🚀 go-pugleaf

On Jun 8, 9:05 pm, Caddyshack...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jun 8, 2:07 am, Duke Kahanamoku <clipper.sm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Correction: A person who doesn't understand science, eg one who
> > doesn't accept the theory of evolution as the only possibly correct
> > explanation we have of the development of life on earth,
>
> You just demonstrated your ignorance in science.

How so? I have been a scientist since learning how to be one in
school. So, roughly 45 years, most those as a software engineer. Now I
have switched to technical writing, simply because I want to be a
writer, but I still deal with science in one form or another on a
daily basis. So how does my remark demonstrate ignorance of science.

Fact: The theory of evolution is the only scientific theory we have
right now that explains how life develops here on earth.

If there is another scientific theory out there, what is it? Neither
creationism nor intelligent design is a scientific theory, so
evolution is the only scientific theory that could possibly be
correct.

Since you dispute that claim, give us your argument.

>You are a
> conservative wannabe who's projecting his own deficiencies upon
> Conservatism. If there were no such thing as creation theory your
> premise is still wrong.

Like I said, let's hear your argument. I am actually a conservative
with respect to finances. I am left liberal with respect to all
matters social, and I am progressive in all things. Creation theory
has nothing to so with science.

> > can not call
> > himself college educated. He can call himself college graduated, but
> > not college educated.
>
> You mean indoctrinated. Naturally, those who have have degrees in
> science, like myself, understand what a "theory" is and "only possible
> correct" does not apply.

You misquoted me. I said "only possibly correct..." which is quite
different. Creation theory has nothing to do with science. The theory
of evolution is the only possibly correct theory we have.

> Those who have taken classes with a Liberal
> orientation are indoctrinated into a closed minded way of thinking
> because science is provable and bioethics, women's studies and
> comparative world cultures is not.

Please parse that statement for me. I don't understand how a liberal
arts education results in closed minded thinking. It doesn't, of
course, but if you think you can support your claim, I'm listening.

> I've never met a liberal who could put in words what socialism is.

Socialism is an economic system wherein each enterprise is wholly
owned by its employees, ie there are no absentee owners of a socialist
enterpris, and, all employees of a socialist enterprise participate in
the profits of their enterprise in a meaningful way.

Now you have met a liberal who can put in words what socialism is.

> They reject dictionary definitions and insist on playing a game of
> hide and seek. Here's your oportunity to show everyone how smart you
> are and put THE (not your) definition of socialism, right...
>
> .... Here-----> see above
>
> > So, no, I think most conservatives are not college educated. College
> > graduated, maybe, but that' quite different, isn't it.
>
> How open minded of you to reject others that don't think the way you
> do.

I didn't reject anybody. I said most conservatives are college
graduate, not college educated.