking whol papers.
There is no Indication that man descended from apes. The ''man from ape'' claim is one typical for ID'iot creationers lacking any background in science.

It's a mistake to use ID'iot creationer charlatans as a source to support your religious extremism.
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
37,256
Reaction score
4,020
Points
1,130
Please identify the research facilities, peer reviewed papers and accredited academic programs that creation ministries sponsor at any of the research / teaching universities in the U.S
You've been getting them, but then post stupid asf links to talkorigins which you can't or won't explain in your own words.
Your hope to sidestep the complete lack of research done by ID'iot creationer ministries is obvious. Can you identify a single research paper submitted by the ICR to the journal Nature?

Can you identify a single US teaching / research university that sponsors or collaborates with research performed by the charlatans at creation,com?
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
37,256
Reaction score
4,020
Points
1,130
Jonathan Wells of the Disco’tute is badly misrepresenting Henry Gee.
"Dr. Jonathan Wells, in his book Icons of Evolution, declares that the ultimate evolutionary icon is to show that man descended from apes. It is an attempt that, given the lack of evidence, is doomed to failure. Wells cites Henry Gee, chief science writer for the prestigious science journal, Nature: To take a line of fossils and claim that they represent a lineage [from ape to man] is not a scientific hypothesis that can be tested, but an assertion that carries the same validity as a bedtime story—amusing, perhaps even instructive, but not scientific."


Nothing wrong with Wells' statement. He says that it can't be tested. My complaint is we do not see bipedalism in monkeys today. Then what we get is the fraudulent transitional fossil thing which we just discussed. What does Gee say about that? What has Gee presented so far, i.e. lineage of fossils, to back him up?

I wish you explain briefly or paste and paragraph or two instead of linking whol papers.
It's really remarkable how the religious extremists all copy and paste the same phony ''quotes''.

The Gee ''quote'' is one you stole from the most extreme of the religious extremists.

ID’iot creationist Jonathan Wells of the Disco’tute is badly misrepresenting Henry Gee. Even if it weren't obvious from understanding biological evolution which the hyper-religious “quote-miners” do not, I can figure this out by consulting the words of Henry Gee. He has become so frustrated at the persistent misrepresentation of his work, he finally felt compelled to clarify his position to refute the false claims made by ID'iot creationers.


https://ncse.ngo/files/pub/creationism/NCSE_2001_PBS_Evolution_series.pdf

"As such, I regard the opinions of the Discovery Institute as regressive, repressive, divisive, sectarian and probably unrepresentative of views held by people of faith generally. In addition, the use by creationists of selective, unauthorized quotations, possibly with intent to mislead the public undermines their position as self-appointed guardians of public values and morals.''
 
OP
abu afak

abu afak

ALLAH SNACKBAR!
Joined
Mar 3, 2006
Messages
3,335
Reaction score
850
Points
315
a. Dr. Stephen C. Meyer produced a binder of one hundred peer-reviewed scientific articles in which biologists described significant problems with the theory.
Meyer, "Darwin's Doubt."

b. The attempt to prevent students from hearing of the problems with evolutionary theory is exactly the kind of indoctrination that critics of the Left have been railing about.
 
OP
abu afak

abu afak

ALLAH SNACKBAR!
Joined
Mar 3, 2006
Messages
3,335
Reaction score
850
Points
315
From Chem Engineer

Adaptation is obvious. Extrapolating adaptation to the extremes you pretend is NOT "fact." Not remotely.
But since you pretend that it is, explain the insuperable statistics of polypeptide synthesis, including folding.

“WE CONCLUDE – UNEXPECTEDLY – that there is little evidence for the neo-Darwinian view: its theoretical foundations and the experimental evidence supporting it are weak.” – Department of Ecology and Evolution, University of Illinois, Chicago, The American Naturalist, November 1992

“And let us dispose of a common misconception. The complete transmutation of even one animal species into a different species has never been directly observed either in the laboratory or in the field.” Dean H. Kenyon (Professor of Biology, San Francisco State University), affidavit presented to the U.S. Supreme Court, No. 85-1513, Brief of Appellants, prepared under the direction of William J. Guste, Jr., Attorney General of the State of Louisiana, October 1985, p. A-16

“I can think of no other example in all of history when an important scientific theory – a dominant position in intellectual life – was held in such contempt and skepticism by people who are paying for its research. People just found that theory impossible to swallow.” – David Berlinski, 2008 lecture

“I believe that one day the Darwinian myth will be ranked the greatest deceit in the history of science. When that happens, many people will pose the question, ‘How did that happen?’ – (Dr Soren Luthrip, Swedish embryologist)

“250,000 species of plants and animals recorded and deposited in museums throughout the world did not support the gradual unfolding hoped for by Darwin.” (Dr. David Raup, curator of geology at the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago, “Conflicts Between Darwinism and Paleontology”)

“My attempts to demonstrate evolution by an experiment carried on for more than 40 years have completely failed…..It is not even possible to make a caricature of an evolution out of paleobiological facts…The idea of an evolution rests on pure belief.”(Dr. Nils Heribert-Nilsson, noted Swedish botanist and geneticist, of Lund University)

I have many more of what YOU call "mentally ill" scientists' quotes.
No doubt you have more LIES/OUT OF CONTEXT QUOTES from people who DO Believe in Evo. PLAGIARIZED from those wacked KWEATIONIST Sites.



`
 
OP
abu afak

abu afak

ALLAH SNACKBAR!
Joined
Mar 3, 2006
Messages
3,335
Reaction score
850
Points
315
NOT limited to the Sci section..
DISHONEST POS PoliticalShlt does it board-wide.
There is no topic she doesn't pull her OCD QUOTE MINING in.
This from Religion about "Jewish" Ruth Bader Ginsburg.,

... law must leave "conceptions" and open itself up to social realities of the modern world.”…[endng]the backwardness of law in meeting social ends,…”http://www.drbilllong.com/Jurisprudence/Pound.html
2. [Roscoe Pound] was perhaps the chief U.S. advocate of sociological jurisprudence, which holds that statutes and court decisions are affected by social conditions; his ideas apparently influenced the New Deal programs of Pres. Franklin D. Roosevelt.Answers - The Most Trusted Place for Answering Life's Questions



3. Instead of following the Constitution, 'social justice' is to be pursued from the bench by following the dictates of unelected judges.....caselaw.

"Christopher Columbus Langdell ....Before Langdell's tenure, the study of law was a technical pursuit. Students were told what the law is. However, at Harvard Langdell applied the principles of pragmatism to the study of law. Now, as a result of this innovation, lawyers are taught the law through a dialectical process of inference called the case method. The case method has been the primary method of pedagogy at American law schools ever since. The case method has since been adopted and improved upon by schools in other disciplines, such as business, public policy, and education. Students such as Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. would ensure that Langdell's innovation would not go unnoticed. Christopher Columbus Langdell - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


There is no excuse for this corruption of jurisprudence except for a hatred of America.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top