Donald Trump

[super_city_si]

Just watched the John Oliver episode. reporter: "what does Donald trump mean when he says words?" Spat my brew everywhere. The most apt observation of the pillock ever.

 

[NorCalBlue]

out of curiosity, do you believe that someone who does not teach the darwinian theory of truth, must necessarily be teaching falsehood? Just that
I have a friend who has studied his work in depth and found it to be somewhat flawed. (And she has an intelligence so bright that, with genuine respect for your intelligence, she could tear both of us to pieces - in a way that you just have to sit there, laugh and applaud)

I have a friend who's so intelligent, she could tear all of us to pieces, including your friend, and she's currently pissing herself at your friend's cryptic assertions about the "darwinian theory of truth".

 

[SWP's back]

out of curiosity, do you believe that someone who does not teach the darwinian theory of truth, must necessarily be teaching falsehood? Just that
I have a friend who has studied his work in depth and found it to be somewhat flawed. (And she has an intelligence so bright that, with genuine respect for your intelligence, she could tear both of us to pieces - in a way that you just have to sit there, laugh and applaud)

There's more evidence for evolution by natural selection than there is for the theory of heliocentricity.

Your friend studying the very incomplete work of Darwin from 158 years ago does not change that one bit. 'On the origin of the species' has many flaws (one of which being the fact he believed the earth to be 600m years old) but he did open the subject up.

It's now the most studied area of nature and with all due respect for your friend, anyone that remotely suggests equal billing for evolution (which is provable) with the creation myth, wants sectioning.

 

[andyhinch]

There's more evidence for evolution by natural selection than there is for the theory of heliocentricity.

Your friend studying the very incomplete work of Darwin from 158 years ago does not change that one bit. 'On the origin of the species' has many flaws (one of which being the fact he believed the earth to be 600m years old) but he did open the subject up.

It's now the most studied area of nature and with all due respect for your friend, anyone that remotely suggests equal billing for evolution (which is provable) with the creation myth, wants sectioning.

Be interesting to know where she studied and what in.

 

[SWP's back]

Be interesting to know where she studied and what in.

I'll bet my life it wasn't evolutionary biology.

 

[arfurclue]

There's more evidence for evolution by natural selection than there is for the theory of heliocentricity.

Your friend studying the very incomplete work of Darwin from 158 years ago does not change that one bit. 'On the origin of the species' has many flaws (one of which being the fact he believed the earth to be 600m years old) but he did open the subject up.

It's now the most studied area of nature and with all due respect for your friend, anyone that remotely suggests equal billing for evolution (which is provable) with the creation myth, wants sectioning.

err...where did i say that she supported creation myths? I might suggest that thomas kuhn's 'the structure of scientific revolutions' would be a useful addition to this conversation or that even Darwin's work is but stage in the evolution of thought? Anyhow no problems - was just a query. Will return to having a beer and wondering if american textbooks have accidently been teaching the 'survival of the fattest' - which might explain the election of Trump?

 

[blueinsa]

Off topic is up in arms because he called the BBC biased and fake yet our main forum has a thread dedicated to the biased cunts.

It's a funny old world.

 

[arfurclue]

I'm not denying that "spicing up" was done or that everything about evolution is fully understood, I give you an example though, the Jewel wasp, if that didn't evolve there must a very twisted God up there.

you might find this interesting -
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/22/books/chapters/0422-1st-tale.html
a different way of looking at things perhaps - which is not so much about looking to see what Does fit into a theory
but more about becoming aware of what Doesn't.

 

[arfurclue]

I have a friend who's so intelligent, she could tear all of us to pieces, including your friend, and she's currently pissing herself at your friend's cryptic assertions about the "darwinian theory of truth".

yeah, whatever :)

 

[SilverFox2]

He is used to making decisions and others carrying out his wishes, he has inherited wealth and at best churns it into different projects. He is not used to criticism from the media of his decision making so attacks it.
The presidential job requires a little bit more thinking in that it requires others to buy into the changes. Socrates recognised the art of getting others to come up with your idea ie think it was their idea but Trump is more of a dictator than a philosopher.
Natural to me he should attack the media, we do it all the time on this forum but our owner just gets on with business and ignores them.

Certainly he is doing things the way how he has always done them and mainly differs from others in that he has brought speed to the process rather than wait for political system approval. Upsetting the establishment has historically required a coup for success so perhaps things may be a little more difficult for him from now on.