1. Resentment Over Darwin Evolves Into a Documentary

Comment #165305 by QuickEye on April 21, 2008 at 10:10 am

Lammie,

I think your wish in point 1 has already been granted:
http://www.expelledexposed.com/index.php/the-truth

:)

2. Holy missing link! Ancient bat flew without 'sonar'

Comment #129430 by QuickEye on February 19, 2008 at 5:59 am

One gap split into two. :P

3. Ben Stein Wins Intelligent Design Money

Comment #127906 by QuickEye on February 15, 2008 at 5:32 pm

Stein, the son of renowned economist Herbert Stein, lends a patina of respectability to neo-Creationist science as a result of his status as a minor celebrity

4. Banks are helping sharia make a back-door entrance

Comment #116358 by QuickEye on January 26, 2008 at 9:59 am

It also might be looked at the other way around: the banking trying to sell their products, and sugar-coat their product so that a new market niche could be explored deeper. This in itself shouldn't bring about the change of the country's legislation.
If the product fails, than the bank is supposed to get rid of it. If it is a success, and the bank is making profit on it, than it is a viable business practice. Like offering kosher, halal or vegetarian meal on airplanes.
Renaming 'interest' to something else doesn't change the nature of it, as the article quotes a banker. In that case it is more about the deception by the religion that is the question, but that is not the banks' problem.
If the articles quotes are right, than it seems that the airline (bank) might be selling the same tray of food as kosher/halal/vegetarian: only the label is different. But than again: that is the religion's problem.

5. A Letter From Hell

Comment #115972 by QuickEye on January 25, 2008 at 6:59 am

Oh, come on! ;)
I think we all know how easily they would sweep away our arguments.
"It's just a dramatization."
And we also know that the rational arguments against this crap are not valid, since religion is "outside of the realm of rationality", as they might say. So all the reasonable questions and arguments posted here are to no avail: we are trying to use our reason to get insight into something that is beyond reasoning - we just don't get it that we simply have to believe, because they say so. And they know it. KNOW. Don't come with the reasonable request for irrefutable evidence (or any evidence for that matter). Again: reason has no place here, no "chain of custody" for the evidence (I clearly watch too much CSI... :P).

It is so hard to pry open their beliefs. Kudos to the religions for their ability to build in such powerful self defense agains what we would call 'reality'. Which ironicaly might be the result of the evolution of the memes that make up religions - not that they would ever consider this possibility.

But anyway: what the hell am I doing preaching to the choir boys here? :D

6. The real danger in Darwin is not evolution, but racism

Comment #115161 by QuickEye on January 23, 2008 at 5:22 pm

This would be the case if Darwin's books (or any scientific work, for that matter) would be unchangeable, "carved in stone" as the Bible. In that case the author might have a point.
But that is not how science works, and that is the beauty of it. Scientific theories develop or get discarded as time goes by. The advances made in other fields of science influence even the theory of evolution, and claims made in the name of Darwinism necessarily have to comply with the science of TODAY, not of Darwin's own time. So if Darwin made statements that were disproved later, those statements can not be part of today's Darwinism. Scientific thinking not just allows this development, but it is the essence of it, as far as I can judge.
This might be a tough concept to "swallow" for people who are used to the idea of the unquestionable authority of a book...