Monday, September 28, 2009
The outtakes, by Noemie Cournoyer
Cath's on http://forum-chretien.com/topic3923.html
The eye of God looks through the heart of gay as well as through a remaining pottery seal or paint.
PS: The eternal can also decendre lightning from heaven.
Read on http://dieu-atheisme.over-blog.com/ "the creation by the mere word is possible given today on computers software with possibility Men speak into a microphone and transcribe this speech into a creative writing"
shaena1-forum on religion: It bothers you so that we can still believe in the year 2009 in the West to a Creator?
other issues, some disreputable animists Ebony marry only among themselves, you think that a hundred generations, their descendants will come to clear because they no longer live in Africa and there is less sun in France ?
glaive, forum-religion :
1 - why is it always monkeys?
2 - please consider the same environment there are different animals comletement?
3 - and why men already existed for thousands of years while monkeys still exist?
4 - and the so-called "common forefathers" who created it?
5 - and finally I suggest a cage in a zoo as an animal who always keeps a monkey's brain
glaive, forum-religion :
it is mentioned in the Koran that some people who have disobeyed their prophets, have been transformed into apes and pigs! and this is proof of the credibility of the Qur'an as we now know that these are the two animals which can be organ transplants (eg the vaves porcine heart).
LECHEMAINDROIT, forum-religion :
A woman is a virgin means that this woman has no relationship sexeulle them before. if I ask this question? is what you taste between fresh meat and such with frozen meat. it's like for women when aurrat the first report sexeulle, she finds that it is something very interesting for her.
marie1, forum-religion: and you're all liars, ignorant! You like your theory, keep it for you! and live as you wish! But we do not share the same nonsense, and your evolutionary scientists do not bring us anything good that's brainwashing me, I love haroune Yahiya that you hate! it is normal, you just remove all your myths! I will give out a Nobel Peace Prize for that!
LECHEMAINDROIT, Forum Religion :
Do not forget that the scientific development in the world didn't saw the days after Islam. Catholic Church was a real obstacle for researchers and scholars. Islam by non-cons. it's reality and you can not refuse.
diddl2007 on Top Chrétien
Anti-Zionism = Anti-Semitism = anti-Jew = anti-Israel = Anti-God
Yoda on Top Christian Forum:
[Yoda speaks of psi powers of the pastor's daughter] Small children are certainly very sensitive to spiritual presences. When worship is spiritually heavy they are often quite agitated, but when the Holy Spirit reigns over a meeting, they are quietly and without noise, but stand still either. When I see the small of my pastor (who must be a little less than 28 months of my granddaughter) in moments of prayer during the week, I often say it is inspired: it will take for example a butterfly specific about the display and gives the right person. His attitude says a lot sometimes, if she knows how to smile more moody, but she tends to avoid people spiritually connected.
Gillovy Topchretien the forum:
When I gathered enough information, documentation on these famous ancient animals and hominids, I think the public will decide who is telling the truth and who does not say. (emphasis added)
Nicolas on Forum-Chretien.com:
there is a woman dedicated to you and you should you set aside for it
basically you have no right or kiss a woman or touched before the wedding you wanted sidebar for the limit? I think you already passed the Very Happy
well it's some good strike but I think real
Pierrot on Forum-Chretien.com
And why is it not now "cash" between ape and man, since man evolved from apes?? Bizarre, bizarre!
Willofly on Topchretien forum:
I never deny the existence of dinosaurs, however I do think that Leviatan and some monsters are references to the kinds of dinosaurs. I really meditate on the issue but for now it's like the utility of tardigrades I did not know but it surely exists.
TR on Topchretien Forum:
In all societies, there were gods and worship. While the barbarians and false gods, so lame companies. But now it is a fact. (...) In this world, be reasonable without God is most unfortunate that stupid, ignorant of his condition. That is, what is true.
kalheb on Forum-Religion
2Pet. 3:3 in the last days scoffers will come from it with their mockery, ranging from their own desires and saying where his presence.
Your insults and slurs on your scripture prove once again the veracity of the prophetic word of God without realizing it you participate in prophecies of the Bible.
TR sur TopChrétien:
Not being an atheist, I can afford what little atheists dare do: be clear about their opinions and their outcomes.
Science Building on Topchretien:
A word can have several definitions. I define what I mean when I use the term macro-evolution. As you take note that when I use this word it is this definition which I speak.
LUCM-Forum on Religion:
1. The Quran describes the realities in a manner different from the Bible.
2. The Qur'an said things that the Bible does not contain in the topic while the two treated ..
3. The Qur'an has corrected serious errors found in the Bible.
4. The Quran continet realities exclusively quoted by the Koran.
5. In the case of disagreements between them is always the Qur'an is right, and that the evidence of logic and science.
gillovy on Forum Topchretien
Some question my knowledge of science ... do not go into these useless polemics. I am a "logician", trained in rigorous reasoning.
Pazu on Blogdei:
I just read a book that made me stop to sympathize with the enemies of Israel.
I am for the state of Israel returned all his land. Before I did not know what to make of all this and I followed a bit but the general opinion is now perfectly clear that the state of Israel is part of the plan of God and His promise to Abraham. Canaan belongs to the Jews.
Willofly on Topchretien:
Beginning with the first chapters of Genesis, there is already a lot of research to be undertaken. (...) The scientists if only out of curiosity does not seek to understand, in general, if there is something to be learned from this story completely inspired to guide their research, understanding of the universe, dating system...
Why, what are they afraid to find? I do not think any of the impartiality of a system-way thinking.
Science Building on the Topchretien:
The approach that I advocate regarding the creation vs. evolution issue is to bring the person to recognize that macro-evolution is a belief. From my perspective, it seems, it is dangerous to shake the faith in Christ a person by proving that the Bible must reject macro-evolution.
For because the world in which we live, that person has a good chance to have more faith in what scientists secular, most schools and the vast majority of media and teaching and ultimately reject Christ.
diddl2007 on Topchretien:
A question I should ask all supporters of evolutionism. Why do you wear clothes out to you and why do not you go out naked (except in certain exceptional cases of certain tribal lands and some even hide the most intimate parts of their bodies). Why many companies even before Christianity had time to see the Gallic or other civilizations not as Judeo-Christian Rome and many others ... have required that men and women are covered??
And do not tell me the climate to argue for how we explain the fact that the Roman Empire who were also in very hot regions of the world such as Africa were all dressed?? After all, if man is to ape ancestor, whence come the sense of decency? Animals do not have this feeling, this feeling is typically associated with humans.
Well just look in the Bible and you will see that men and women knew that they were naked after sin and God gave them animal skins to cover them.
superspy on Topchretien:
do not try plunging nails into the "behind" where I do not know where (in my heart), this does not change the truth
there is no Christian, there is not intelligent, there is no executioner, there was not tortured ... it is simply life with his lies and truths
I think I have to do for the moment, people who practice very well lie they lie to themselves and therefore lie to others about themselves
I have one thing to say go or flee the truth by refusing to speak to me for fear of talking to your reflection TRUE!
see ya
ps: and no, I'm not god, I'd rather satan
KingJosias on Topchretien forum:
Regarding the quotes out of context, my ten years of experience in the creation-evolution debate showed me that evolutionists have never demonstrated the quotes "out of context"
Athanasius on Protestant Forum
[On the possibility of women becoming priests:]
Not mitres they need ... but yards (ICor.4/21)!
Commentary on Mr. Kirrmann Blogdei
Chapters 40 and 41 of Job describes two other extinct animals. the King James transcript:
"Behold now Behemot" reflects unfairly by the French as "hippopotamus", giving it a tail like a cedar, a diet high in places, bones like tubes of brass and a sword as a defense (Job 40.10 -- 19)
Then follows the description of Leviathan, reflects unfairly by a crocodile, but similar to what we believe to be a Trex (Job 40.20 to 41) It spits fire, is immune to weapons, breastplates sheet has on its tummy harrow .
(...)
The Bible is not only talking about dragons encounters with men, and the literature is literally crammed. From the Epic of Gilgamesh where the hero kills a dragon and bring his head.
Iron_Coffin on Topchretien:
[Regarding incest necessarily committed by the children of Adam and Eve ...]
In supposes that there is no God. The first man and first woman that we populate the earth have probably had recourse to this procedure.
Science Building on Topchretien:
[He was asked if he believes the story of Genesis is literal (6 days) or symbolic] I chose created in 6 days. So historically, but also symbolic. For example, harvesting a historical fact is used to symbolize. To me the bible is fractal.
mal4 of Topchretien:
[Asked about the symbolic value of "six days of creation"]
Do not be scientific. The things of God are understood by the light of évengile and is the Bible that says: 1d = 1000 years. Is this with or without the sun I know.
frero on Topchretien:
Yes God can regrow a leg, I saw her once. It was an operation of a miracle (the gift of working miracles), The Man in question, he missed both legs and also was a priest Catola.
A man's historical passage in our city were filled with the Spirit of God told him to just go buy a new pair of shoes, the priest is laughed first, but then he obeyed, He gave his shoe size to the vendor size 42 black please footwear. The seller apologized when he saw that the client had no leg but prostheses, but the priest insisted, and the seller finally served.
When the salesman handed him the shoes he looked and he placed a prosthesis in the shoe and at the same moment that formed one leg and he did the same for the second prosthesis and a second leg pushed immediately as the first leg with the foot entirely in the shoe.
Masson.A Topchretien on Forum:
Whether God exists is an object of knowledge and not an object of faith, because we can learn by logical deduction that God exists and what are its key attributes. (...) And of course knowing his perfections, how can we not have faith in God? (if not a neurosis affecting intelligence). So frankly, I do not see where is the problem. God is perfectly fair and everyone is in a position of equality of opportunity before him. We have to explain where the problem is, I frankly do not see it.
diddl2007 on Topchretien:
The name Yeshua has significance for Jews and becomes more accecible to understanding Jewish because too often the Jews believe that the Jesus of the Christians has created another religion when it is false because the Messianism of our Messiah and Savior is integral Judaism Bible ...
Frontline on Topchretien:
molecular biology, increasingly, the question arises .. physics: you know that the earth has a rotational shift of one day among the other planets of the Solar System? and that scientists do not find the explanation in the book of Joshua ...
an excellent documentary made by some guys just go out there called "Expelled". I think it might interest you!
diddl2007 on over Topchretien
I say again, there are 2 kinds of intelligence, there is a human intelligence on IQ and then there's the intelligence that comes from God, that which is most important, that is to follow the Lord God and this is the one that counts to God. Moreover, people who are far from God saying that there is no God is an indescribable stupidity and those claiming there is intelligent. Getting closer to God increases the intelligence and increases away from God stupidity. Consider Darwin's theory, it makes people really stupid to get away from God as to believe that man evolved from apes ...
Salt on the forum Topchretien:
God gives roles and different responsibilities to each, there is no rank or position but from different positions ...
The woman bears the child and the breastfeeding! The man is responsible for the outbreak before God!
The brothers taught in assembly! The sisters in the Privy their family, their guests and their sisters!
Or is the problem ?????????????????????
M3dhi on forum-religion.org:
Class IterationInfinie {
int i = 0;
boolean b = true;
do {
i = i +1;
} while (true);
System.out.println ( "Variable i =" + i) [the red line was Ed]
}
In fact, your compiler (brain) will succeed to compile it. it will therefore generate the binary file that contains your processor (yet logical brain +). After execution: Not the red line will be executed. (it will be too late because you press Alt + F4, otherwise the CPU block and you have to reboot the PC) Basically you will be dead.
You understand the principle?
"All these years of work experience have reinforced the observation that the psychiatrist, in all its forms, is an" effective "very limited despite its many claims and I am now more convinced than ever that she is in many ways a real springboard and a 'ramp' to the world of darkness! " - Excerpt from "Testimony of Annie" Voxdei.
"The changes (in the true sense) is not advantageous for a species, quite the contrary. They did not change either. We can not make a" mistake "and said it will be the rule for any a new generation. Do you know of varieties of five-legged cows, humans of the Third Kind? varieties of flies blind in nature? " - Gillovy, forums Topchretien
"I do not know if you read the book 'eternity in their hearts', but it shows how various peoples, ancient oral traditions were as preparations to receive the gospel." - Clairette2, Topchretien forums.
"The men of science should never interfere in how to read and understand the Word of God. For cons, the Bible illuminates the field of knowledge." - GILLOVY on the Forum Topchretien.
"We are very far from the time of Francis Bacon who believed possible to address the facts without bias. What's really sad is the attitude of the institution so well emphasized by Ben Stein in his film" Expelled: No intelligence allowed ". If creationism is so stupid, why not teach in public schools and demolish the argument by argument throughout the school year? And I talk about recent arguments published in scientific journals, not of old arguments. " - D. Gasser, Topchretien forum.
Link
Labels: Creationism, Noémie Cournoyer, Religion and fanaticism, Science and theory, Secularism
Saturday, May 02, 2009
Doe's the racialism is necessary for the emergence of Canadian society, by Francis Chartrand
Racialism is an emphasis on race or racial considerations.
Racialism entails a belief in the existence and significance of racial categories, but not necessarily in a hierarchy between the races, or in any political or ideological position of racial supremacy.
While the term racism refers the social and political effects pertaining to individual attitudes, institutional discrimination, and certain political ideologies based on the concept of race, racialism is the basic epistemological position that not only do races exist, but also that there are significant differences between them.
It is important to note, however, that this distribution of meanings between the two terms used to be precisely inverse at the time they were coined: The Oxford English Dictionary defined racialism as "belief in the superiority of a particular race" and gives a 1907 quote as the first recorded use. The term racism was defined by the OED as "[t]he theory that distinctive human characteristics and abilities are determined by race", giving 1936 as the first recorded use. Additionally, the OED records racism as a synonym of racialism: "belief in the superiority of a particular race". By the end of World War II, racism had acquired the same supremacist connotations as racialism: racism now implied racial discrimination, racial supremacism and a harmful intent.
Since the 1960s, some authors have introduced a new meaning for the less-current racialism: Black civil rights activist W. E. B. Du Bois introduced racialism as having the same meaning as racism had prior to WWII, i.e. the philosophical belief that differences exist between human races, be they biological, social, psychological or in the realm of the soul. He reserved the use of racism to refer to the belief that one's particular race is superior to the others (viz., precisely the inverse of the OED definitions). Scholar Kwame Anthony Appiah criticised DuBois for this definition of racialism in 'My Father's House' (1992) where he defines racialism as "...the view…that there are heritable characteristics, possessed by members of our species, which allow us to divide them into a small set of races, in such a way that all the members of these races share certain traits and tendencies with each other that they do not share with members of any other race."
Philosopher Pierre-André Taguieff has used the word racialism as a perfect synonym of scientific racism, to distinguish it from popular racism; He uses the term racialism to mean racism that claims to be scientifically founded. Arthur Gobineau's An Essay on the Inequality of the Human Races (1853-55) is an example of such racialism. Human zoos have been an important component of both popular racism and racialism, popularizing colonialism to the masses and was a subject of curiosity for anthropology and anthropometric studies, until at least the 1930s.
The field of whiteness studies examines the idea that race is a category that only applies to groups that are perceived to be different in some way. This area of scholarship scrutinizes the ways in which white people have become the standard against which all races are marked.
Racialism and scientific racism
Current racialist positions have moved away from 19th century classifications and rely instead on genetics, studying physiological differences between groups such as race and height, but also more complex, and thus controversial, questions like race and intelligence, race and health, and race and crime.
In the mid-20th century, support for some of the classical terminology of scientific racism declined among anthropologists: scientific support for the "Caucasoid", "Negroid", "Mongoloid" terminology has fallen steadily over the past century. Whereas 78 percent of the articles in the 1931 volume of Journal of Physical Anthropology employed these or similar terms, only 36 percent did so in 1965 (see African-American Civil Rights Movement (1955-1968)), and just 28 percent did in 1996. In February 2001, the editors of the medical journal Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine asked authors to no longer use "race" as explanatory variable, nor to use obsolescent terms. Other peer-reviewed journals, such as the New England Journal of Medicine and the American Journal of Public Health, have done the same. The National Institutes of Health issued a program announcement for grant applications through February 1, 2006, specifically seeking researchers to investigate and publicize the detrimental effects of using racial classifications within the healthcare field. The program announcement quoted the editors of one journal as saying that "analysis by race and ethnicity has become an analytical knee-jerk reflex."
Racialist vocabulary with inconsistent definitions is still used in medicine to a small extent, even when it has vanished from some census agencies and everyday speech. Genetics has renewed racialist perspectives, combining with the racialist perspectives of craniofacial anthropometry. Racialism in genetics is criticized as being subjective and otherwise inappropriate.
Racialism as pretext for separatism or supremacism
Alleged scientific findings of racial differences have been used to justify racial separatism. Nazi Germany had a racialist policy with its concept of "Großdeutschland" (Greater Germany), alongside its racial ideal based on the nordic race. In the United States in the 2000s, the term racialism has been employed by white separatist groups such as Christian Identity, Aryan Nations, the American Nazi Party, and White Aryan Resistance, though it has also been used by more innocuous groups and individuals.
During the first part of the Shōwa era, the propaganda of the Empire of Japan used the old concept of hakko ichiu to support the idea that the Yamato was a superior race, destined to rule Asia and the Pacific. Many documents such as Kokutai no Hongi, Shinmin no Michi and An Investigation of Global Policy with the Yamato Race as Nucleus referred to this concept of racial supremacy. Racial discrimination against other Asians was habitual in Imperial Japan and the Shōwa regime thus preached racial superiority and racialist theories, based on sacred nature of the Yamato-damashii. According to historian Kurakichi Shiratori, one of emperor Shōwa's teachers :«Therefore nothing in the world compares to the divine nature (shinsei) of the imperial house and likewise the majesty of our national polity (kokutai). Here is one great reason for Japan's superiority.»
Labels: Francis Chartrand, Science and theory
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Those who have faith, they are disabled or mentally ill?, by Francis Chartrand
There is people in life we can not know what mental illness they caught. But still ...
"Harry Potter and this kind of literature (big book) with the" magic "replied the kind perfectionists who must control everything in their lives but who hit the nose on the realities and that's good they are always disappointed. So they escape to play characters who have the "power" on people and events. Fabulent and they will enjoy a small consolation when writing the Bible gives us the character's most powerful, Jesus. Fortunately that Potter was far behind in the list of most sold books in the world "- forum on JP-chretien.com
"You is not gay Baptist, you are in fact victims of a sinful temptation, that of the homosexual. Especially not you ever consider as being homosexual, trying with all your heart to fight against that temptation, and Christ knows that nothing is impossible. "- Majestic forum on chretien.com
"This salary is other than AIDS that we often forget that its origin is homosexuality. This is why AIDS is a disease that will always incurable, simply because it was a divine punishment. Excuse me but you can not have tolerance for anything and everything. "- Levangile777 forum on chretien.com
( "Another states that the carbon 14 dating is a matter of interpretation. He said that nuclear physics is not blank ...) "That's your interpretation ... of scientist - Another Top Chrétien on Forum
Well first, when I say that I am thologien, historian and bla bla bla, it's not by degrees I justify this, but my attachment to these areas, period. - Another Top Chrétien on Forum
A touch of ethnocentrism:
(Background: we wonder if the ancestral Maledives are heresies).
"Absolutely, you will notice that these beliefs are mostly spread among the African Christians who think it is cultural as well. - Forum on Tinina Top Chrétien
"This issue for those who dispute the possibility of the existence of a" Triune God ", I remind them that for example if" UAE "written in three letters or three typographical as" H2O "in the language of a chemist, we should conclude that water can appear in three different forms namely concrete, a liquid, solid ice and gas in vapor form." - Site" Bible and numbers "
"I have another problem with the famous" continental drift ". Why is there no elephant, giraffe, hippopotamus, rhinoceros in South America as in Africa? You will answer me that it is because they have disappeared long ago in America and not Africa. Allow me to contradict myself constateur the simple things that everyone can take it with me. First there are the same types of climates from northern Argentina to northern Mexico, and vast areas virtually uninhabited. Then, the Americas were inhabited by very late man in relation to other continents, so there was no competition for large animals. Even if he had to cross the arm of the sea, all these animals can swim! - " Gillovy "on forum Topchrétien
"I am fighting against the devil and evil spirits with a few friends, spirits and jinn, which helped, but I had to take the drug because the psychiatrist did not want to get out of closed treatment in hospital since then, apart from a brief stop in 94, I take a drug, they can not get when I am not receptive, it can not crucify me." - " Gaetan "on forum Sceptiques Quebec
"Me I need to know that virtually no scientific or n'étudie use the theory of evolution in this work (except to make the plug-in) to conclude that evolution is a belief and not a theory understood and supported by the scientific community." - " KingJosias "on top Christian forum
"Science has taught us long ago that are carnivores because they no longer have the enzymes needed to digest certain components of the vegetation, or vice versa." - " D. Gasser, on top Christian forum
"I always ask a question ... Why are scientific as it rejects the establishment and acceptance as it changes ... Knowing that neither one nor the other is provable by a + b and that changes must also be called "Theory of evolution" as it is, I think he still theory and is trying to collect what seems to be "done" to derive a more "logical" ... "-" Fabien ", on top Christian forum
"I read the bible is the best scientific tool because it agrees with science." - " Adventist ", Forum on Religion
"ME I DON'T GIVE A FUCK (modo) IF GOD WANTS YOU IN HELL BECAUSE YOU HATE HIM I CAN NOT DO ANYTHING TO SAVE YOU. VOUS VOUS RAPPELLERAI DE MOI MAIS EN ENFER. YOU'LL REMEMBER ME BUT TO HELL. NOT BECAUSE YOU LIKE WHAT YOU LOVE. NEXT TIME I GIVE YOU THE DEFINITION OF HELL, THAT WAY YOU AN IDEA ON YOUR DESTINATION." - " LECHEMAINDROIT ", Forum on Religion
"What is evolution? It is a theory based on the unholy thought that the explanation of the origin of life can be a theist. Based on this principle laid down in rule, a materialistic atheistic (such mechanism) has been developed in concurrence with the design expressed by the biblical Genesis. Taking its starting point in the fabrications of the apostate Darwin Ch 1 (and a few others) as working hypotheses, a scenario 2 scientistic considering modification and improvement of species and it has been imagined "- gillovy forum TopChrétien.
The great confession of a creationist speaker:
"I don't care about his opinions [of the Intelligent Design proponent Michael Behe] and the views of creationists or evolutionists."- Julien P.aka Josiah and KingJosias "on the forum Sceptiques Quebec.
There are two elements in a couple, then God exists:
"Prove the contrary, prove that there are no pairs? if you find that is true of each element there are a couple, it means that God exists, if not, god no! this is your chance atheists!!" - " LECHEMAINDROIT ", Forum on Religion
"Of course man has cotoyé these fantastic beasts that are known dinosaur, although I am convinced that it was made of species of dinosaurs, whales, elephants, lizards and large birds. Moreover it was discovered that evidence of cohabitation in the fossils of the same geological layer. We must tell the truth and stop the misinformation! Because if the lie was punishable by law, there would be much more evolutionary in freedom!" - " Gillovy "on the Forum Topchretien
"An acquaintance who claims to rid themselves from the biblical teaching satanic claims the right to autonomy (I remind your kind thought that creationism is the official doctrine of the Church of the Apostles until today ... No father apostolic fathers of the Church, Doctor of the Reformation has supported an alternative explanation than that of Genesis, which is crucial to lay the foundations for understanding the functioning of the universe where we are .... Who can say it a cure?) Why autonomous thinking is it satanic? because it is based on .... Did God really say? Doubt, a search for a different understanding, a different interpretation." - " Gillovy "on the Forum Topchretien
"The true believer accepts to make a clean sweep of human ideas and to welcome those of God in the place. And believe me, when someone has received God himself in his life, the veil of ignorance and poor reasoning falls blind and his eyes open to consider how the truth is simple, beautiful and accessible ... so it is there in his eyes and he wondered how he had done so far to not see it! Our intelligence is renewed by the Holy Spirit of God and we finally understand things, how the world was made, how it works and how it eventually. Evolutionist propaganda seems so frivolous and vain that it ends soon by classify science-fiction mythology and post-scientific." - " Gillovy "on the Forum Topchretien
"If evolution was represented by a person, after these facts, you require the care of your property? If you were an employer, you commit? How can we trust any logic in this false science?"- J. Michel, comment on an article in the newspaper La Vie Rurale.
"Creationism is conveyed through scientific journals published by research centers creationists, via the Internet, via the debates in colleges and universities, etc ..." - Josiah, comment on an article in the newspaper La Vie Rurale.
"[T] he man was created to serve and not to be the master. The great seduction of 60 years was to believe that man can be free. Jesus reminds us of the truth, man was created to be under the government of God is under the government of money. The "free spirit" does not exist in the kingdom of God. - Impact Zone Blog, 1 April 2008
"What some theologians have taken on account of the" methodical doubt "of Descartes is unfortunately true. (...) For my part, I do not trust these pseudo-scientists of the Bible, these douteurs professional, the unbelievers in Christian clothing. I would never allow my old Bible, who followed me - and I tried to follow during my earthly pilgrimage, and be "eaten by the myths!" - Guillaume JC - Are there any myths in the Bible?
"[...] Participants display of" avatars "(images that forumeurs choose to represent) clearly demonic matching each message or a link to their site, like this young woman advocating lesbianism, the "conversion to atheism" and another glorification of suicide (sic) - but moderation is silent." - Site Voxdei on the forum topchretien.
"Do not forget that quantum mechanics can explain things quite large, such as the killer waves (waves of 20-30m high) that were impossible for classical physics." - " Yoda " on the Forum Topchretien
"0 = + m-m
= Should be read as a symbol of identity m anything (apple, man, god, music ...) + m-m and the expression of balance, which is universal.
For this truly magical, though infinitely simple, there is nothing that we did everything !!!!!!!!! So I believe that this scholar has fully answered questions about the identity of God, on the way up and on that of evolution. I personally do not see nothing to say more, or to explain any further." - Fabio, on the Forum Topchretien
"How to give a proof of the existence of God is above all a personal encounter with him with an open heart ready to give him access to all our lives for my part I was a hurry for without God there not but I started to do black magic and it did not bring peace but on the contrary one day I do encounter a Christian and m'ainvitée to come to church and I 've heard many stories but I could not really believe it made me worry and one evening in my room alone I have prayed and I asked forgiveness and I talk with God as a friend when I destémoignages had heard people crying and said they had felt peace n'aivaient they never felt so I foolishly waited all that I cry but nothing has happened I went to bed sad but always persévérence j got again the next night and has nothing; gold I thought I could not will not have forgiveness and above all the peace that I had since the practice of black magic then again the next night I did not update genous I am lying very very sad and I said I did not have the right because of what I did and all of a sudden I started crying and feeling resents the top of my head up toes and a peace I had never Wind fears and all my fears angoises that I lived a few years since we lost and that peace has never left and I have lived through extraordinary avecDieu an adventure so wonderful that is why it can not be explained that this is living with his heart, it is a personal decission must believe it just like a child the world wants proof God has already given proof look around you life is a miracle, but know that we are responsible for our actions God has given us the intelligence and choice of our actions we will meet un jour y God is not responsible for what we come c.est the world chosen and we accept them or not "- Choupette on the Forum Topchretien
"We have 10 or 100 billion neurons, and we only use a small part:" 5000 neurons. It is the scientists tell us. For me, I think that is a consequence of original sin. - Titou on Topchretien Forum
"You think it is possible to select pigs finally over several billion years be a pig the size of the city of Chicago? I think not.'' - Science Building on the Forum Topchretien (See also Samizdat, the site of Creation Science for an incalculable number of beads).
And Creation Science is doing it on that other thread, the same argument: the pig the size of the city of Chicago refutes evolution.
"While scientists are not evil Satanists attempting to corrupt the world, but ultimately one that does not belong to God belongs to the Devil. " - Saimoune on the Forum Topchretien
Link
Labels: Francis Chartrand, Human mistake, Science and theory
Did Jesus ever lied?, by Iba Bouramine
Jesus lied in John, Chapter 7.
In John, chapter seven, there is talk of a banquet which the disciples go. Jesus said he will not go to the party, but then went there on the sly.
In french, we have the translation Sower:
The world has no reason to hate you, but me it hates me because I testify that his actions are bad. So, go to the feast, for my part, I'm not going to [b] because the time has not yet come for me. After having said this, he remained in Galilee. But when his brothers were gone for the feast, he gave him, but secretly, without showing.
And b we note that "Some manuscripts have: I'm not going."
And Louis Segond, actually:
Mount you, in this celebration, for me, I did mount, because my time is not yet completed. After having said this, he remained in Galilee. When his brothers were fitted to the party, it climbed as himself, not publicly, but as in secret.
Bayard in the translation is even more pronounced:
Rendez-vous at the party, I will not go, the opportunity is not there yet. (...) Yet, once his brethren to the party, he went there too, not in broad daylight, but as in secret.
In English version VIN:
Therefore Jesus told them, “The right time for me has not yet come; for you any time is right. The world cannot hate you, but it hates me because I testify that what it does is evil. You go to the Feast. I am not [yet] going up to this Feast, because for me the right time has not yet come.” Having said this, he stayed in Galilee. However, after his brothers had left for the feast, he went also, not publicly, but in secret.
The "yet" was added. Some try to explain it by saying that Jesus said he did not go with those who came to invite him.
The King James Version offers another explanation. The passage is phrased as if Jesus first mentioned the "feast" (feast) as the afterlife or something like:
Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up yet unto this feast: for my time is not yet full come. When he had said these words unto them, he abode still in Galilee. But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also up unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret.
The American Standard Version does not "yet":
Go up to the feast yourselves; I do not go up to this feast because (K) My time has not yet fully come. "9Having said these things to them, He stayed in Galilee. 10But when His (L) brothers had gone up to the feast, then HeHimself also went up, not publicly, but as if, in secret.
Jesus lied about his return
It puts into the mouth of Jesus words concerning the coming of the Kingdom of Heaven and the return of the messiah. For example in Luke:
Then they see the Son of Man coming on a cloud with power and great glory. When these things begin to happen, straighten up and raise your heads, because your delivery approach. - Luke 21:32 (emphasis added)
Jesus told his disciples that they will return, as many will be still alive when he returns:
For the son of man comes in the glory of his Father with his angels, and then travel to each according to his conduct. Verily I say unto you: There are a few of those here who point not taste death until they see the son of man coming in his kingdom. Mat. 16:27-28. (Trad. Darby)
Link
Labels: Iba Bouramine, Religion and fanaticism, Science and theory
Thursday, March 05, 2009
The Top Ten Atheist Myths, by Noémie Cournoyer
We all know that many theists are so closed-minded about us that they won’t even talk to us, let alone try to understand us. This is usually not their fault, as they are told terrible things about us by people they trust, their preachers, whose whole livelihood depends on their parishioners staying in the flock.
It is this prejudice and conflict which is one of the main factors keeping atheists in the closet and theists in ignorance. With dialogue, not prejudice, both sides will benefit and the country will become a freer place. In this article I will therefore mention many of the myths about atheists that are popular among theists, as well as my usual responses. With any luck, this will prepare atheists for future confrontations and therefore make them more confident to announce themselves, as well as allow theist readers to better understand the atheist mentality.
Myth 1 ~ “Atheists are all the same” — You can understand why theists believe this, after being told this over and over by their preachers. This belief is reinforced by the fact that believers must be bound by much more than a simple belief in God. For example, Catholics must also have the same stances on abortion, contraception, and homosexuality in order to be called a “good Catholic.” It only goes to follow that atheism must be similar.
However, atheism is not a religion, rather the absence of religion. As such, we are bound only by our atheism. We are republicans and democrats, men and women, gays and straights, blacks and whites. We accept every person as they are as equals, and delight in our diversity (not many religions can say that). We disagree with each other on many issues, and discussion is encouraged and common. Above all, atheists demand the right to disagree, even if it means with each other.
Myth 2 ~ “Atheists have no morals, since they don’t believe in God” - What a sad world it is when people can seriously say that humans need to fear eternal damnation in order to do good. It is the one statement which at the same time stirs both anger and pity in most atheists; anger because it is a bigoted, prejudicial statement which serves no purpose except to promote intolerance, and pity because it highlights the speaker’s ignorance and willingness to accept such crap without question.
At the risk of validating the question, a reply needs to be made in order to expose the speaker to the idea that what they’ve heard is wrong on so many dimensions. It must not be answered with anger, but with compassion.
Humans have the idea of right and wrong imbedded in them by their own brains, as well as their upbringing and society. Atheists do good, not out of fear of reprisal, but because it’s the right thing to do. We value family, society, culture, and, of course, freedom. Many of us will - and have - defended these values with our lives. Examples:
1) Many Catholics make judgement calls on moral decisions against their church. For example, some use birth control or have abortions, despite what their church preaches. If these people can make moral decisions despite what their church preaches, then atheists can make similar choices without a church altogether.
2) Slavery was not only acceptable 200 years ago, it was considered a good deed by many, and defended using the bible. The bible was also used to justify the Holocaust, the Crusades, and the Spanish Inquisition.
Why is this relevant? Because it shows that the bible can be used to defend even the most immoral and unethical ideals, and is therefore not an adequate yardstick to measure moral or ethical behavior.
3) Finally, mention bad religious people. Remember that Hitler was a religious Catholic, and that Jeffrey Dahmer said grace before he ate his victims. Mention also that one need only open a newspaper to find yet another story about allegations against priests for sexual misconduct, often with children. Don’t forget our good friends Jim Bakker (who swindled millions from his flock) and Jimmy Swaggart (asked for forgiveness only after being caught using prostitutes).
4) Always couple these statements with the fact that, while atheists make up 8-10% of the population at large, we only make up 1% of the population in prison. I mean, think of it, what if 8-10% of the population (on top of all the religious criminals) decided it was OK to steal, rape, and murder? We’d have chaos! These will serve to prove that religion and ethical behavior are not even slightly related.
Expect these statements to piss off the theists, and this is where you must mention that what you said is verifiable and that their statement is openly prejudicial against 50 million Americans. This is the opportunity to open their eyes to the fact that just because we’re different from them doesn’t make us inherently bad.
Myth 3 ~ “Atheists believe in evolution, but that doesn’t answer as many questions as creationism”- Atheism is not a scientific theory, rather a lack of religion. We do believe in science, and that all questions will eventually be answered with science if they are not answered today. It’s gone well so far, giving theories regarding evolution, geological movement, and the Big Bang, all supported by evidence, but not necessarily endorsed by all atheists.
Creationism does not give all the answers, either. Furthermore, it goes so far as to choose which questions to answer, and discourages the asking of the rest. Believers are loath to discuss where God came from, or what he was doing before the creation. They refuse to give good answers for the many biblical inconsistencies or for the terrible injustices in the world, because they know that no such answers exist. They merely answer with “there are things which we mere humans cannot fully understand” or “the Lord works in mysterious ways”. In the end, religion doesn’t answer as many questions as it raises.
Myth 4 ~ “Atheists cannot know there is no God, since you cannot prove he doesn’t exist” - Again, this is a two sided coin, but the theists are loathe to admit the other side. Atheists don’t need to prove the non-existence of God, any more than we need to prove the nonexistence of Zeus or Jupiter. Can theists prove God over any alternatives? Of course not. Nobody can prove God exists, yet they will stand on their heads saying they’re sure. Well, if they can be sure despite evidence to the contrary, we can be sure in light of evidence in support of atheism.
Myth 5 ~ “Atheists seek to remove religion from society, and to force all people to be atheists” - Absolutely wrong. We seek only the freedom for people to make their choice on their own, free of intervention from the government or public school system. We seek the freedom not to support religion through taxes, forced participation, or special privileges of any kind.
That being said, your thoughts are your rights, and none of our business. Wear your jewelry, celebrate your holidays, and pray in your house, church, or in public if you like. Just don’t force your religion on other people. That’s what we’re all about.
This is in direct contrast to many of the world’s religions, including Christianity, which include worldwide expansion as one of their central objectives. Isn’t it amazing that they falsely accuse us of doing what they do openly, only with atheism it’s evil?
To try to force atheism would by hypocritical, since we would be placing pressure from the state on people to believe a certain way. But let me give a good analogy to our objectives and at the same time answer this charge using the money we use every day.
“In God We Trust,” is the government actively promoting religion.
“In God We Do Not Trust,” would be the government promoting atheism.
We advocate the complete omission of the statement thereby rendering the money neutral.
We feel the same way about the rest of the government. It should be the “Switzerland of the religious debate,” while at the same time being the protectorate of the individual.
Myth 6 ~ “Atheists are so closed-minded, they can’t see that miracles happen every day!” - Some people look for miracles where none exist (they never do). Allow me to put things in perspective: Someone’s cancer going into remission is no miracle, but we can talk when disease suddenly disappears from the face of the earth overnight without help from medical science. Food getting through to a hungry village: human perseverance. Starvation vanishing from earth without a reason overnight: Miracle. One more time: A child is born - science; The spontaneous end of birth defects - Miracle. Got it?
Note: only good things are miracles, so volcanoes, tornadoes, and hurricanes don’t count.
Myth 7 ~ “Atheists are pushing a negative sentiment, and have a dreary life” - Wrong We are “pushing” a very positive statement: that living without dependence on a false deity is easy, fulfilling, and positive. We strive to be a positive influence in the world, and think each person can - and must - find their own meaning of life. We are thinkers, philosophers, and we thrive on discussion and diversity. We are proud, happy, and most of all, free. Compare that to original sin and Hell.
Myth 8 ~ ” If atheists are right, then religious people are wasting their time, but at least they’re happy. No harm in that! If religious people are right, then atheists are going to hell. It seems logical that atheists should become religious just to be safe.” I like getting this question. I sense another list coming:
1) Drug addicts go through life happy, so would theists suggest we all use drugs and stay home? We would be happy, and not hurting anybody, so where’s the harm? The harm is the same for believers. They go through life happy, but it’s a false, wasteful happiness. Atheists get happiness from family, contribution to society, charity, and truth.
2) Religious people should not be lumped into one category for this question. Remember, religions are also biased against each other (Jews Vs. Catholics Vs. Protestants, etc), so no matter what religion the speaker follows, most of the world think they’re going to hell (or other punishment), just like atheists. Ask them which religion has the worst punishment, and whether they would convert to that religion on that one factor, just in case they’re right. When they tell you how absurd that question is, remind them that they asked it first.
3) To convert and practice a specific religion just to ingratiate yourself with God and avoid going to hell is pure, self-serving greed, which is one of the seven deadly sins. Therefore, by their own thinking, even if they are right and I do convert, I’d go to hell anyway, along with everyone else in the flock whose actions are so motivated (possibly including the speaker).
Myth 9 ~ “There are no such things as atheists” a.k.a. “There are no atheists in foxholes” - More fantasy from the believers, that there could never exist a single human whose reason and logical abilities surpass the pressure from society to believe in a deity. This is especially true in a situation of imminent death, where they believe all atheists would drop to our knees and beg God for forgiveness.
Wouldn’t it be nice if we could somehow be sure that those who currently disagree with us would come around in the end and know we were right? Just like most other parts of religion, this is blatant fantasy.
There are 25 Million atheists in the country, more that Jews and Blacks combined. Many atheists became atheists not because they were born into it (like most theists), rather because we contemplated god in its many forms and decided it just doesn’t make an ounce of sense. This isn’t a choice, it’s fact - a logical proof. We are simply too logical to believe God is anything more than fantasy.
As far as foxholes go, when I face death, as we all do sooner or later, I will use the last few remaining seconds of my life to remember my favorite moments, and evaluate my contribution to my family and society. I would definitely not waste precious time praying to a deity “just in case I’m wrong” I’m not.
Myth 10 ~ “This country was founded by Christians, on Christian values, and should therefore be a Christian country”.
True, some of the founding fathers were Christian, but some were Deists (generally believed in God), and some were outright atheists. But a more important point needs to be made: the founding fathers went out of their way to specify that church and state be separate. They believed that their religion was just that: theirs and theirs alone. They also remembered that they were there trying to be free of the state church of England, and recognized from their first-hand experience that true religious freedom can only come when belief is left to the individual. It is this ideal, among others, for which our forefathers fought and died.
Individual religious choice - including the right not to practice - is still under assault in this country. Those who would prefer to make the choice for you have labeled us criminal, evil ne’er-do-wells and launched a massive campaign to keep freethinkers subdued. They have been successful, mainly because atheism is fragmented and closeted.
They continue to be successful, but we can reverse the trend. Atheists must make themselves known. If you are reading this, and you are a closet atheist, you owe it to your country, your fellow atheists, and yourself to let people know how you feel. Start by coming to our convention in June, and meeting other people like yourself. You’ll be amazed at how good it feels to speak, listen, and party with people who openly agree with you. Bring a friend.
Link
Labels: Creationism, Noémie Cournoyer, Science and theory, Secularism
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Radical constructivism or how to build a reform of education on the sand, by Anne Humphreys
From an article by Normand Baillargeon, a professor in educational sciences at the University of Quebec at Montreal, published in the book "Against the educational reform", published recently in vlb editor. We recommend the purchase of this book to anyone interested in the education required for students in Quebec.
Normand Baillargeon is a former education columnist for Le Devoir. It attacks by radical constructivism is the cause of educational reform imposed by the monopoly of education in Quebec schools. Baillargeon libertarian who is progressive and is reminiscent of Alain Finkielkraut, both citing Hannah Arendt, for whom the real progressive policy requirement calls as a pedagogical conservatism.
The headings below are of us.
Ernst von Glasersfeld, tutelary figure of the current curriculum Quebec
Ernst von Glasersfeld (born 1917) is, among other things, a psychologist and cyberneticians. [...]
Glasersfeld but he is best known as the creator of an epistemological doctrine called him 'radical constructivism', which has held in Quebec, in contexts where they think the education, influence and has been for nearly three decades .
As such, Mr. Glasersfeld has on many occasions been invited to Quebec theorists of education, especially in universities, where the texts were widely read, disseminated and studied.
In 2002, he received the University of Quebec at Montreal (UQAM) the recognition of scientific merit. The university stressed that his participation in the work and activities of the Center for Interdisciplinary Research on Learning and Education Development (CIRAD), one of the places where it thought the current educational reform, and reminded that this "long-standing collaboration of the Center" had a great influence on the research conducted there. "
This influence is still recognized by this group of eminent academics and researchers from Quebec who in 2004 published a book in tribute to Glasersfeld. Their aim, say the authors, was to show "the impact of constructivism on research and educational practices" and to describe "his influence on curriculum reform and educational choices. "
Finally, Glasersfeld in 2006 received an honorary doctorate in education from Laval University.
Radical constructivism as hegemonic orthodoxy in Quebec
All this suggests the radical constructivism in Quebec has become a doctrine very influential at the highest levels of education. In fact, a kind of orthodoxy has installed an orthodoxy whose hegemony is reinforced by the fact that followers of radical constructivism do little contradiction and quickly, for all practical purposes, monopolized the discourse in Quebec and that the institutions of production and dissemination of research.
[...]
Varieties of constructivism in radical constructivism
Some feel that such socially that knowledge is constructed, particularly by social groups: their social constructivism is and others believe that it is the individual who builds and constructivism is individual. Some believe that this construction is a psychological phenomenon and that the study helps to understand how the mechanisms by which knowledge is constructed, while others believe that the very status of knowledge than a building, pushing some fairly in this way to achieve one form or another of idealism and epistemological relativism, claiming that knowledge, eg science, is a construction among other possibilities, no epistemic privilege. This is precisely the prospect of Glasersfeld.
Radical constructivism according Glasersfeld
[...]
The heart of Glasersfeld's position is contained in this presentation that often. From the perspective of it, he says:
- Knowledge is not passively received either through the senses or communication.
- Knowledge is actively constructed by the knowing subject.
- The function of cognition is adaptive in the biological sense of the term: to agree to viability.
- Cognition allows the organization by about the experiential world, not the discovery of an objective ontological reality.
These ideas involve various ontological and epistemological positions with the agreement of the author may be conveniently presented as follows:
- Knowledge is not a world independent of the observer;
- Knowledge is not such a world: theories of knowledge that knowledge is the real false;
- Knowledge is created by individuals in a historical and cultural context;
- It refers to individual experience rather than the world;
- It consists of conceptual structures of individuals;
- Conceptual structures constitute knowledge when individuals consider viable in their experience: constructivism is a form of pragmatism;
- There is no privileged conceptual framework: constructivism is a relativist doctrine;
- Knowledge is an order of a suitable experiential reality;
- There is no extra-experiential reality accessible to reason.
[...]
In fact, I do not deceive me by suggesting that many philosophers and epistemologists consider such concepts as contradictory, absurd, or highly questionable at best implausible.
[Radical Constructivism: relativistic and contradictory
Many criticisms have been leveled against the constructivist epistemology. The most common is that this theory is the bed of relativism, because it defines the truth as a "construction" depends on social society where it appears. This leads to accusations of internal contradiction: if what should be considered as "real" is relative to a particular company, then this constructive design itself must be true that in a given society. It could well be "false" in another company. If so, constructivism would be wrong in this society. In addition, this means that social constructivism can be both true and false. Critics of constructivism then recall this axiom of logic "if a proposal is both true and not true, it is not true", so according to the principles of social constructivism, it is false.]
[...]
Constructivism "repudiates the notion of truth"
[Some citations Glasersfeld:]
[F]rom a naive point of view which is that of common sense, the elements that make this complex environment are part of a real world consists of objects unquestionable, as real as the student, and these objects have an existence independent independent not only of students but also teachers. Radical Constructivism is a radical theory of knowledge which, for reasons that had nothing to do with the teaching of mathematics or education, does not accept the view of common sense.
The Radical constructivism is radical in that it breaks with conventions and he develops a theory of knowledge in which knowledge does not reflect an ontological reality "objective" but only scheduling and organization of a world by our experience. Radical constructivism repudiated once and for all "metaphysical realism".
Elsewhere, it states that constructivism "repudiates the notion of truth as correspondence with reality".
[...]
Count the number of people: everything is relative
In one of his books, Philippe Jonnaert, a constructivist Quebec, provides an example of what an educator for the adoption of what he calls the "constructivist posture" and metaphysical idealism. A teacher of a class of first year of primary school requires its students to the number of boys and girls in the classroom with their first names. It has 23 labels, distributed as follows: 12 boys, 10 girls, 1 and that of the teacher.
But that's it. A student has 22 labels is that it does not the teacher. Another arrived at 24: he has the teacher and, as it is a great person, he counts for two. The observer of the scene, he has 23 labels.
You see, then decreed constructivist idealistic: there is no real, that representations, each doing its own without it being possible to declare one more objective than the other. "Everyone writes the author constructs his reality."
All that is hateful in the constructivist posture is here.
First, this extraordinary and unjustified quantum leap by which one moves from a triviality to a radical thesis in epistemology, the banality of the very psychological constructivism and radical constructivism very questionable metaphysics.
Then the sad conclusion that teaching draws. For what should be drawn from this story is just [...] it is essential pout the teacher to ensure that what he said is clear and can be interpreted in different ways. Here, the instructions clearly were ambiguous.
[...]
Utilitarianism of constructivism in the teaching of basic skills
"[T] o constructivists, writing an emulator Glasersfeld Quebec, the only possible to know a topic is the practical knowledge which enables it to survive, to carry out its projects and to deal with his desire." The same author stresses the content of these programs in secondary mathematics [which] should include the teaching of concepts a minority use the latest "and" knowledge that most will never be called upon to use their lives, because they do not meet the problems they are supposed to solve, and the teaching of "some sophisticated language written or spoken."
[...]
[T]his pragmatism, in my opinion, is an important part of the explanation for this obsession of skills that has gripped the world of Education of Quebec. Glasersfeld wrote: "It is extremely difficult to substitute the concept of" know how "to design a knowledge that should produce an image of the real world [...]. But it is precisely this substitution must be done to understand the basis of constructivism."
[...]
Endoctrinaire trend in the faculties of education
In short, a radical doctrine was very questionable and is still taught in an extremely biased and partisan students and future researchers in education. But there's more. Is that this doctrine was transmitted in an institutional context where join was (and remains) an essential condition for taking part in the intellectual community and progress. All this leads me to conclude that everything has been made to ensure that people who are targeted adhere to the doctrine presented.
There is, philosophy of education, a word and a concept specific to describe what I just wrote, namely the transmission of a doctrine with the intention to close the mind through the use of processes other than those allowed by the observance of the rationality of the subjects or processes as deplorable bias and the incompleteness of the information or the institutional and economic pressure. This concept is that of indoctrination. And I support, based on over twenty years in that environment, and that this is indeed a form of indoctrination constructivist positions (particularly radical) that has been practiced on a large scale in Quebec schools science education.
[...]
Summary: waste transfer and relativistic without legitimacy
Constructivism is a radical doctrine confused, delirious in some respects and does little philosophical interest.
[...]
If [the education] has allowed the practitioners of a discipline in search of recognition to establish legitimacy, the latter inspired by him, have helped to dump the school system in a very toxic cocktail made of idealism of epistemological relativism, pragmatism [utilitarianism], very much in the spirit of the times, but whose impact on the school and the children are dramatic.
At the same time, it was neglected and lost sight of important issues for any reflexive support of education, encouraged a weakening of the role of knowledge in education and its practitioners and neglected the vast and rich heritage of knowledge from the philosophy of education and science that can make an important contribution to our understanding of education materials and the most appropriate and most effective to train people educated.
[...]
In the meantime, I'm still looking, without quite finding the answer to a pressing question: what right, by what legitimacy, officials and researchers have been able to transfer this tremendous sense of education they have made? It seems that the arrogance and ignorance that led to the adoption of ideas that I just described had to play a role in this story.
Labels: Anne Humphreys, Science and theory
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]