Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    9:00 PM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: Grassroots drive for Dr. Ben Carson, to be President in 2016 Back to Topics
mexicomaria

Champion Author
Minnesota

Posts:26,649
Points:1,749,380
Joined:May 2007
Message Posted: Feb 16, 2013 11:47:47 PM

At long last...a man that does not care to be politically correct, he cares to be frank. Dr Ben Carson speaks at Prayer Brkft
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:73,014
Points:2,931,870
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 2:18:14 PM

A couple of days ago I posted about a clash between Carson and Jesse jackson and the link failed. Here is a working link.

And by the way, let's all HOPE that the quantum fluctuation that we are living in is not too temporary. About 12 billion years in, I'd say we're all right for now.
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,342
Points:2,679,240
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 12:43:16 PM

of course Jack, I realize that you have to ignore reality in order to maintain your "faith"...
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,342
Points:2,679,240
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 12:41:52 PM

I'm just showing you Jack, that your statement that all quantum fluctuations are temporary, is in fact in error.

Have a nice day...
Profile Pic
MahopacJack
Champion Author New York

Posts:9,417
Points:1,819,505
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 12:22:35 PM

Shockjock, >>And as I have shown Jack, Wikipedia is in error (surprise, surprise). The formulation they use is incomplete and the orticle needs revision…<<
~
Then complain to them rather than extending this discussion far 'beyond the pale.'
~



[Edited by: MahopacJack at 8/27/2014 12:24:29 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,342
Points:2,679,240
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 11:30:43 AM

And as I have shown Jack, Wikipedia is in error (surprise, surprise). The formulation they use is incomplete and the orticle needs revision...

[Edited by: Shockjock1961 at 8/27/2014 11:34:43 AM EST]
Profile Pic
MahopacJack
Champion Author New York

Posts:9,417
Points:1,819,505
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 10:59:19 AM

Shockjock, >>BTW, you will notice that your Wikipedia "source" did not say ALL quantum fluctuations are temporary... <<
~
In case you missed it, the following appears at the very beginning of Wikipedia's definition.

"In quantum physics, a quantum vacuum fluctuation (or quantum fluctuation or vacuum fluctuation) is the temporary change in the amount of energy in a point in space,[1] as explained in Werner Heisenberg's uncertainty principle.

According to one formulation of the principle, energy and time can be related by the relation[2]

\Delta E \Delta t \approx {h \over 2 \pi}

That means that conservation of energy can appear to be violated, but only for small values of t (time). This allows the creation of particle-antiparticle pairs of virtual particles. The effects of these particles are measurable, for example, in the effective charge of the electron, different from its "naked" charge."

Let me emphasize, "That means that conservation of energy can appear to be violated, but only for small values of t (time)."

~
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,342
Points:2,679,240
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 10:36:16 AM

I've already shown how the Universe may have been created through a quantum fluctuation...

BTW, you will notice that your Wikipedia "source" did not say ALL quantum fluctuations are temporary...

[Edited by: Shockjock1961 at 8/27/2014 10:37:44 AM EST]
Profile Pic
MahopacJack
Champion Author New York

Posts:9,417
Points:1,819,505
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 10:34:52 AM

Shockjock, >>Really Jack? A Wikipedia article? That's your proof? <<
~
You asked, >>Really, what makes you say ALL quantum fluctuations are temporary? <<

And I responded with Wikipedia's definition. If YOU have proof that Quantum Fluctuations are permanent, I suggest you take the problem up with Wikipedia.

~
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,342
Points:2,679,240
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Aug 26, 2014 3:54:06 PM

Our try here if you want a source a little more reliable then Wikipedia...

For many years, cosmologists have relied on the idea that the universe formed spontaneously, that the Big Bang was the result of quantum fluctuations in which the Universe came into existence from nothing.
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,342
Points:2,679,240
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Aug 26, 2014 3:45:26 PM

Really Jack? A Wikipedia article? That's your proof?
Here

[Edited by: Shockjock1961 at 8/26/2014 3:49:51 PM EST]
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,719
Points:813,900
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Aug 26, 2014 1:01:06 PM

Heinlein is one of my favorite authors, flyboyUT. I love that quote! It's part of the reson that I won't allow abortion to be a topic when we do argumentative papers. It always boils down to religion and you simply can't argue religious beliefs. You either have some particular ones or you don't, and it is very difficult to take someone else's seriously if you are a "true believer" of some other faith. Explains much about politics as well.
Profile Pic
MahopacJack
Champion Author New York

Posts:9,417
Points:1,819,505
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Aug 26, 2014 12:57:58 PM

Weasel, >>You are in trouble, jack, when shock and I are in agreement…<<
~

It isn't the first time nor will it be the last, where my beliefs are different than the majority. I'll take my chances.

~
Profile Pic
MahopacJack
Champion Author New York

Posts:9,417
Points:1,819,505
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Aug 26, 2014 12:53:44 PM

Shockjock1961, >> Really, what makes you say ALL quantum fluctuations are temporary? <<
~

THIS

~
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,279
Points:515,665
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 26, 2014 11:13:02 AM

You are in trouble, jack, when shock and I are in agreement...
Profile Pic
wbacon
Champion Author Philadelphia

Posts:15,744
Points:3,479,750
Joined:Jun 2004
Message Posted: Aug 26, 2014 5:39:31 AM

Good News!
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,719
Points:813,900
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 8:04:34 PM

I would certainly follow Dr. Carson's views on healthcare, and have when he was my son's doctor.

I believe the man also foresaw the evergrowing problems with the poorly-thought-out ObamaCare. If I were a politician who cared about the people, I would follow his advice on fixing that debacle as well.
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,342
Points:2,679,240
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 8:01:12 PM

"If your theory of the origins of the Universe are true, then there is little, if any, meaning to life."

Life has as much meaning as you are willing to grant it...

"As Quantum Fluctuations are only temporary"

Really, what makes you say ALL quantum fluctuations are temporary?

"There is also the problem of space. In what vessel is our 'heavens' contained?"

Who says there has to be a vessel? Space/time is a vessel in and of itself...

"It is a matter of choice."

Exactly, and since neither choices can be proved, neither is more or less valid then the other...

"Should I believe in a theory that debases humanity"

What theory debases human and how does it do so?
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,387
Points:1,419,035
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 6:39:17 PM

Robert Heinlein---- "No one can conclusively prove there is a God. No one can conclusively prove there is no God. All too soon you will die and find out for sure."

Act as you think wise.
Profile Pic
MahopacJack
Champion Author New York

Posts:9,417
Points:1,819,505
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 6:34:53 PM

sgm4law, >>and who created God, again? Did God create God? <<
~
It is a matter of choice. Should I believe in a theory that debases humanity or believing we should treat each other with respect and are ultimately answerable to a higher power?

Therefore, I CHOOSE God. The outcome is better and if wrong, what matter is it anyway?

~
Profile Pic
MahopacJack
Champion Author New York

Posts:9,417
Points:1,819,505
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 6:19:32 PM

Shockjock, >>It's amusing to see how people can so readily dismiss the idea that the Universe was created through a quantum fluctuation as an impossibility, yet readily embrace the concept that it was created by a magical being….<<
~
Good for you that you are amused.

If your theory of the origins of the Universe are true, then there is little, if any, meaning to life. As Quantum Fluctuations are only temporary, something or someone had to be created before the temporary fluctuation could occur. Whether it was Energy or matter or a combination of both. There is also the problem of space. In what vessel is our 'heavens' contained? If there is no vessel, what are the limits? This often confuses those who are unable to conceive of a power greater man.

Unlike you, I do not find your line of thinking as amusement. I find it saddening.

~
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:22,601
Points:2,876,295
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 6:13:16 PM

"Instead of recognizing it is impossible for anything to evolve without it FIRST being created (i.e.. someone or something had to create not only the matter but the conditions for evolution as well, a.k.a. GOD),"

and who created God, again? Did God create God?
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,342
Points:2,679,240
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 4:37:07 PM

It's amusing to see how people can so readily dismiss the idea that the Universe was created through a quantum fluctuation as an impossibility, yet readily embrace the concept that it was created by a magical being....
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,279
Points:515,665
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 2:11:37 PM

"you chose to use the Loony Left's ploy of ridiculing me."

Your 'answers' were simple deflections.

"Feel free to answer any of the questions below directly;

"What tangent is this you are now on? Since when did the theory of evolution ever pertain to Chemistry, Physics or any other field of science outside of Biology???"

Or this one;

"The question you should be asking is, why do you have to have creation without evolution?"

Or this one;

"What other subjects will he ignore the data on?"

[Edited by: Weaslespit at 8/25/2014 2:11:58 PM EST]
Profile Pic
MahopacJack
Champion Author New York

Posts:9,417
Points:1,819,505
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 11:52:48 AM

Weasel, >>Again, I note the absolute refusal to answer the basic questions outlined - I am not surprised…<<
~
I am not surprised that you did not see the answer to your questions. Perhaps it is because you do not or just ignore the meaning of words.

Here is a summarry of our 'debate.'

You asked, >>The question you should be asking is, why do you have to have creation without evolution?…<<

I replied, "As for the 'why', evolution cannot occur without creation but creation can happen without evolution ever taking place.

I then went on, "An example, Hydrogen. The building block of what we know as the Universe. How did it manage to evolve from nothing? Who or what brought it into existence? Who or what separated [a] neutral electrically charged object into its component parts, a proton and an electron?"

Instead of recognizing it is impossible for anything to evolve without it FIRST being created (i.e.. someone or something had to create not only the matter but the conditions for evolution as well, a.k.a. GOD), you chose to use the Loony Left's ploy of ridiculing me.

Have a nice day.
~

Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,279
Points:515,665
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 10:09:17 AM

"Of course, Ben Carson is right.
Of course, The Reverend Jesse Jackson is wrong. Again."

I agree with Dr. Carson's opinion, and anybody else who says as much (‘Has Nothing To Do With Race’).
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,279
Points:515,665
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 10:07:57 AM

"So now you're saying the Bible doesn't have any information in it?"

It has lots of information in it however most of it having to do with behavior, not science.

I don't recall ever reading a Bible for literal translation of scientific fact.

Again, I note the absolute refusal to answer the basic questions outlined - I am not surprised...
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:73,014
Points:2,931,870
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 10:03:10 AM

Ben Carson Clashes With Jesse Jackson Over Ferguson: ‘Has Nothing To Do With Race’

Of course, Ben Carson is right.
Of course, The Reverend Jesse Jackson is wrong. Again.

Posting this here instead of in a Ferguson thread.
Profile Pic
MahopacJack
Champion Author New York

Posts:9,417
Points:1,819,505
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Aug 22, 2014 4:22:50 PM

Weasel, >>Sorry jack, but the Bible is not 'data' proving or disproving evolution through the discussion of a 'soul'. Spin the English language any way you see fit though to complete your deflection of the issue….<<
~
No one set out to prove or disprove Evolution THEORY. One of us, however, accepted it as fact and, unfortunately, it remains a THEORY. (Psst, it wasn't me.)

In case you someday find the time to look up words you use, I'll save you the trouble of looking up data. OOPS! I already did that. Well anyway, while we're on the subject definitions here's on for you. Its the singular of data.

datum |'dat?m, 'dat?m|
noun ( pl. data |'dat?, 'dat?| )

1 a piece of information. See also data.
• an assumption or premise from which inferences may be drawn. See sense datum.
2 a fixed starting point of a scale or operation.
ORIGIN mid 18th cent.: from Latin, literally ‘something given,’ neuter past participle of dare ‘give.’

So now you're saying the Bible doesn't have any information in it? Are you also saying the experiences of a four year old boy who claims to experienced Heaven and the information he passed onto us is not information?

Have a nice day.

~
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,279
Points:515,665
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 22, 2014 3:20:33 PM

Sorry jack, but the Bible is not 'data' proving or disproving evolution through the discussion of a 'soul'. Spin the English language any way you see fit though to complete your deflection of the issue....

I note the absolute refusal to answer the basic questions outlined - I am not surprised...
Profile Pic
MahopacJack
Champion Author New York

Posts:9,417
Points:1,819,505
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Aug 22, 2014 1:58:43 PM

Weasel, >>More tangents? Climate warming is indeed happening since the last ice ace - the question is about AGW and if it is real. There is not enough data either way to support or refute that claim yet.

VIOXX was shown to be dangerous when it was found that the drug company intentionally withheld data from Doctors regarding risks.

Anything else you'd like to try and deflect from the conversation at hand?

"First, are some Biblical quotes….."

I said data, as in science. <<

~

Once again you fall prey to your lack of knowledge of the english language. Is english a second language for you?

The definition of data (look closely at the second definition):

data |'dat?, 'dat?|
noun [ treated as sing. or pl. ]

facts and statistics collected together for reference or analysis. See also datum.

• Computing the quantities, characters, or symbols on which operations are performed by a computer, being stored and transmitted in the form of electrical signals and recorded on magnetic, optical, or mechanical recording media.

• Philosophy things known or assumed as facts, making the basis of reasoning or calculation.It is very difficult, if not impossible, to debate with someone who does not know the meaning of words being in the debate.

~


[Edited by: MahopacJack at 8/22/2014 2:02:14 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,279
Points:515,665
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 22, 2014 1:02:20 PM

"Carson is interested in solutions, Sharpton is interested in political base. That's why Carson would be the better President for our country."

Than Sharpton? I agree.

"I doubt he'll run for President, but I hope the eventual winner, regardless of affiliation, is wise enough to consult Dr. Carson."

Should any of our future Presidents require medical advice, they should indeed consult Dr. Carson who is the utmost expert in his field.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,279
Points:515,665
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 22, 2014 1:00:53 PM

"Well unlike your empirical data that sometimes doesn't live up to expectations, such as VIOXX is safe if taken as directed and the data used for climate warming was eventually proven to be fraudulent..."

More tangents? Climate warming is indeed happening since the last ice ace - the question is about AGW and if it is real. There is not enough data either way to support or refute that claim yet.

VIOXX was shown to be dangerous when it was found that the drug company intentionally withheld data from Doctors regarding risks.

Anything else you'd like to try and deflect from the conversation at hand?

"First, are some Biblical quotes….."

I said data, as in science.

"and then there is this. Throughout the years the story never changed for the then 4 year old boy."

Again, the testimonial of a toddler is not data, much less science. Are you implying that Dr. Carson would discard data in favor of the testimonial of a child with regards to policy? Strange.

I see you never answered this question either;

"What tangent is this you are now on? Since when did the theory of evolution ever pertain to Chemistry, Physics or any other field of science outside of Biology???"

Or this one;

"The question you should be asking is, why do you have to have creation without evolution?"

Or this one;

"What other subjects will he ignore the data on?"
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,719
Points:813,900
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Aug 22, 2014 10:25:39 AM

Why would Al Sharpton debate Dr. Carson?
First of all, he would come off looking like an idiot compared to Dr. Carson, even though Dr. Carson would be very gracious in his refuting Sharpton's points. Second, there's no money or added power that can be traded for money for Sharpton.

Carson is interested in solutions, Sharpton is interested in political base. That's why Carson would be the better President for our country.

I doubt he'll run for President, but I hope the eventual winner, regardless of affiliation, is wise enough to consult Dr. Carson.
Profile Pic
Troller_Diesel
Champion Author Denver

Posts:1,300
Points:11,805
Joined:Jun 2014
Message Posted: Aug 22, 2014 10:14:19 AM

There seems to be a significant misunderstanding about evolution...

Natural Selection is NOT evolution, and has been proven time and time again, with empirical data.

Macro-evolution, or evolution beyond species, is unproven and has never been observed in nature.

Once you understand the difference, you can continue with a discussion of creation...

Because, Evolution is every bit as much of a religion as Judaism or Christianity, or Atheism.
Profile Pic
MahopacJack
Champion Author New York

Posts:9,417
Points:1,819,505
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Aug 22, 2014 10:08:48 AM

Weasel, >>Like I said... it doesn't jive with his opinion, so he disregards it, contrary to what he stated earlier about being data-driven.

"...and evolutionists seem to not be able to explain is that lifeforms, especially mankind, have been imbued with a soul.

Show mw the data.<<

~

Well unlike your empirical data that sometimes doesn't live up to expectations, such as VIOXX is safe if taken as directed and the data used for climate warming was eventually proven to be fraudulent, my 'data' is anecdotal and has never changed.

First, are some Biblical quotes…..

and then there is this. Throughout the years the story never changed for the then 4 year old boy.

~
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,279
Points:515,665
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 21, 2014 3:19:50 PM

"The building block of what we know as the Universe. How did it manage to evolve from nothing?"

What tangent is this you are now on? Since when did the theory of evolution ever pertain to Chemistry, Physics or any other field of science outside of Biology??? The depths some will go to avoid the point being made never ceases to astound me.

"As for Dr. Carson, he dosen't deny the existence of empirical data but the conclusion many have come to..."

Like I said... it doesn't jive with his opinion, so he disregards it, contrary to what he stated earlier about being data-driven.

"...and evolutionists seem to not be able to explain is that lifeforms, especially mankind, have been imbued with a soul.

Show mw the data.
Profile Pic
MahopacJack
Champion Author New York

Posts:9,417
Points:1,819,505
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Aug 21, 2014 2:06:40 PM

Weasel, >>...why do you have to have creation without evolution? The data is there regarding evolution, yet for a guy who says he is data driven (Carson), he refuses to acknowledge this particular set of data because it doesn't jive with his opinions.

What other subjects will he ignore the data on?<<

~

As for the 'why', evolution cannot occur without creation but creation can happen without evolution ever taking place. An example, Hydrogen. The building block of what we know as the Universe. How did it manage to evolve from nothing? Who or what brought it into existence? Who or what separated an neutral electrically charged object into its component parts, a proton and an electron?

As for Dr. Carson, he dosen't deny the existence of empirical data but the conclusion many have come to.. What Dr. Carson also recognizes, and evolutionists seem to not be able to explain is that lifeforms, especially mankind, have been imbued with a soul.

~
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,279
Points:515,665
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 21, 2014 10:55:42 AM

"Can you explain to me how you can have evolution without creation? How the vast universe with all the minerals to make evolution even possible can exist without a Creator?"

Ugh - like I said, my opinion on the matter is moot. The question you should be asking is, why do you have to have creation without evolution? The data is there regarding evolution, yet for a guy who says he is data driven (Carson), he refuses to acknowledge this particular set of data because it doesn't jive with his opinions.

What other subjects will he ignore the data on?
Profile Pic
MahopacJack
Champion Author New York

Posts:9,417
Points:1,819,505
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Aug 21, 2014 10:15:35 AM

Weasel, >> My opinion on evolution (not creation, which you have changed the subject to) is moot with regards to this discussion.<<
~
It looks like I was hasty when I said, "It's refreshing to see an open mind…"

Can you explain to me how you can have evolution without creation? How the vast universe with all the minerals to make evolution even possible can exist without a Creator?

~
Profile Pic
mweyant
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:7,714
Points:1,441,085
Joined:Feb 2010
Message Posted: Aug 21, 2014 3:20:08 AM

Atheists forgetting the meaning of freedom

8-19-14

opinion

"As a nation, we must avoid the paralysis of hypersensitivity, which will allow us to get nothing done because virtually everything offends someone. We need to distribute “big boy” pants widely to help the whiners learn to focus their energy in a productive way. We must also go back and read the Constitution, including the First Amendment, which guarantees freedom of religion. It says nothing about freedom from religion and, in fact, if you go back and look at the context and the lives of those involved in the crafting of our founding documents, it is quite apparent that they strongly believed in allowing their faith to guide their lives. This has nothing to do with imposing one’s beliefs on someone else."

[Edited by: mweyant at 8/21/2014 3:20:47 AM EST]
Profile Pic
mweyant
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:7,714
Points:1,441,085
Joined:Feb 2010
Message Posted: Aug 20, 2014 4:57:46 AM

Ben Carson Challenges Al Sharpton to Debate

8-18-14

“I had an opportunity to speak with Rev. Sharpton a couple months ago at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner,” Mr. Carson explained. “I said, ‘We want the same kinds of things, but we have very different approaches to achieving them. What do you think about a public debate to talk about the various ways that we can get this done?’ “

I believe Carson wants everyone at the table to discuss the future--all political leanings, that is.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,279
Points:515,665
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 19, 2014 5:13:29 PM

"While I'm not favoring Dr. Carson, one shouldn't dismiss him because his views are different than yours."

This statement tells me you missed my point. I dismiss anybody who says one thing but then does something else. He said he follows data, yet is clearly shown to reject data when it isn't in line with his personal beliefs/opinions.

My opinion on evolution (not creation, which you have changed the subject to) is moot with regards to this discussion.
Profile Pic
MahopacJack
Champion Author New York

Posts:9,417
Points:1,819,505
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Aug 19, 2014 4:12:28 PM

Weasel, >>Unfortunately for him the media seemed to ignore him, so I don't know much about his views. From the little I have seen though I will listen if he runs again.<<

~

It's refreshing to see an open mind as Gov. Johnson seems to be the best qualified of the people who have thrown or appear to be gettting ready to throw their hats into the ring.

While I'm not favoring Dr. Carson, one shouldn't dismiss him because his views are different than yours. Your statement of >>Yet despite all of the evidence and empirical data supporting the theory of evolution, he doesn't buy it because it conflicts with his 'opinion';<< is still an opinion. There's nothing wrong with that. All of us have to eventually come up with an opinion on subject matter that is beyond our realm or continue to switch to the then most current or popular view.

Perhaps a better perspective is, your belief begins at the moment AFTER creation and continues to today. Dr. Carson's view begins BEFORE creation and everything that happens (including the 'Big Bang') has been planned.

Personally. I admire Dr. Carson for voicing his opinion against popular opinion. (It's one of the traits I believe that separate leaders from followers.) I see no reason anyone should dismiss him as a Presidential Candidate for doing so but should actually consider him a potential candidate for standing up for what he believes to be true. I would much rather have a President who believes in God than a President who believes they have to answer to no one.

~

Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,279
Points:515,665
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 19, 2014 3:26:20 PM

"Unfortunately, Obama only hires "experts" who campaigned for him or gave large contributions. It explains much of his blundering about."

Just his Ambassadors... ;)
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,719
Points:813,900
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Aug 19, 2014 3:24:45 PM

Unfortunately, Obama only hires "experts" who campaigned for him or gave large contributions. It explains much of his blundering about.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,279
Points:515,665
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 19, 2014 2:09:11 PM

"You must have been not paying attention when Gary Johnson was marginalized by BOTH the Republican and Democrat Parties."

He ran as a Libertarian after withdrawing as a Republican. Unfortunately for him the media seemed to ignore him, so I don't know much about his views. From the little I have seen though I will listen if he runs again.

"To my knowledge, he didn't say that at all."

This is what he stated;

"I believe it is a very good idea for physicians, scientists, engineers, and others trained to make decisions based on facts and empirical data to get involved in the political arena and help guide our country."

Yet despite all of the evidence and empirical data supporting the theory of evolution, he doesn't buy it because it conflicts with his 'opinion';

"I don’t believe in evolution .... I simply don’t have enough faith to believe that something as complex as our ability to rationalize, think, and plan, and have a moral sense of what’s right and wrong, just appeared.”

Like I said, he says all of the right things like any politician but doesn't follow what he says.

"Compare this to the POTUS who had ZERO business experience but constantly tells us what is best for all of us."

NO President is an expert in every aspect of running a country. That is why they have experts who advise them on such things...
Profile Pic
MahopacJack
Champion Author New York

Posts:9,417
Points:1,819,505
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Aug 19, 2014 11:37:20 AM

Weasel, >> I want the GOP to offer candidates that I can actually take serious. Romney, Santorum and Cain were the only 3 serious candidates last election (until Cain self-destructed over personal issues and Santorum pulled the plug leaving the '08 re-tread whom nobody on the Right wanted 4 years earlier as the only guy left standing).<<

~

You must have been not paying attention when Gary Johnson was marginalized by BOTH the Republican and Democrat Parties. He was a business executive who had started his company from scratch and built it into a multi million business, and became a Republican Governor in very Democrat State (New Mexico). He also infuriated Republicans because he exposed his corrupt party members. He was also one of two Republican candidates espousing the legalization of marijuana and the doing away with the IRS. (In just a little over two years, take a look at what is going on in this country today. Many States are now considering legalizing marijuana and the IRS is being exposed as the corrupt organization it was and continues to be.)

As far as Romney being a serious candidate, he lost the election when he didn't let Ron Paul on the podium during the Republican Convention.

Gov Johnson is currently suing the Presidential Debate Commission for being excluded in the Presidential Debates. While I don't have any idea how that will work out, the man fights for what is right, has leadership talent, and is not afraid to shake things up. Something we are in dire need of today.

As of today I see no other prospect coming close with exception of Herman Cain.

~
Profile Pic
MahopacJack
Champion Author New York

Posts:9,417
Points:1,819,505
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Aug 19, 2014 11:14:04 AM

Weasel, >>So apparently he only follows empirical data when it agrees with his POV? Yikes.<<
~
To my knowledge, he didn't say that at all. Getting 'involved' is a call to others to HELP our country. Compare this to the POTUS who had ZERO business experience but constantly tells us what is best for all of us.

Gigantic difference.
~
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:15,279
Points:515,665
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Aug 19, 2014 10:55:38 AM

"Weasley keep up..ben Carson retired a long time ago so I am NOT taking him away from anyone anyone.perhaps he retired to run for president."

Interesting - I didn't realize that once retired that he was useless in his profession as a mentor/teacher to those currently wielding the scalpel? I also don't consider March of 2013 to be a 'long time ago', especially when he stated that he was quitting while being 'at the top of his game'.

And were you trying to be condescending in your first comment (along with your intentional mis-use of my screen name in)? Seems awfully 'fishy' given your sanctimonious posts regarding the attacking of other posters - specifically females ;)

Regarding the man's positions, I find his disbelief in evolution especially troubling given his statement "I believe it is a very good idea for physicians, scientists, engineers, and others trained to make decisions based on facts and empirical data to get involved in the political arena and help guide our country".

So apparently he only follows empirical data when it agrees with his POV? Yikes.

He is a smart man, there is no doubting that, but a Presidential candidate? God, I hope not. I want the GOP to offer candidates that I can actually take serious. Romney, Santorum and Cain were the only 3 serious candidates last election (until Cain self-destructed over personal issues and Santorum pulled the plug leaving the '08 re-tread whom nobody on the Right wanted 4 years earlier as the only guy left standing).
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,719
Points:813,900
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Aug 18, 2014 10:52:37 AM

I'm sure Dr. Carson would consult on a case, if needed, but he's been retired for a while.

Having spoken with him many times, and having heard him speak to students, as well as at the funeral of a mutual friend, who was a Carson Scholar before her untimely passing, I think he would make an excellent President. He lacks the bombastic speaking ability common to many successful politicians, but he quietly makes a lot of sense with his opinions and observations.
Post a reply Back to Topics