Law School Discussion

Regent University Law is the most powereful Law School in America???

Julie Fern

  • *****
  • 25797
  • hillary clinton say "boo!"
    • View Profile
Re: Regent University Law is the most powereful Law School in America???
« Reply #70 on: April 13, 2007, 06:07:27 PM »
truth always important. but if you want seem like ignoramus, good luck with that.

truth overrated. 90% of "truth" just someone else's spin.

but mostly i'm going for "curmudgeonly".

being idiot overrated, too, except in president gump's administration.

This is wrong.

  • ****
  • 207
  • Dear LawDog3...
    • View Profile
Re: Regent University Law is the most powereful Law School in America???
« Reply #71 on: April 13, 2007, 06:09:15 PM »
truth always important. but if you want seem like ignoramus, good luck with that.

truth overrated. 90% of "truth" just someone else's spin.

but mostly i'm going for "curmudgeonly".

being idiot overrated, too, except in president gump's administration.

yes, but sometimes it pisses people off and leads to entertaining results.

e.g. not using proper grammar to piss people off.  ;)

Julie Fern

  • *****
  • 25797
  • hillary clinton say "boo!"
    • View Profile
Re: Regent University Law is the most powereful Law School in America???
« Reply #72 on: April 13, 2007, 06:20:34 PM »
not mock handicapped, forrest.

This is wrong.

  • ****
  • 207
  • Dear LawDog3...
    • View Profile
Re: Regent University Law is the most powereful Law School in America???
« Reply #73 on: April 13, 2007, 06:28:00 PM »
not mock handicapped, forrest.

you started it.  your schtick is brain cloud.  my schtick is not believe evolution.  fair's fair.

Alan Shore

  • ****
  • 186
  • All reality. None of it scripted.
    • View Profile
Re: Regent University Law is the most powereful Law School in America???
« Reply #74 on: April 14, 2007, 04:07:17 PM »
Oy vey. I did not mean to start an evolution thread.
This is starting to look like lawstudentparadise... a waste of Internet storage space. ::)

From studying evolution, I hardly believe that there is undeniable proof of it's existence.
While microevolution (change within species) clearly exists... a dog is still a dog is still a dog, whether it's a German shepherd or poodle... I have yet to see any significant evidence in favor of macroevolution (change across species).

What is science?
According to webster, it is "1 : the state of knowing : knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding."
http://www.webster.com/dictionary/science

Can we KNOW?
How do you know that dinosaur bones are billions of years old.
"The fossil record tells us this."
How do you know those fossils are billions of years old?
"The dinosaur bones tell us."
This is not science, this is circular reasoning, which is a flawed reasoning.

Who here was there at the big bang and watched creatures evolve? Nobody.
I'll reverse the question to be fair: Who here was there when God created the world? Nobody.
They are both faith based systems.

More 'junk science' is Carbon dating.

www.iidb.org/vbb/archive/index.php/t-38149.html

*Living mollusk shells have been carbon dated at 2,300 years old (Science vol. 141, 1963 p. 634-637)
*Freshly killed seal was carbon dated at 1300 years old (Antarctic Journal vol. 6 Sept-Oct 1971 p. 211)
*Shells from living snails dated at 27,000 years old (Science vol. 224, 1984, p. 58-61)

If carbon dating doesn’t work for known ages, how is it supposed to work for unknown ages?

One of the biggest proofs of evolution is Haeckel's Embryo Diagrams. Haekel was accused of fraud by several scientists and convicted of fraud by a university court.

Great "facts" and "science"!

And if this theory is so 'ironclad' that would mean that all scientists agree right? Espeically evolutionary scientists.
Wrong. Read what Richard Milton, atheist and evolutionist, had to say.

   “Because it is a difficult job, a tacit understanding has arisen that it would be bad form or unseemly to criticize science or scientists seriously, as if they were a banker who added up sums wrongly or a grocer who forgot to deliver the sausages.
   “I reject this tacit consensus. I am a customer for the scientific service that we pay scientists to provide and I have a customer complaint: I am not satisfied with the answers they have provided on the mechanism of evolution and I want them to go back into their laboratories and investigate further.
   “I believe it is high time that consumerism finds a voice in the public sector and in the academic world as effectively as it has in industry and commerce. And I do not accept the convention that scientists may be criticized only by their peers.”

To make it certain that he's not a fruad, he makes clear his religious beliefs.
   
   “Let me make it unambiguously clear that I am not a creationist, nor do I have any religious beliefs of any kind. I am a professional writer and journalist who specializes in writing about science and technology and who writes about matters that I believer are of public interest.
   “For anyone, anywhere, to say that I am a creationist, a secret creationist, a “creationist ally,” or any other such weasel-word formulation, is an act of intellectual dishonesty by those who have no other answer to the scientific objections I have raised publicly…
   “Darwinism still has a large number of critics and it isn’t only creationists who have serious doubts about the theory or who have questioned the established view of historical geology.”
(Quoted in Martin, Jobe. The Evolution of a Creationist. Biblical Discipleship Publishers, Rockwall, TX: 2004. pp. 118-119)

And read what Stephen J. Gould had to say! We all know him to be an evolutionist.

“The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of fossils.”
Dr. Stephen J. Gould Stephen J. Gould - "Evolution's Erratic Pace," Natural History, vol. 86 (May 1987), p. 14.

To be fair, he later clarifies in the article, "The modern theory of evolution does not require gradual change. In fact, the operation of Darwinian processes should yield exactly what we see in the fossil record."

Belief in evolution also fosters racism, and Hitler was a staunch believer in evolution.
The entire title of the book by Darwin is (since edited for obvious PC reasons): "ON THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES: By Means of Natural Selection or The Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life."

Oh, those pesky evolutionists, with their so-called "facts"...  they are so stubborn!


My point exactly! Talk about self-righteousness and superiority of a claim!

One of the best ways to learn about an issue, is to look at the other side.
We're all going to be lawyers, we know about this and 'cross-examination.'
One of the best cross-examiners of evolution is Dr. Kent Hovind.

http://www.drdino.org is an excellent site with free videos where you can learn some fascinating things about the not-so-unshakable theory of evolution.

This will conclude my discussion. I think we should continue to research both sides of the topic for ourselves, because I doubt we will come to a consensus here on these boards, and we should go back to talking about Regent! ;)


This is wrong.

  • ****
  • 207
  • Dear LawDog3...
    • View Profile
Re: Regent University Law is the most powereful Law School in America???
« Reply #75 on: April 14, 2007, 04:12:52 PM »
check it out, debunking evolution isn't worth the effort.  just say you don't believe in it and you get the same amusing emotional responses without doing all the work.

H4CS

  • ****
  • 2445
    • View Profile
Re: Regent University Law is the most powereful Law School in America???
« Reply #76 on: April 14, 2007, 04:38:14 PM »
Do you have peanut butter?  Then there's no evolution!  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZFG5PKw504

That gets you an A at regent and a guaranteed gov't job and pardon.

This is wrong.

  • ****
  • 207
  • Dear LawDog3...
    • View Profile
Re: Regent University Law is the most powereful Law School in America???
« Reply #77 on: April 14, 2007, 04:39:31 PM »
Do you have peanut butter?  Then there's no evolution!  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZFG5PKw504

That gets you an A at regent and a guaranteed gov't job and pardon.

how long is that pardon good for?

Alan Shore

  • ****
  • 186
  • All reality. None of it scripted.
    • View Profile
Re: Regent University Law is the most powereful Law School in America???
« Reply #78 on: April 14, 2007, 05:22:58 PM »
check it out, debunking evolution isn't worth the effort.  just say you don't believe in it and you get the same amusing emotional responses without doing all the work.

Yeah, but this way I show I actually have a point, rather than saying, "I belive this is the way it is and that's that!" (Which would prove my previous point about superiority complexes.)

Do you have peanut butter?  Then there's no evolution!  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZFG5PKw504

That gets you an A at regent and a guaranteed gov't job and pardon.

I actually don't like peanut butter. :-/

H4CS

  • ****
  • 2445
    • View Profile
Re: Regent University Law is the most powereful Law School in America???
« Reply #79 on: April 14, 2007, 05:29:52 PM »
Yeah, but this way I show I actually have a point

You sure about that?  Claiming that you have a point may be a bit of a stretch.  Let's stick with feeling.  You have a feeling about evolution.  No wait.  It's more than a feeling (more than a feeling) when I hear that old song they used to play.  And that song is more than 6000 years old.