seven8s

Rereading my posts I realize that my frustration got the best of me, and that from there my mistakes gathered into a snowball. That was not my intention. I recognize that I may have offended others, and would like to take a moment to offer a sincere apology. I am hoping that it will be received in the same manner that it is extended. Upon careful reflection it occurred to me that in order for that to happen, and to transition from frustration to peace it would be helpful to first acknowledge my mistake, then attempt a correction. I would also like to offer some positive feedback that I have gathered from this community through your postings, and various other threads that I have read over the past few years. I am hoping that it (positive feedback) will be received in the spirit that it is given, from a place of sincerity. I am hoping that you all will be patient and allow me this opportunity to share with you the things that your posts have in many ways taught me. I spoke off the cuff, as humans often do. I am not different then others, I am the same. There exists within me all of my experiences, both positive and negative. I desire like others to offer that which is good in me, but because of my humanness that is not always possible. When I do not offer my best, and instead may even offer my worst, I recognize that I have hurt another. When I hurt another I have hurt myself. In that human beings have an innate drive toward correction, through the gift that has been given to us through evolution to experience feelings, my feelings ‘kick in’ when I perceive that I have either hurt another, even potentially hurt another, whether purposefully, or unintentionally, or feel that I have been hurt myself. I will feel shame, guilt, and remorse, frustration, even anger. I will experience sorrow, even lose. Those feelings show that I am normal, not abnormal. Those feelings are painful. And since humans seek pleasurable experiences, and flee painful experiences, our innate ability toward correction kicks in through all of our experiences hence feelings. If I can say anything right now it is this; I am human, I am normal, and realistically take comfort in that. As one frequent poster states on this board, I embrace all of myself, all of it, or words to that effect. I didn’t understand that when I first read it, now I do. If there is a gift that science has given us, I have come to learn that this gift is the knowledge of ourselves. Science cannot exist without scientists and so I can not just give recognition to the processes of life such as evolution for who I am. I would also give recognition to the scientists who discerned these very processes, then sought to teach others, who taught me so that I might know. To those teachers I would also give recognition. I would give recognition to all those who have entered my life, including the students, my children. It is amazing what one can learn from their own children. In that I am not sure if the above is sufficient to correct some of the mistakes in my previous posts I would like to add the following, and would ask again your patience. From a link offered by Dichotomy (I think), in regards to how our environment affects our genes, turning them on or off according to our environment I found other studies that spoke of the same subject, from different perspectives. One study dealt with the subject of environment and genes through supportive intervention into the environments of mothers and children. The study established additional support to the mothers (adult/teacher) first, which enabled the natural bonding that occurs between mother and child to produce maximum effect, over a given period of time. The children’s IQ increased. Iow’s, the child was in reality the secondary, not primary target/benefactor of the study, or so it appears to me. I believe that the benefactor pool can be broadened to extended family members, and society as well. I noted this study because of it’s supportive intervention to the mother first, hoping to draw a parallel about the needs of adults, whether parent or teacher, male or female because adults are both, and most stressed. They are the primary intervention in the development of children, an idea that I had not thought of before, because I did not have the knowledge to think so. Like other mothers, my maternal instincts kick in, and I think of children first. While instincts enable the survival of species those same instincts must be understood, tempered, and redistributed for the survival of the whole. A parent or teacher depleted is of little use to children. I am not suggesting that we ignore children, especially young teenagers, but that we don’t ignore ourselves either. If I can draw a parallel from that study, this is the parallel I can draw: I can duplicate those results by adding additional, more helpful, healthful supportive additions to my life. I don’t have to wait for someone else’s support, nor for their permission, I can give that to myself through a variety of endeavors. From there I can give that to others, because I am reacting to life, and it’s challenges from a place of well being. Iow’s, I don’t have to be selfish, in the traditional sense of the word, but I do need to be mindful of the self, myself; it’s needs, it’s, abilities, processes, purpose, rewards, challenges. From here, I will thank you for your time. Dichotomy, I did not realize that you had posted to the board. I read your post, and thank you for being more forthright. I will consider what you wrote, and if I think I have something of value to add, will post that addition. I don’t disagree with what you wrote.

Attempting to guess what point someone is trying to create, especially from one who is not willing to be forthright, leaves another to surmise. Perhaps it is a game people play for the entertainment value. Rather then surmise, I’ll leave you to your entertainment for someone else to surmise, from there you can entertain one another. True or not it begs the question, ‘why’ to those who consider the subject and want an answer. Not all who notice/observe want an answer, which in and of itself may beg the question, ‘why’ to those who do want an answer. Unless they are able to give a satisfactory answer as to why they don’t want an answer, to those who do want an answer, those who do want an answer are only left to surmise why those who do not want an answer, do not want an answer. Did you get that? The only thing it (the increase of children diagnosed with ADD and or ADHD) suggests, is that all options are open for consideration, to determine if in fact ADD/ADHD has significantly risen over a given period of time, in order to determine the truth. It seems to me that the mistake you are making is assuming that all diagnosed cases of ADD, and or ADHD are correctly diagnosed. If you don’t know the answer to that question you cannot even make an assertion that ADD/ADHD has risen or lowered in any proportion, in any period of time, let alone significantly. Until you know the truth you are pouring water into a bucket with a hole, avoidance. The reason I post? It is called fishing. Perhaps there is a parent who keys in the words ADD/ADHD and this site pops up, because they went fishing. I just want to make sure they get another opinion and don’t start slapping their kid around, or spare the rod, spoil the child, which if you think about it is an interesting pun on my point of view. If one spares (withholds) the rod (measurement/proper evaluation) do they spoil (harm) the child? I think they do. ADD/ADHD has symptoms of other disabilities. Treating one disability with the solution for another disability is pouring water into a bucket with a hole in it. In the USA, parents have the right to a full learning disabilities assessment for their children, if they suspect that their child is learning disabled. An ADD/ADHD assessment cannot determine whether or not a child has a learning disability, hence, specifically identify what that learning disability is. Therefore it seems logical for me to conclude that it does not necessarily determine whether or not a child is truly ADD/ADHD., for the reason I have attempted to lay out. It, learning disabilities, and ADD/ADHD are complicated, complex issues, which makes them ripe for abuse. In that we are discussing children, it is my hope that we will try to understand the issue. The ‘spanking’ part of the op is a whole other issue. It has no connection what so ever to ADD/ADHD, nor learning disabilities, except perhaps parental, scholastic, and religious frustration and ignorance. If I am wrong perhaps there is another who posts here, and or reads this forum, specifically one in the educational setting here in the USA, who would like to discuss the issue.

I find that intriguing. Adolescence with ADHD have a particularly high incidence of illegal drug usage. It is known that drug addicts develop a tolerance of their drugs of choice, which precipitates a need to up the dosage to sustain the high, or feeling of well being. Addiction then becomes a vicious cycle of self destruction which sucks everything and everybody within it perimeter into the same hole. Which on a positive note would include doctors, rehabs, scientific breakthroughs............teachers, parents, lawyers, judges. Today’s drugs of choice are prescription drugs. Many of today’s addicts that are ADHD were given narcotics to treat their ADHD symptoms as small children, or vulnerable teenagers. Did this precipitate a knowing and a tolerance, creating future addicts of illegal drugs? Iow’s, what I am asking is this; is it possible that a brain, that acts as if amphetamines are always present, build a tolerance of amphetamines, much the same way an addicts brain builds a tolerance? As such, the introduction of drugs such as Ritalin, may initially provide a sense of well being, through the mechanism of focus and concentration, but, over a period of time a secondary tolerance is being built as well as an unconscious means of re-mediating it? I guess what I am asking hypothetically is this: Are we unwittingly teaching our children’s brains drug addictions?

I will apologize in advance for the length of this post. I hope none of you have ADD/ADHD, because if you do, I probable lost you around the first paragraph. Please come back and continue to read (wink) Do parents exist that lack appropriate skills to achieve a more desired outcome that is beneficial to their children, the parents, and society at large? Of course they do. So do societies. We tend to parent the way we were parented, because we don’t know any other way. We can’t know what we don’t know until someone/thing comes along that finds/knows/shows a better way/skill. If parents/societies don’t know how to parent normal children, because they lack skills, i.e. experience through observation/participation and/or science how in the world are they supposed to know how to parent children with disabilities? Really? What kind of pressure? Rather then get off onto a wild philosophical/religious tangent on what is or isn’t the cause of ADD/ADHD, and/or how to parent children, perhaps it would be better to discuss how the disorder is diagnosed, and how this diagnosis may in fact mask a more serious disorder, such as a brain injury. Otherwise we will be suturing wounds with bacteria, and not the good kind. You jest, correct? Perhaps we can have an enlightening conversation, without resorting to boxing gloves, and or bringing our own baggage to the table. Evidence? You will find none, because none exists (that most cases of ADD are from parental abuse). Interesting. I did read the link, and may have a comment after pondering it. I also find this interesting, however it says nothing about rehabilitation because we don’t know everything that there is to know about rehabilitation, especially in regards to learning disabilities, the brain. We don’t know everything there is to know about genes. How is it that a mans lost finger tip grows back, including the finger nail, by adding some concoction from a pigs bladder? Who would have ever thunk it? Obviously, somebody did. Why give up hope for children of learning disabilities, their families, and society at large? Are you again comparing apples to oranges? A simple google will yield you the answer that boys are more often diagnoses with ADD/ADHD then girls. Having said that, children need fathers. Children need loving fathers, kind fathers, strong fathers, generous fathers and most important, knowledgeable and participatory fathers. How do we get those kinds of fathers, in regards to this topic, ADD/ADHD? Would it help to dispel the myths and the ignorance in regards to the subject matter. Would it help to bring them out of their shame, embarrassment in regards to this subject, and many others for that matter? There are those professionals that would agree with you, hence would also say that it is not a disorder, but rather characteristics of a particular individual, hence, to even label a child as ADD/ADHD is wrong. Perhaps it could be said that they do not have learning disabilities, but rather have been denied, for whatever reason, learning opportunities, that are more beneficial to their particular characteristics for the benefit of their well being, and societies at large. That is an opinion, and you will find many who agree with you. I believe that in philosophy they call that an appeal to authority, and or an appeal to majority (if there is such a thing as an appeal to majority in a philosophical argument). And? Well, I guess it answers the ‘begging the question’ argument, which appears to me to be an argument designed to seek agreement (?). From there it appears to me that agreement is promoted to be the truth, but that is not, imo, necessarily the truth. From there, do other points of view exist, and do they have any merit, worth consideration? In that there are various opinions amongst professionals as to whether or not ADD/ADHD is a valid disorder, is there another angle with which to approach the subject? I happen to be of the opinion that there is. ‘Some form of measurable’ testing will not do because you may or may not get an accurate diagnosis. I knew a little girl (three years old) who was presented to her local pediatrician over a period of time with symptoms of a common cold that the child could not shake. Eventually, at some point the flu was suspected to be the cause of the child’s illness. When the flu didn’t go away, allergies were suspected, and sure enough upon testing allergies were confirmed. They were minor allergies common in little children. Cold/flu/allergies all present similar symptoms, or global symptoms, of a suppressed immune system. The doctor treated each illness as he thought it was. However, the allergies did not go away with treatment. The child remained sick, was in fact getting sicker. Nothing was working until it was discovered that the child had leukemia, and thank goodness, before it was too late. She is now 40 years old, a survivor. But then again, maybe not. I had forgotten that there are experts that do not agree that ADD/ADHD is in fact a disorder, until I read the above post. Ironically, that adds to the difficulties children and their families suffer in regards to the stigmas attached to this diagnosis, and/or mis-diagnosis. It particularly hurts them in the educational setting where the myth continues to thrive that ADD/ADHD is a direct cause of uncaring, uncooperative, lazy, and or abusive parenting. They have even developed names for them: dysfunctional families, white or black trash, trailer trash are a few that come to mind. Then they, the shamer’s and the namer’s, promptly wipe there hands clean. It is a frustrating subject, and it is quite tempting, even appealing to throw ones hands up and walk away. For the most part, excluding profoundly sick individuals, parents do not have children so that they can hurt them. They don’t have children with the hope of continuing dysfunction that they may have experienced in their own lives. Children represent the hope to engender new life, for the child and the self. I believe that there is another urge to explain reproduction, other then the primitive urge to survival of the species and that is procreation, which has nothing to do with religion, intelligent design and all the baggage that goes with that subject.

Myth. Parents of children with autism have been stigmatized for many generations as being the cause of their child’s autism. Today, through the advancements of science, including social sciences, we know better. ADD in fact is closely related to autism. Autism has a genetic link, if I remember correctly. The latest fad does appear to blame the parent for the child’s inability to focus/concentrate, stigmatizing a whole new generation. Why not help families, why hurt them? ADD/ADHD have diagnostic symptoms that find themselves spread across the board of other learning disabilities, no different then a sever iron deficiency in the elderly is often mis-diagnosed as Alzheimer, because it presents itself with similar symptoms. Iron deficiencies are not uncommon in the elderly because they take aspirin. Restless leg syndrom is another potential syndrom of iron deficiency. Most people, including some doctors don’t know that. Medications in such cases won’t help, iron supplementation on the other hand will. Which would you like a doctor to give in such cases? Many children have neurological disorders that need specific attention. Those disorders are often from injuries, are injuries, either during birth, such as oxygen deprivation, and or ordinary childhood head injuries from falls, bumps, etc. Little boys, ‘boys being boys’ are most vulnerable to head injuries. Little boys are diagnosed in a significantly higher proportion with ADD/ADHD then little girls. No one knows why a child is not preforming to expectations until proper testing is administered. Would we suture a wound with anti-biotics? Neither ADD/ADHD or any other learning disability is a mere phenomenon. It is a real, physical disorder, no different then a broken leg, cancer, strep throat, yada, yada. Left unaddressed it significantly impacts an individuals life as well as society at large, in one way or another. And I would make this correction; it is not that people don’t care, but that it is an overwhelming problem. Spanking children and blaming parents increases the angst felt by both, increases the symptoms. Children don’t get up in the morning and say, gee I think I will fail today, and parents don’t get up and say, gee I think I’ll slap the crap out of my child today. However having said that, it is far to easy for school systems to label children as ADD/ADHD who are not, and they do so willingly and knowingly, for various reasons. This is a science forum, correct? No offence, but that is BS. This isn't even equivilent to comparing apples to oranges, more like apples and onions, or strawberries and greenbeans...........

What has changed? Indeed an interesting question. Why are so many children diagnosed as ADD then ever before? Legal loophole. They are not being given a ‘full learning disabilities test’, which encompasses a three part evaluation as to why the child is not preforming to expectations. That evaluation includes the following: a) social history b) academic evaluation c) verbal/ performance IQ discrepancy test, often know as a WISK test ( if I remember correctly). Neurological testing such as EEG are also often preformed depending upon the results of the other ‘three’, in a comprehensive test to determine learning disabilities, and it’s CAUSE. When a parent or teacher is concerned that a child may be ‘learning disabled’ it is more convenient to trash the child in the waste basket of ADD/ADHD, then preform a true learning disabilities test. children who are diagnosed as ADD do not have to be given a full and comprehensive learning disabilities test BECAUSE they have been diagnosed as ADD or ADHD, unless the parent knows to request it. The teacher knows but will not, it is up to the parent to protect, know their child. It is cheaper and more convenient for the school (and tax payers) to not care.

Maybe you should get a job in the public school system. It appears you would be untouchable.

I noticed your little pun. Aren’t you the clever one. It’s just like whining, ‘Mommies mean’, help daddy, help, we don’t want to think, we want to spend’. Desperate times call for desperate measures? While you were fiddling around with the mathematics of a snow balls chance in hell......................splat? School of hard knocks? It reminds me of the verse, ‘I stand at the door and knock’. Keep the little natives busy and they are not so apt to question authority? As such there will be no argument from authority because there is no argument with authority? Splat! You are probably more right then not, wouldn’t that be normal? We all have one, correct? What is your’s? Spending? George Bush will love ya! Yes. Now, can you tell me ‘What’s Going On’? I will even behave and not post a link. how's that for community participation? Now, I know you have been looking into those economics books, I am hoping by now that you have figured something out, if you haven’t I will expound. But then you should know by now that once the door is opened I am walking in, and so................ An old adage, ‘God helps those who help themselves’ begs a question; to what? A special form of retarded is school boy tactics. If you don’t have an answer, throw sticks and stones? Argument from ignorance, or busy? Perhaps I have strayed too far off topic, the topic being the conservapedia site. Is the site trash? Does like attract like? Do we just trash the site with no insight? One mans trash is another man's treasure.

Does he like marvin Gaye?

Sour grapes! Quit whining, you lost. If they didn’t ask I couldn’t answer. If you hadn’t opened the door, I couldn’t enter. Maybe you are jealous? I don't know. I don't like thinking that way and so........pass. Small skirmish. No big deal. These are to be expected. I read from the beginning. It is my mistake in regards to when the word creationism first appeared. That I expanded upon the word, was at your invitation, and participants of the boards request. Reread post 31, and comprehend why we have established governing principles/practices that guide and determine just such disputes as ours. Some of their colleagues could be their self or others. Read my post in scientists vs normal people. In order to determine what is a scientist vs a normal person, one must determine what is normal. Why? Because scientists are people, as in person, and if they are people they are either normal or abnormal, therefore what is normal? When we understand who we are we understand what is our potential/purpose, and from there the knowledge that we have the potential to create. When we understand what we have the potential to create we have some options, options enable mankind, individuals to some semblance of choice no matter how minute or large. From there we rise into our inheritance as creators, determinism. There remains no one else to blame or credit, and we just are (though I am not sure about this last part because it begs a question). ah, a thought sparks, balanced. Take greed and generosity. When I know that greed and generosity exists, and exists in normal people, I am able to not just look at others and make judgements, I am able to look at myself and make judgements. Am I normal? When I know that selfishness and selflessness exist, and that they exist in normal people I am able to look at myself and others and make judgements. Hopefully I am making, or at the least now able to make judgements that benefit not just society, but myself, or visa versa. If society at large has a right to survive, and thrive, do I? Iow’s phi, when this Lord God comes calling and asks, ‘where were you when I......... I can look him in the eye and say, I was there. And when I demand of him to know, where were you when I............... I know that he can say, so was I. I to I. Each and everyone of us are there, which begs the question, where? Phi, I have developed a whole theory on your name calling, it is very enlightening. And so you want what Phi, to be spoon fed? Unfortunately the word creationism is a very large word, as such, and just as unfortunately you have a very small mouth. Having said that, if you are willing to suspend prejudice against the word, from your traditional evaluation of the word, perhaps the better to hear me with................ Where are we at? I am sitting at home typing on a key board, surfing the net. I happened upon SFN, I can happen somewhere else. Therefore: Is that a threat or a promise? Clarify, you do know what that means, correct? You are a moderator Phi, choose. That or come up with another option. Right here, right now, this moment, choose. As to the alleged studies cited in post #4; The average person does not know how to read an abstract, let alone an anecdotal study. In fact they do not even know what the difference is. The very first need when determining the validity of any abstract or anecdotal study is to find the bias. That bias can be found in the scientist(s) who preformed the study, and/or the individuals or institutions who market the study. The bias can be in the method, but then I do tend to believe that this bias is a reflection of the researcher/scientist, whether inadvertently (Freudian slip), or cunningly. Iow’s, the scientists who studied/tested a new pharmaceutical may or may not lie, but the company that marked the new pharmaceutical did/will/might/didn’t. One can always hide things and drug manufacturers have been caught with their hand in that cookie jar. I am sure there is a lot of arguments from ignorance on the site. We all have them. I am sure you do.

Wrong (ORIGIN Old Norse, 'awry, unjust'.). I expanded the term creation. I added to the conversation at hand as requested by participants of the thread. It really is that simple. I am not sure what part about this that you, or anyone else for that matter does not understand, unless of course the purpose for the discontent amongst so many is that I expand/expound further, that they might. Again, here is the original post containing the word creationism: It’s all relative or none of it is, as someone once told me; general relativity in a nut shell. I believe that there are those wonderful scientists who must look at some of their colleagues and shudder. Why? Because they know, and I admire them for that knowing, and admire the example/precedent being set. I expanded the thought. I threw you a line that you might not drown in the sea of superstition and disbelief, fear, immorality, and ignorance. And to boot, (pun intended) I gave a revelation to go with that new beginning. You do understand that a revelation goes with a new beginning, correct? Or are you intent on repeating? Perhaps we can talk about mediaeval conceptions of time, how they are related to creationism, how those ideas both hurt and help mankind, and all the metaphors and yada yada that goes with those times (linear, spherical, folding/unfolding, back and forth, up and down), and how they are related to ours. If so it is going to be a long thread son, perhaps you might what to start reading up................. I gifted you with the experience of God, there for: Good/God it was my intention to shake God/Good out of that tree. Now that we have wrested, let it rest? Any one else care to get in on the act?

You have a preconceived notion of what creationism is, therefore, we are not having the same conversation. I would also suggest that your opinion is not only preconceived, but is not necessarily based on reason, nor rational thought, except in a conversation with those theists/atheists/scientists who hijack the word to an exclusive definition confined to religion, specifically fundamentalist religious beliefs. Correction, you can’t. I never changed the conversation. Read post 31. You all opened the door and I obliged, walked in. It is called opportunity. Now you know. I will oblige myself of another opportunity, and finally change the conversation, ending my contirbution to the thread, bye.

Scientific discipline? Where did that come from? What does one have to do with the other? I thought that it was an issue of the law though you can correct me if I am wrong. As well I thought that it was a social issue of great importance, perhaps for others it is not. For me it is. Again, what does one have to do with the other? Think before you answer that one. Let me ask you this Is it inherently impossible to do something about child abuse or is not doing something about child abuse a choice? If a sky daddy doesn't drop out of the sky and do something about it, who does? The abuser? Um, we weren’t talking about science. Read post 31. But since you brought the subject forward, have you looked at a dictionary of late? creator >noun 1 a person or thing that creates. 2 (the Creator) God http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=God&searchmode=none Good http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=good Try gal. He? When it comes to the word God/Good everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I would encourage you in yours, no matter that opinion, unless and until it infringes on mine. And having said that, I do have a knowledge of the term and refuse to be smeared with the atheist and/or theist opinion of God. God only knows................. It’s a matter of trust? And if that doesn’t work try post # 31 Tst, tst. No, I would not consider it equivocation, why should I? I would ask you to reconsider the word ‘all’. Then I might ask you, hmm, do you think it is possible that heterosexual and homosexual men (and women) can be attracted to each other? And if so for what purpose? Perhaps they simply have something in common, perhaps they have reached a stage in their development that fear, bias and prejudice is set aside and recognize that attraction between human beings is not necessarily sexual in nature. If you changed the subject I might think, would probably think, that you were uncomfortable with the subject. I do think that you are attempting to avoid post 31, but if you want to talk about gravity, I am all ears, though I will have a lot of questions. And who knows maybe you will answer them? My mistake, I wasn’t referring to myself, nor was I inferring that he was calling me names. If the truth be told I can be smug. Defense mechanism, or simply pleased with myself? I have seen ‘irritatingly pleased with oneself’ on this board, other then myself. At least I admitted it. Can you? Defense mechanism, oh well, everyone has one. What’s yours? Let me ask you this, if you are not pleased with me does your opinion have to have value to anyone other then yourself? Does it have to have value to me?

Hmm, interesting. My question was, ‘how do you determine which scholar is correct’ and your answer is, ‘you don’t’. And so we do what, follow the sheep? Sheep have skins, correct? No thinking for oneself? And by the way, that local news story had a congressional report that went with it, and also tons of other information, ‘evidence’, ‘proofs’ as to it’s validity, but what would I know............. Thank you for sharing.

Acting smug? Interesting. Calling people names is what, using crutches?

seven8s, please stop linking to billy joel music videos for no apparent reason. Why? Is there a rule of the forum that states that I can't. p.s. censorship comes in all shapes and sizes, no big deal.

that deserves some points.

Do you mind if I ask how do you determine which scholar is correct in that there are so many that have differences of opinion on the same subject matter?

A prejudice has been bred against scientists, and atheists, science, and visa versa, yep theists. What are normal people? normal >adjective 1 conforming to a standard; usual, typical, or expected. 2 technical intersecting a given line or surface at right angles. >noun 1 the normal state or condition. 2 technical a line at right angles to a given line or surface. Normal people: Laugh/cry feel pain/pleasure Normal people experience sickness/health Life/death joy/sorrow Normal people have hopes/dreams fears/failures good days/bad days etc................you can add to the list as you please.............. for your listening pleasure fella’s........... url removed

Phi For All The thread began with conservapedia, and it’s biased perspective. You brought up creationism, without clarification, others danced around their bias and or the issue. I added my perspective, then was asked to clarify the term, and did so with examples (evidence/undeniable proof) of creationism. You opened the door Phi, don’t blame me for walking in. Did you just expect me to sit back and not do as told, (well ignoring sisyphus lol)? I had a legitimate right to answer the question. As well there is an old adage that lawyers use, never ask a question that you don’t know the answer too’. Do you know why they live by that rule? Discovery. They may not like what they discover, but do we ever get to the truth if we fear discovery? Do we go to the grave deaf, dumb and blind? Is that good science? I played fair and square. When reason fails to prevail it courts emotion. Deal with it. and for your listening pleasure..............enjoy. url removed

How can people know that child abuse exists, know where it exists, which knowledge relies upon it’s unfalsifiability, remain silent and be understood? Is silence golden? Is silence approval, frustration, or ignorance? Who’s next? Which begs the question, if they are desperate, why are they desperate and if they are looking for any line to cling to that will justify their choice, will they settle for a lie, or silence, what’s right or wrong, yada, yada? I am just expanding your thought. ‘The better to see you with, my dear?’ No, I am not. I am using creationism in the context of knowledge, which would include it’s helpful and harmful effects. Perhaps I am begging the question, have we evolved in our evolutionary process the ability to choose? And, have we evolved to the point in our evolutionary process where we are able to solve problems? Creationism is the process of creating, which begs the question, ‘who’ and ‘what’ is the creator? How, why, when, where? Reality exists. Have the courage to look in the tearful eyes of one of those children, if only in your minds eye, that or wait until he appears in court one day and says, **** ***, which is interpreted: ‘In my mothers womb you created me’. Correct! Which one of the examples (links) that I have provided continues to make no sense? No, I am. Perhaps you can spend the other ½ of your day attempting to figure it out, which begs the question, have you evolved in your evolutionary process to recognize injustice? That or you can pull out the same card that the USA Supreme Court uses when they refuse to hear what they don’t want to hear. Choice, correct? The American way? The Catholics did it in the 1990's when the sexual abuse of their children first came to surface. Their refusal to hear bit them in the ass. Wrong. Now you know my pet peeve. Having said that, after reading your post, I don’t know whether to get my waders out or nose clip, maybe you have a suggestion. Ah, don’t be too offended................I am not trying to be offensive..........well maybe that is not true. I am a Patriots fan, but I gotta be honest, I am hoping the NY Giants will win this years Super Bowl, though I hear they are the underdog. How about you? Oh, and Phi, if you know any Germans, even one, who can pull a miracle out of his/her hat, tell em we could use one, in fact more then one. As a matter of fact, tell em I have a few suggestions. You have heard the story about the woman when told about receiving, went and got all her pots, correct? I know there is someone who likes songs, so lets give him one from the Animals, or Santa Esmerelda, I’m just a soul who’s intentions are good, Oh Lord, please don’t let me be misunderstood.................. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrOfBRblGec&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jzhQTHBKgQ&feature=related just adding a little humor fella’s......................

Of course they are relevant, they used the word create. They use the word create because something was created, and in one case specifically that something was a heart that did not exist before, nor did the knowledge. Perhaps you are uncomfortable with the word, and if so where did that discomfort arise, and is it necessary in the evolutionary process of mankind? Does the word give you pause and if so why? Is that a good thing or bad? We are creators, get used to it. It is not a curse word as atheist would have us believe, nor is it taboo, hijacked so to speak as theist would have us believe. Well, the hijacking has been done on both sides, imv. It is a marvelous word. I consider it mankind’s inheritance. And I believe that the evidence of that statement is made manifest in all that mankind has achieved, that is good. It can also be a frightening word when reality ‘sinks in’ the waters so to speak, which is the mind. I frankly think atheists are as much afraid of the word as theists, and yet they both use it each and every single day. I could say, ‘as the ship of Creationism sinks in upon the foundation of rational though, the desperate crew looks for any line to cling to that will justify getting on board in the first place’. It is pretty potent to hold such power. The very God an atheist has judged has become himself, when he/she understands they are creators. more on creationism http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2004/05/24/040524fa_fact http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-10-22-1021049676_x.htm Both incidents occurred in secular institutions. The first example as reported world wide and by the New Yorker was addressed and remedies brought about. The second incident has been swept under the rug. Outrage against the priests, nary a whisper about the teachers. Capital punishment still exists in the USA public school system, and obviously other things we don’t want to know about. The public school system is a secular institution. It is owned by both atheists and theists. We fight to get prayer out, or get it back in, but do we really care about the children? Is the educational system of today like the Gods/religions of yesterday, untouchable? Maybe evolution has been falsified, if we haven’t gotten very far, well stymied.

I didn’t have to make a statement with substantial explanation as I think the original statement speaks for itself. Perhaps you should reread it, and then we can discuss it. If necessary get a dictionary. Maybe Phi wasn’t attempting to be poetic, but then again, I think so. And, I made no such absurd statement. What are we creating, anyone of us, not just theists? Reread what was said, rationally please. Iow’s set aside your own prejudice, preferences. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/14/health/14heart.html?ref=research http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080118092439.htm

Stop what? I made my point. Don’t blame me Phi brought it up...............deal with it. ‘Key words’? Perhaps you shouldn’t be so sensitive, prejudice? It’s a word, get over it. Until one recognizes their own prejudice nothing will change.

And that goes for atheist and theist alike in that we are all creationists.