President Bush / Astro - Relevant

Hi,

I haven¹t posted to sci.astro.amateur for a while. But I have been a
"lurker" and have enjoyed much of the information about telescopes, and
the little bit about Astronomy.

But - to George Bush and the latest threads regarding his grades and
qualifications - and his intelligence. This is not only about
Astronomy but also and more so about a very close relative of it -
Evolution. In this case Evolution Science¹s continual battle against
the onslaught of Scientific Creationism believers, mostly the Moron
Far Right but also some Stupid Lefters too. But among political
leaders actively pushing it, mostly the Right Wing. Creationists label
their (theory) Science so that it may possibly sneak through the
courts, because their goal is to pass legislation which forces schools
to teach Creationism (Bible stories) alongside Evolution in science
classes, and our US Constitution wisely forbids that. Creationism
Theory is the modern equivalent of (as far as being Science) Flat Earth
Theory. The world was created approximately five or so thousands of
years ago, so goes its main tenet. A 5,000 year old universe would
present a lot of problems with current Cosmology Theory. Unless The
Creationists' deity is tricking us, we should not be able to see any
stars, or galaxies, or anything, farther than around 5,000 light years
away, because their light would not have reached us yet. Those damn
Cepheid Variables must be The Big Guy's little jokes.

Our wonderful President, George W. Bush, along with his Sheriff, John
Ashcroft, also believes that Creationism should be taught alongside
Evolution in science classes. To those (astronomers) who believe in
Creationism, I would guess that you¹re looking at the world through the
wrong end of your telescope, which would decrease resolution
significantly and would make the ³what really is² harder to see. For
those pocketbook-first Right Wingers, who really know better, and yet
still praise Bush and his myopic and astigmatic judgment, wake up and
see who and what you're lying in bed with. And how much you have to
lie to yourselves to excuse him.

But there's more. The greatest Republican ever, so Right Wingers
claim, was President Ronald Reagan. However, Reagan also believed that
the Bible should be taught alongside Evolution (if Evolution should be
even taught at all). And whom is Bush trying to load the Courts with?
His favorite Supreme Court Justice is Antonin Scalia, the wisest of the
wise. In Louisiana, where I live, in the 1980's, we (I abstained)
tried to legislate Creationism into our laws and we took it all the way
to the US Supreme Court. See Edwards VS Aguillard, 1987. Creationism
lost (thank a deity). But there were two dissenters. Can you guess
whom? Justice Scalia, along with Justice Rehnquist, another Bush
favorite, thought and ruled that Creationism should be taught alongside
Evolution, and in science classes.

Around that same time, however, there was another politician, who was
speaking out against the then current legislative attacks by
Creationism advocates. I had never heard of him before that. Guess
who! None other than that terrible Bill Clinton, Governor of Arkansas,
the scourge of Right Wing America as seen against that shining
Supernova of Wisdom, George W. Bush.

If the world was created 5,000 years ago, I guess that means President
Bush was born yesterday. Hey, maybe it was.

Clear skies without cloudy heads,

Linwood Albarado

Why don't you continue to lurk until you have something relvant to
contribute regarding astronomy! Until then, screw off.

Al


wrote in message ...
Hi,

I haven¹t posted to sci.astro.amateur for a while. But I have been a
"lurker" and have enjoyed much of the information about telescopes, and
the little bit about Astronomy.

But - to George Bush and the latest threads regarding his grades and
qualifications - and his intelligence. This is not only about
Astronomy but also and more so about a very close relative of it -
Evolution. In this case Evolution Science¹s continual battle against
the onslaught of Scientific Creationism believers, mostly the Moron
Far Right but also some Stupid Lefters too. But among political
leaders actively pushing it, mostly the Right Wing. Creationists label
their (theory) Science so that it may possibly sneak through the
courts, because their goal is to pass legislation which forces schools
to teach Creationism (Bible stories) alongside Evolution in science
classes, and our US Constitution wisely forbids that. Creationism
Theory is the modern equivalent of (as far as being Science) Flat Earth
Theory. The world was created approximately five or so thousands of
years ago, so goes its main tenet. A 5,000 year old universe would
present a lot of problems with current Cosmology Theory. Unless The
Creationists' deity is tricking us, we should not be able to see any
stars, or galaxies, or anything, farther than around 5,000 light years
away, because their light would not have reached us yet. Those damn
Cepheid Variables must be The Big Guy's little jokes.

Our wonderful President, George W. Bush, along with his Sheriff, John
Ashcroft, also believes that Creationism should be taught alongside
Evolution in science classes. To those (astronomers) who believe in
Creationism, I would guess that you¹re looking at the world through the
wrong end of your telescope, which would decrease resolution
significantly and would make the ³what really is² harder to see. For
those pocketbook-first Right Wingers, who really know better, and yet
still praise Bush and his myopic and astigmatic judgment, wake up and
see who and what you're lying in bed with. And how much you have to
lie to yourselves to excuse him.

But there's more. The greatest Republican ever, so Right Wingers
claim, was President Ronald Reagan. However, Reagan also believed that
the Bible should be taught alongside Evolution (if Evolution should be
even taught at all). And whom is Bush trying to load the Courts with?
His favorite Supreme Court Justice is Antonin Scalia, the wisest of the
wise. In Louisiana, where I live, in the 1980's, we (I abstained)
tried to legislate Creationism into our laws and we took it all the way
to the US Supreme Court. See Edwards VS Aguillard, 1987. Creationism
lost (thank a deity). But there were two dissenters. Can you guess
whom? Justice Scalia, along with Justice Rehnquist, another Bush
favorite, thought and ruled that Creationism should be taught alongside
Evolution, and in science classes.

Around that same time, however, there was another politician, who was
speaking out against the then current legislative attacks by
Creationism advocates. I had never heard of him before that. Guess
who! None other than that terrible Bill Clinton, Governor of Arkansas,
the scourge of Right Wing America as seen against that shining
Supernova of Wisdom, George W. Bush.

If the world was created 5,000 years ago, I guess that means President
Bush was born yesterday. Hey, maybe it was.

Clear skies without cloudy heads,

Linwood Albarado

Hello Al (& Wayne),

Sorry, but I think my post is relevant.

However, your counter argument, as was Wayne Howell's in another post:
...Please, crawl back into your hole and go back to lurk mode!...)
were very well thought out, I admit. I guess I will be spending the
night tending the new asshole you and Wayne have ripped me.

Thanks for the kind welcome.

Linwood


In article , Al
wrote:

Why don't you continue to lurk until you have something relvant to
contribute regarding astronomy! Until then, screw off.

Al


wrote in message ...
Hi,

I haven¹t posted to sci.astro.amateur for a while. But I have been a
"lurker" and have enjoyed much of the information about telescopes, and
the little bit about Astronomy.

But - to George Bush and the latest threads regarding his grades and
qualifications - and his intelligence. This is not only about
Astronomy but also and more so about a very close relative of it -
Evolution. In this case Evolution Science¹s continual battle against
the onslaught of Scientific Creationism believers, mostly the Moron
Far Right but also some Stupid Lefters too. But among political
leaders actively pushing it, mostly the Right Wing. Creationists label
their (theory) Science so that it may possibly sneak through the
courts, because their goal is to pass legislation which forces schools
to teach Creationism (Bible stories) alongside Evolution in science
classes, and our US Constitution wisely forbids that. Creationism
Theory is the modern equivalent of (as far as being Science) Flat Earth
Theory. The world was created approximately five or so thousands of
years ago, so goes its main tenet. A 5,000 year old universe would
present a lot of problems with current Cosmology Theory. Unless The
Creationists' deity is tricking us, we should not be able to see any
stars, or galaxies, or anything, farther than around 5,000 light years
away, because their light would not have reached us yet. Those damn
Cepheid Variables must be The Big Guy's little jokes.

Our wonderful President, George W. Bush, along with his Sheriff, John
Ashcroft, also believes that Creationism should be taught alongside
Evolution in science classes. To those (astronomers) who believe in
Creationism, I would guess that you¹re looking at the world through the
wrong end of your telescope, which would decrease resolution
significantly and would make the ³what really is² harder to see. For
those pocketbook-first Right Wingers, who really know better, and yet
still praise Bush and his myopic and astigmatic judgment, wake up and
see who and what you're lying in bed with. And how much you have to
lie to yourselves to excuse him.

But there's more. The greatest Republican ever, so Right Wingers
claim, was President Ronald Reagan. However, Reagan also believed that
the Bible should be taught alongside Evolution (if Evolution should be
even taught at all). And whom is Bush trying to load the Courts with?
His favorite Supreme Court Justice is Antonin Scalia, the wisest of the
wise. In Louisiana, where I live, in the 1980's, we (I abstained)
tried to legislate Creationism into our laws and we took it all the way
to the US Supreme Court. See Edwards VS Aguillard, 1987. Creationism
lost (thank a deity). But there were two dissenters. Can you guess
whom? Justice Scalia, along with Justice Rehnquist, another Bush
favorite, thought and ruled that Creationism should be taught alongside
Evolution, and in science classes.

Around that same time, however, there was another politician, who was
speaking out against the then current legislative attacks by
Creationism advocates. I had never heard of him before that. Guess
who! None other than that terrible Bill Clinton, Governor of Arkansas,
the scourge of Right Wing America as seen against that shining
Supernova of Wisdom, George W. Bush.

If the world was created 5,000 years ago, I guess that means President
Bush was born yesterday. Hey, maybe it was.

Clear skies without cloudy heads,

Linwood Albarado

wrote in message ...
Hello Al (& Wayne),

Sorry, but I think my post is relevant.

However, your counter argument, as was Wayne Howell's in another post:
...Please, crawl back into your hole and go back to lurk mode!...)
were very well thought out, I admit. I guess I will be spending the
night tending the new asshole you and Wayne have ripped me.

Thanks for the kind welcome.

Linwood

)
Other than that, have you been getting much observing in?


Ed

In article k.net,
Edward wrote:

wrote in message ...
Hello Al (& Wayne),

Sorry, but I think my post is relevant.

However, your counter argument, as was Wayne Howell's in another post:
...Please, crawl back into your hole and go back to lurk mode!...)
were very well thought out, I admit. I guess I will be spending the
night tending the new asshole you and Wayne have ripped me.

Thanks for the kind welcome.

Linwood

)
Other than that, have you been getting much observing in?


Ed
-------
Hello Ed,

A little. Here in south Louisiana, just outside of New Orleans, the
air has been terrible. The sky is poor where I live with so much sky
fog that I can seldom see much more than 2nd and 3rd magnitude stars
from my house. I viewed Mars several times with my C8 SCT (on an
equatorial mount). I could see the air currents and heats waves just
shimmering across the face of the planet. I still saw, of course, much
more than I ever saw previously. I look at astro pictures on the
internet mostly and read S&T regularly but I go outside to look at the
sky mostly to remember that it is all real and not just another TV
program.

How about you? Where are you located?

Linwood

wrote:
Hello Al (& Wayne),

Sorry, but I think my post is relevant.

NOT to the subject of this Forum (Astonomy)

wrote:
I guess I will be spending the
night tending the new asshole you and Wayne have ripped me.

Thanks for the kind welcome.

You have got to be kidding me. You come on here and basically say that
anybody who doesn't see things the way that you see them are idiots
and you expect a "kind welcome?"

You think that those of us who believe that we were created by a
super-intelligent being are silly and dilluted, but YOU beleive you
evolved from a ROCK! Furthermore, dismissing another theory of
anything without any proof or hard evidence to support that dismissal
is in and of itself UNSCIENTIFIC. The fact is that evolution and the
Big Bang Theory have had major problems from day one, and both
theories have been twisted so much, they remind me of the Christmas
Tree in Charlie Brown's Christmas. They tried hanging all sorts of
crap on it, but it was still and freakin' ugly tree. No one here
expects you to beleive in Creationism and I don't want to debate it
here, as it is REALLY OFF TOPIC, but don't come here and hurl insults
at peoples beliefs and faith and expect to not get your teeth kicked
in. Thats just stupid. Maybe your children will be more EVOLVED than
you.

Matt

(Matt) wrote in message . com...
You think that those of us who believe that we were created by a
super-intelligent being are silly and dilluted, but YOU beleive you
evolved from a ROCK!

Last time i checked, evolution stated that he evolved from similar
life forms. But when i checked the Bible, it said:

"then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became
a living being."
--Genesis 2: 7, RSV

Now which theory is saying that Linwood evolved from a ROCK?

Furthermore, dismissing another theory of
anything without any proof or hard evidence to support that dismissal
is in and of itself UNSCIENTIFIC.

Come again? There is plenty of evidence that the world was not
created in the manner described by Genesis. If you respond with the
assertion that God made the universe "in progress"--an assertion which
is impossible to dismiss--it begs the questions: 1) Creating the
world so that we couldn't tell the difference is, by definition,
untestable; how can we even talk about whether dismissing it is
scientific? 2) If we can't tell the difference, then *does* it make
any difference? ...unless God is testing our faith in an ungodly
sadistic way...?

For a young Earth creationist to lecture anyone about being
unscientific strikes me as ludicrous.

The fact is that evolution and the
Big Bang Theory have had major problems from day one, and both
theories have been twisted so much, they remind me of the Christmas
Tree in Charlie Brown's Christmas. They tried hanging all sorts of
crap on it, but it was still and freakin' ugly tree.

That's only because science doesn't start out with the answers.
Science is a discipline of discovery, not of dogma. If you want
contortions, try the so-called "evidence" that the Scientific
Creationists have conjured up to try to fit their pre-ordained
answers.

And perhaps my memory is faulty, but i seem to remember in the TV show
that after they finished hanging all the crap on the tree, it was far
from ugly.

P.S. With the recent enthusiastic participation in the "God or the
Big Bang" thread (and other off-topic stuff, such as Mac vs. Windows
vs. Linux), it seems a bit incongruous to me to come down so hard on
Linwood, who is at least making a case that he is on-topic. The
president's attitude towards science vs. religion, and its effect on
education and public policy, are certainly more relevant to astronomy
than his astronomy grade in college.


Clear skies!

--
------------------- Richard Callwood III --------------------
~ U.S. Virgin Islands ~ USDA zone 11 ~ 18.3N, 64.9W ~
~ eastern Massachusetts ~ USDA zone 6 (1992-95) ~
--------------- http://cac.uvi.edu/staff/rc3/ ---------------

wrote: a whole lot of verbal dribble.....

Please, crawl back into your hole and go back to lurk mode!

wrote:
Hi,
=20
I haven=B9t posted to sci.astro.amateur for a while. But I have been a=

"lurker" and have enjoyed much of the information about telescopes, and=

the little bit about Astronomy.
=20

Just what we need: More dimestore political philosophy and less astronomy=
=2E

Thanks so much - NOT.