The American Spectator : Chimp Change

Chimp Change

By R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. on 5.21.09 @ 6:08AM

WASHINGTON -- This week a 47 million-year-old fossil was put on display at New York's American Museum of Natural History. Scientists accorded the event enormous attention, as did the press. The creature may be related to us, though it looks like a cat, not a chimpanzee, and certainly nothing like your mother or father or even one of your more eccentric aunts or uncles. Evolutionists tell us that of all the creatures known to science we humans are most closely related to chimpanzees.

That is not the whole story, of course. According to a very fine book that I have been reading, Why Evolution Is True by Jerry A. Coyne, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Chicago, mankind can be traced back over three billion years to our most distant relatives, self-replicating molecules. The fossil unveiled at the American Museum of Natural History is a relative newcomer, but she (the creature was a young female) has cleared up a debate among scientists. Anthropologists have been pretty certain that we evolved from ape-like ancestors, but they have been divided on precisely which one. There were two, the family Tarsiidae -- whose descendants, the tarsiers, are jungle creatures now living in Asia -- and the family Adapidae, who were precursors of the lemur of Madagascar.

Scientists base their speculations on fossils that are rarely complete. Some scientists have extrapolated our ancestors from as little evidence as a tooth. The lucky ones have had a jawbone or a rib or some other skeletal fragment. This week's fossil displayed in New York is a complete skeleton, except for a missing lower leg. From it evidence mounts that our ancestor is the adapidae, the precursor of the lemur. "Lemur advocates will be delighted," Tim White, a California paleontologist, is quoted as saying in the Wall Street Journal, "but tarsier advocates will be underwhelmed." Scientists are given to such disputes, and then there are the creationists who doubt we have any animal ancestors whatsoever. Let the debate continue.

What I have found fascinating in Coyne's book is how very old the earth is. Some of his evidence comes from fossils and measurements of the radioactivity in the layers of stone that harbors the fossils. The radioactivity gives us a good idea of the stone's age, and the progression of the fossils gives us an idea of their steady development.

Scientists, by dating old rocks, have established that the earth is 4.3 billion years old. The earliest fossils, those being photosynthetic bacteria, trace life on the planet beginning about 3.5 billion years ago. Around 600 million years ago multi-celled organisms appeared, for instance, worms and jellyfish. Then came terrestrial plants and four-legged animals about 400 million years ago. Mammals did not show up until 250 million years ago, and birds can be found in fossil form dating from 50 million years ago.

Coyne writes that "Humans are newcomers on the scene -- our lineage branches off from that of other primates only about 7 million years ago, the merest sliver of time." Then just over four decades ago Barack Obama was born, and just over six decades ago Newt Gingrich.

Coyne and other evolutionary biologists have had their theories fortified by the ability, starting three decades back, to sequence the genomes of various species and discover genes shared by related species, some that still work, some that do not thus allowing us to go our merry way from, say, our relative the chimpanzee. The key to this process, scientists say, is natural selection. There are good genes that help us survive and not-so-good genes that deny those who carry them the possibility of survival.

Now creationists find all this highly dubious, but for me the information has come as a great relief. The good news is that human beings adapt. We have survived, according to my reading of Coyne, for about 60,000 years, adapting to all sorts of challenges, climate changes, dietary changes, plagues, and other such unwelcome happenstances. The present hullabaloo over global warming is much ado about nothing. Let the climate change, the species Homo sapiens has survived 60 millennia. There is no reason for the Obama Administration to tamper with the automobile market. We can survive carbon in the atmosphere and have since the last weak-gened member of Homo erectus wobbled off. Unfortunately it is unlikely that the automobile industry can survive politicians designing our cars, taxing our gasoline, and supplying us with tiny vehicles that few Americans want to buy.

Letter to the Editor

topics:
Global Warming, Evolution

Marc Jeric| 5.21.09 @ 7:02AM

A French scientist calculated the probability that the first living cell was produced by chance from that "primordial soup". He postulated the simplest cell, consisting of only 2000 molecules of only two kinds, say black and white, arranged in the order one black, one white, and so on. He found that if the entire universe consisted of such two kinds of molecules (all 10 to the power of 80), and that all of them were in a single bunch, it would take us 16 billion years of mixing to find one such cell. In other words - utterly impossible.

Melvin| 5.21.09 @ 7:11AM

May be this theory is correct because I have this inexplicable urge to go and climb a tree, hang upside and throw feces at politicians.
"Now where did I put the bananas?

David Mathews| 5.21.09 @ 7:12AM

Is Bob Tyrrell such an idiot as to argue that since our species is 60,000 years old that means that it cannot go extinct? He is completely misreading the story of evolution.

Bob, one reason why our ancestors could entertain religious nonsense about the uniqueness of humankind is because all of our closest ancestors had already gone extinct.

Bob the Naive says ...

* "We have survived, according to my reading of Coyne, for about 60,000 years, adapting to all sorts of challenges, climate changes, dietary changes, plagues, and other such unwelcome happenstances. The present hullabaloo over global warming is much ado about nothing. Let the climate change, the species Homo sapiens has survived 60 millennia."

This is as absurd as the 18 year old insisting that he can drive home drunk because he's 18 years old!

Bob fails to comprehend science and fails to perceive risk in an accurate manner. Thank God he is a member of a dying political party mired in 19th century thinking and religious fundamentalism.

The ignorant people can continue clinging to their Bibles and SUVs, the rest of the nation can move ahead without you.

Robert Rosencrans| 5.21.09 @ 7:24AM

Were there any fossilized remains that indicated when the first politicians arrived?

jim rice| 5.21.09 @ 7:52AM

You also neglected to mention the fact that we humans are circumventing one of the biggest reasons that we, as a species, are able to adapt... We have removed ourselves from the evolutionary cycle mostly due to the fact that we no longer are subservient to the "Survival of the Fittest" maxim. We save everyone. Everyone is allowed to breed, and it's kind of crazy to think that we can continue to adapt rapidly enough to cope with drastic environmental changes.

And if you want to come at it from a Christian point-of-view, should we not be good stewards of the planet we were given? Are we really ok with spewing poisons into God's creation just b/c it's convenient?

I just don't see any argument from any angle that holds any water which ends with, "so we don't need regulation of anything b/c we can do what we want." This article was pretty interesting until the author took that crazy unsupported turn at the end. :-/

Ash| 5.21.09 @ 7:56AM

I reckon Dave M looks like a chimpanzee.

2Anglico| 5.21.09 @ 8:30AM

I know 2 things, first, mathews IS a relative of monkeys and second his butt probably looks like 150lbs of chewed bubble gum.

Michael L. Hauschild| 5.21.09 @ 9:41AM

One of my best friends believes the Universe (read realm) is 4000 (+) years old. He has calculated this by researching the death certificates of old soothsayers. I miss the spirited debates he provided but he moved to Minnesota where his lust for power and control entailed his election as a civil servant (City Councilman). This move was no doubt due to “divine intervention” or “intelligent design” as the “Land of a Thousand Lakes” has insufficient population to “create” whacko politicians and actually needs to import them.
His rational for “instantaneous” (geologically speaking) creation avoided the temporal viability issue of evolution. His take on creation allowed him to avoid the question, “Is gestation equivalent or manifest of evolution; were those first single cell bottom dwellers “human” at conception? After all, many do believe in the “origin of the species” and this certainly would account for the evolutionary pinnacle, Libertarians.

P. S. Mr. Rosencrans,
The reason there are no detectable remains of politicians is they all eventually cannibalize each other; scat does not fossilize well.

ncatty| 5.21.09 @ 10:15AM

Read "The Great Warming" by Brian Fagan, an analysis of the medieval warming period ca. 1000-1300. In his introduction he announces his conviction mankind is causing global warming. Then the rest of the book refutes this conviction. Sort of funny. Anyway, he comes to the same conviction as RET, than humans are very adaptable.

Aryeh| 5.21.09 @ 10:42AM

I believe that man descended from near-angels, e.g. Adam, Noah, Abraham, etc., not that he ascended from monkeys.

logmank| 5.21.09 @ 10:56AM

Two things on which Dave Mathews is unquestionably expert: monkey's butts and teabagging.

What is the Bible & Purpose| 5.21.09 @ 11:04AM

The Bible was written by people in the past to control and confuse the masses.

Much the same way politicans write and re write laws today. Many Christian Fundamentalist, are no more than misguided people who needs something to justfy, killing and enslaving another, who have different views on life or history.

The same Bible many of they say slavery is alright. The same Bible they use to justify the murder and slaughter of the Palestinian people.

These are the same fundamentalist who claim it's alright to steal from the poor Africans to create their life of ease, and kill Arabs to steal their oil so they can drive their SUV's.

The counter attack the Arab Muslim fundamentalist use the Koran to do the same counter attack.

Like monkies, one thing is clear, they form groups espacially the Anglo Saxons their beliefs in racism makes it clear that they must protect one group from another which is an animal instint. So how can one denigh the facts when it isa so clear.

The Bible is the greatest scam of all time. The Bible has values of which man can live by but as long as it is fundamentalist using religion to destroy the world, we will continue from world war one to world war two and progress to world war three. What we need is a formula in which we can all live in peace, regardless of race and genda.

Mans inability to own up to the facts, explains why it's so Ok to kill livings things due to disregard to all forms of life on the planet.

L. Ross| 5.21.09 @ 11:46AM

What is the Bible and Purpose:

Dude, if you can't write a coherent paragraph that isn't laden with sentence fragments and misspellings, do yourself a favor and just don't post here. By revealing how ignorant you are, I guarantee you will not be winning any hearts and minds to your cause. But you do reveal yourself to be a dumbass.

Stan| 5.21.09 @ 12:00PM

Contra Mr Tyrell, humans survive because they do not adapt to the environment. We learn how to survive in any environment we happen to be in. We didn't grow thick fur to live in the Arctic, but learned how to make clothes from the fur of animals and houses from snow. We didn't grow flippers to travel across oceans and feed off their resources, we built boats.
When their environment changes, animals usually don't adapt, and they don't invent tools to help them survive, they become extinct.
If humans did evolve by natural selection, then everything we do is also natural. That includes moving into every possible habitat and exploiting it to the max and spewing our waste into it.
There is moral case to be made for protecting our environment, after all it's where we live, but no case can be made based on nature.

Turk| 5.21.09 @ 12:01PM

Leftist America Hater: In April you did your filibuster trick to attempt to smother a Tyrell column. I pose the same questions I did then:
1. Where were you schooled?(or just in our magnificent govt school system ala NEA?)
2.What is your profession(or do you just swill the public teat?)
3.Where do you reside?(house or rent control apt?)
4.Are you married? Male; female or other?
5. Ever seen one day of military service?
In a variation on my last response, I explain my questions by indicating they are to help us understand what combines to produce human excrement like you. Also; in a slight change: How do you plan to celebrate Memorial Day?

Oh! Also new------------you are NOT a real person are you? You're just a left wing outfit that seeks to drown out Conservative discourse, aren't you? THIS time don't go quiet on us, ANSWER THE QUESTIONS!

kmichaels| 5.21.09 @ 12:01PM

"Purpose of Bible" makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. His post is riddled with misrepresenting the opposite view and a mountain of ridiculous straw man arguments. His most retarded assumption is that an evil person must need a bible or a religion in order to destroy things. Seems that mankind's basic nature, before books were even written, was to destroy things. So, the anti-religious fool would be better served trying to shut down the natural instinct of evil men. And good luck with that. BTW, most mass murders have been done by atheists. Go figure.

kmichaels| 5.21.09 @ 12:04PM

I see why everyone hates David Matthews. He is a worthless subhuman troll having not an ounce of dignity or human value.

kmichaels| 5.21.09 @ 12:08PM

I have no problem with some aspects of evolution. After all, if God does exist he most like is a result of a very long evolutionary process and came from what I would think is a society of advanced intelligent beings. What bothers me about evolutionists is their extreme lack of logic and their dogmatic views about evolution. Much like global warming fanatics they try to connect things that don't look remotely connected and end up looking like fools. In this case, we have what looks like an ancient lemur only it lacks a combing tooth and somehow the existence of this creature proves that man came from apes. It is just retarded logic and extreme dogmatic hope at it's finest.

What is a Christian?| 5.21.09 @ 12:14PM

Daivd Mathews

Mr David Mathews is about the only intelligent person on this page.

Christian Fundamentalist is a major problem in America, along with Lobbist and AIPAC, these people have destroyed careers of respectable people in America and destroyed Democracy in the United States.

Thes Christian Fundamentalist who have been brain washed to support crimes against humanity thinks they are going to heaven.

Nothing wrong with being a good Christian, but don't support mass murder it's wrong, it makes no difference who you want killed it is not a Christian thing to do.

kmichaels| 5.21.09 @ 12:18PM

It seems Jim Rice has reading difficulty. What the author said in regards to global warming was letting the temperature take it's natural course since life adapts quite well to temperature changes. Carbon dioxide is neither a pollutant nor a poison. Life has adapted to temperature changes for billions of years. Life has never once been able to control temperature changes. Nobody has proven that higher temperatures are bad in the long run. Not even remotely. Jim Rice is simply a global warming koolaid drinker.

The Moonbats Are Out| 5.21.09 @ 12:20PM

We have quite a collection today, from the distinguished DM whose ancestor was recently discovered, to people whose ravings are so confused I can't figure out just what it is they are saying.
Who moved the rock?

kmichaels| 5.21.09 @ 12:21PM

Apparently now the idiot Dave Mathews is writing himself love letters.

Last time I did a poll I could find ZERO Christians supporting mass murder.

I did find lots of liberals that were in favor of murdering millions of unborn human babies. But these morons are not remotely Christian.

So davey, next time you write yourself a love letter, try to be less obviously insane. That way we might not catch on so quickly.

Grow up| 5.21.09 @ 12:26PM

You Christian Fundamentalist, who want to destroy all of our wild life, and Plant life on our Planet, do you think you are the only ones that is important? That is tipical of a Monkey.

Mr David Mathews is a smart person with well thought out statements.

kmichaels| 5.21.09 @ 12:30PM

Dave mathews needs to get a room with himself, a padded one works wonders.

Turk| 5.21.09 @ 12:46PM

I WAS RIGHT! IWAS RIGHT! I WAS RIGHT! Our sainted leftist America hater can't answer my questions! He, like in April, ducked! Because he doesn't exist! Sooooo, a like bunch of leftist creations are springing to "his" defense. The words under "his" by-line are decrept and can be traced way back to the days when Hiss tried to win the cold war for other than America. The leftists defended him to the end---stilldo: despite Soviet records proving his absolute guilt! THIS is who the left really is!!!!!!!!!!!

God bless Dick Cheney!

Big Leo| 5.21.09 @ 12:53PM

"What is a Christian?" would be more impressive if he showed the slightest sign of literacy. Why do people who can't frame a coherent thought post anyway? Do they not know how idiotic they seem? If you eliminated posts solely on the basis of incoherency, we'd have a much shorter thread. If you insist on the expression of coherent ideas as well, we could have a liberal free discussion.

jim rice| 5.21.09 @ 1:05PM

kmichaels...

- Do you agree that the pollutants and deforestation and other various changes to our environment caused by man are "natural" b/c man is simply another part of nature, or do you think that man is something greater than another animal following the laws of nature?

I understand what the author was saying perfectly well. I completely agree with the author regarding life and its adaptability. My point is that man has removed himself from natural cycles and the natural order of things. We adapt our environment to suit us... we no longer let the weak be culled from our ranks. There is no more natural selection for man. Our entire existence has been spent attempting to remove ourselves from the natural cycles of life. To think that we are somehow still going to reap the benefits of evolution is preposterous.

Joe| 5.21.09 @ 1:20PM

I see Religious Bigot flat earther Davey is at it again. There are more holes in your evolution theory (TALL TALE) then we have time to go over. But surfice it to say that is no missing link except to maybe your ancestors. Because anyone that created you must have been backward.

kmichaels| 5.21.09 @ 1:23PM

Jim Rice: "Our entire existence has been spent attempting to remove ourselves from the natural cycles of life."

Nah. That is a dumb conclusion. The natural cycle of life, especially as intelligence evolves, is to use our intelligence to help our entire race survive. How is this unnatural? According to evolution it is the survival of the fittest. How fit is the form of life that is capable of making even its weakest link be able to survive? That makes the entire race more capable of surviving and more fit to be able to spread it's seed.

You are just being simplistic in your conclusions and have frankly drawn the wrong one.

And the author never stated (as your straw man argument suggested) that we don't regulate anything. Neither did the author make a claim that we should let ourselves just do whatever we want. You are simply misrepresenting what was said.

So, you either have a reading problem, as previously stated, or you are purposely twisting the facts.

Crusader| 5.21.09 @ 1:41PM

If evolution is real why haven't slugs evolved into a higher species? For that mater why are there ANY forms of lower life? Wouldn't all species want to evolve like Homo Sapiens? Or did they just stop? "I like being a cockroach, so I think I'll stop evolving now." But enough about libs. Ziiiiiiiiiiiing!

Anyway also when can I expect to evolve to shoot fireballs out of my eyes and fly and have like superhuman strength and stuff?

Oh yeah, and how do you get life from non-life?????

Oh and I think humans and dandelions share like 30% of the same DNA, so does that mean we evolved from flowers too? Flower-monkeys? Maybe that's where the French evolve from huh?
Ziiiiiiiiiiiiing!!!!!

Man I am en fuego today.

Nick| 5.21.09 @ 1:42PM

The key word in Mr. Tyrrell's essay is "speculations". The religion of Darwinian evolution is almost entirely based on speculation and almost no science.

Geology is full of speculation also. To determine the age of rocks on radioactivity assumes radioactive decay is a constant. What if it isn't?

Since we haven't figured out how space-time works yet, to assume time acted the same way in the distant past as it does today is unscientific. Maybe it did, maybe it didn't. I'll wait for the evidence. But I'm not going to base my worldview on the speculation of others.

Creationists can fall into the same trap evolutionists do. They start with a premise, and then look for evidence to try to prove it. This is not science.

kmichaels| 5.21.09 @ 1:59PM

As a Christian, I have no problem with evolution. My God is more than capable of creating an intelligent system that, for the most part, is self maintaining and self adapting.

Although other Christians may readily disagree with me, I believe that God is most likely the result of an eternity of evolution, that created a society of very intelligent beings that was capable of spreading it's seed and its vast knowledge down from one generation to the next for billions of years (minimum).

As a result, we ended up with a highly intelligent being that conquered death, that desires his children to become like him. Therefore, he created man in his own image, his children, and has given them the means to learn for themselves the wisdom in choosing his way of life.

A godly society can exist for all of eternity. And, as part of the evolutionary process, the desire to spread it's seed to all ends of an infinite universe will be manifest everywhere.

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Vern Crisler| 5.21.09 @ 2:10PM

There were some, such as H.F. Osborn, who held to an aristocratic view of human evolution -- that man was descended from a patrician "Dawn-Man" rather than from a plebian "Ape-Man." This is why they were so willing to accept Piltdown Man as a genuine ancestor since the old fraud fit well into the "Dawn-Man" theory.

Others spoke of differential rates of evolutionary progress in man. This usually meant that some modern races -- such as blacks and Australian aborigines -- often had to sit in the back of the evolutionary bus.

Since I'm a creationist, I regard Paleolithic men as actually superior to modern men. They had greater morphological and genetic potential than modern men -- who are washed-out versions of Paleolithic men.

With regard to Mr. Tyrell's respect for dating methods, he ought to realize that dating methods are all too often theory-laden.

I did want to make a joke about Homo viagras, and have tried to think of ways of working it in without seeming to force it upon the reader. But I couldn't think of a way, so I'll have to let it go.

jim rice| 5.21.09 @ 2:43PM

So, kmichaels, the answer the question I asked is that you do believe that man is part of nature, inherently, and that everything he does (be it building, blowing stuff up, polluting, fucking... whatever) is also part of the natural order of things b/c it was done by a "natural" creature?

And of course I was exaggerating the points to say that we don't regulate anything. But it's a valid theoretical. If you don't regulate car emissions, what is your yardstick for what you do regulate? Because it seems to me that the arguments I'm hearing against regulating that one thing could be applied to everything else we attempt to regulate.

My point is that I think that man is something more than simple nature. And that his actions should (and do) reflect that. It's fine if we want to believe that God gave us dominion over all other living things. I don't think it's fine if we go about destroying that gift in the name of "personal freedom" and then justify it by saying that, "It's just natural."

Also, you're applying the survival of the fittest axiom to our entire species and saying that our species is the fittest and, therefore, survives. Which is totally fine, but it misses the point in that the above scenario requires a comparison to other species in order to apply the superlative "fittest." The axiom, I think, is meant to be applied inter-species as well as intra-species. You're missing the second point. The fittest within the species should be surviving to make the species as a whole more "fit" for the environment and its changes.

As for all the talk about theory... yeah, science is a theory. So is religion... what's the difference? You have to take something on faith, regardless. Just that, with science, you can take that theory, extrapolate it, and begin to prove (or disprove) other theories empirically.

But, as to the main point above, it does seem to me that humans have existed outside of the natural order of things once "reason" and the ability to so throughly modify our surroundings became hallmarks of our existence. And b/c we are outside of that natural order of things, we have a duty to protect these things over which we have dominion.

Nick| 5.21.09 @ 2:51PM

kmichaels,

I am a Christian that respectfully disagrees with you. God reveals through the Scriptures that He created everything. He has always been, He is the ETERNAL Word. Without Him nothing can be.

There is no Q continuum of highly evolved beings.

What makes you a Christian.| 5.21.09 @ 4:30PM

All thes highly learned men and women in the world, if they really thought there was a god they would live godly.

George W Bush sai God told him to make up false stories to go to war, and make up lies to hold people in prison. I am sure the same God lead to the death of John the Baptist.

And the same God who told the Jews to kill Christ too to save a Murderer. And the same God who tells them it's OK to kill and steal land so they can have a way of ease, and not have to pay their way through life like every one else.

Some people think being White with Blue eyes makes them a Christian and better than everyone else, and all living organisms on the planet.

Otis, my man!| 5.21.09 @ 4:53PM

I don't believe in evolution.

I do, however believe in devolution.

Dave Mathews is proof of devolution.

Dustoff| 5.21.09 @ 4:55PM

What makes a fool
George W Bush sai God told him to make up false stories to go to war, and make up lies to hold people in prison. I am sure the same God lead to the death of John the Baptist
+++++++++++++++++++++++++

Look out guys, the looney tones are loose again.
So looney, did God tell JFK & LBJ to start a war?

Ding bat

Sue| 5.21.09 @ 5:33PM

We don't have a democracy; we have a Republic. Look up the difference. As we move closer to a "democracy" we become even closer to a "dictatorship" and tyranny. The problem is our politicians want it to be a democracy because they get to give us "free" stuff and they don't have to make "controversial" decisions about the Republic and they stay in office.

The Dead Republic| 5.21.09 @ 5:54PM

Sue

Are you sure you live in a Republic? if that is true why is your country controled and run by Israel.

Ariel Sharon said and I quote, Israel runs America.

kmichaels| 5.21.09 @ 7:35PM

"I am a Christian that respectfully disagrees with you. God reveals through the Scriptures that He created everything. He has always been, He is the ETERNAL Word. Without Him nothing can be.

There is no Q continuum of highly evolved beings."

I understand the scriptures quite well Nick. As to your statement of no coninuum of highly evolved beings, I beg to differ. I seem to remember that there was God the father, that had an only begotten son in the flesh, which is also God. I also seem to remember that this son, Jesus, told his followers that they could be one with him (Jesus) and he is one with God. I understand the false sectarian idea of three Gods rolled into one but it is simply not true and not scriptural. What is scriptural is that Christ refers to scriptures that refer to God's children as Gods themselves. "Know ye not that the scriptures call ye Gods, even the sons of God?" I understand my potential. I understand that the scriptures refer to us as Gods, sons of Gods, children of God, and Jesus is God of Gods, and King of Kings. I do not sell myself short. Christ promised us "all that his father hath." Christ promised us that we could be joint heirs with Christ. I know my parent and my potential. Do you? The continuum of God was declared from the beginning and is evidenced in all of the scriptures.

Starting with the first ... "Let us go down and create man in our image."

unger| 5.21.09 @ 8:19PM

kmicheals,
Are you a member of a space cult? Or are you a morman? But really is there a difference?

Nick| 5.21.09 @ 8:37PM

I notice you skipped over my objections. I never said anything about sharing in God's Divinity. Besides, your scripture quotes I find unconvincing of a continuum. "Let us go down..." Ever heard of angels?

Please address what I wrote. God is Eternal. He created the universe.
The Gospel According to Saint John, chapter 1: "1) In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2) He was in the beginning with God; 3) all things were made throught Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made."

Christ is the Eternal Word; and the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are three persons in one God.

Violette| 5.21.09 @ 8:50PM

Turk, the crazy American hating leftist is Daphne Kenward--she's been trolling AmSpec for months. Nice grammar and spelling, huh? Ignore her; not only is she crazy, but she smells real bad, too.

Charles Darwin| 5.21.09 @ 9:05PM

Dave Matthews, I wish you were extinct, you are waste of DNA.

sobe conservative| 5.21.09 @ 9:06PM

to the great unwashed undecided who made it this far (the rest of you aren't going to switch sides if you burn in hell): Humans by their very existance Polute, they use oxygen (good stuff) and produce carbon dioxide and feces (bad stuff). They should go. All of them including you. Then, Satan does not have to go to hell because the Word of God will not be fulfilled. its very simple. Those of you that think that Spirit filled Christians are for killing and enslaving their fellow mankind are delusional and need to be exorcised.

Charles Darwin| 5.21.09 @ 9:10PM

Crazy much?

Mark| 5.22.09 @ 1:19AM

Did no one read the fine print? All these headlines are about one thing: Making Headlines. The "science" behind these claims have already been quitely backed away from. These scientists did not find some distant relative of ours, but they did find an extinct primate that is the size of a small cat, kin possibly to a lemur. I had to study all of this hooey as an Anthropology student and still find it hilarious, not to mention frightening, that people continue to believe whatever they are told in this regard. Darwinian evolution is a soundly debunked model for human origin, and one of the most telling proofs of this is the fevered evangelistic nature of current evolutionists who are on the defense and trying to squash all dissent before some sense actually creeps back into the whole "debate." Lie about it as they might, "evolution" has never been anything more that a hypothesis. It is one theory among many... one with an enormous amount of weaknesses that are visible to anyone with their eyes open on the subject. All ideas have consequences, and this one's are particularly atrocious. Not that it would matter if evolution where actually true, but it is soley responsible for atrocity after atrocity (think nazi Germany, Communist Russia, eugenics in all forms, etc...), and will continue to produce more until it is finally discarded. If you and I are primordial soup, then Neitzche was right - and if you're fine with that... then you should be worried.

Pingback| 5.22.09 @ 1:23AM

Ida proves that scientists are insecure about evolution « Jim Blazsik links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…Dumbing Down the Definition of Homophobe by John Nolte Waxman clueless about his cap&trade bill: “You’re asking me?!” By Michelle Malkin Wow: It’s time to legalize drugs, says … Tom Tancredo? Chimp Change By R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. Possibly related posts: (automatically generated) Scientists Who Reject Evolution You say you want an evolution? Scientists Unveil Missing Link In Evolution Creationism in the Classroom: Florida…

CH| 5.22.09 @ 1:26AM

The Theory of Evolution is the same as the Theory of Global Warming--Bullsh!t.

It's Tough losing support| 5.22.09 @ 10:47AM

Anyone who disagree with the status quo, gets criticized, but that is tipical of a desperate Republican Party, who is finding it difficult to gain support from the population after 10 years of the worse President in History George W Bush.
The person who should be criticized is the people who was stupid enough to have elected the biggest moron in history to lead their Political Party.

kmichaels| 5.22.09 @ 11:53AM

"kmichaels,

Christ is the Eternal Word; and the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are three persons in one God."

I appreciate your thoughts Nick. As to God being eternal, why should it offend you if you found out that instead of existing forever he existed instead for trillions upon trillions of years?

What you failed to address is all the scriptures and comments that I made that tell us directly that we are the children of God, made in his image, joint heirs with Christ, that Christ refers to us as Gods even the children of God.

There is not a single scripture that refers to God and Jesus as a single entity, other than Christ saying that God the Father and he are "one." And in the same vein he prays unto God the Father on behalf of his followers and asks that his followers with Christ might be one in the same way that Christ and God are one. I am sorry to burst the bubble of so many Christians that have been taught a false concept of the trinity. It is purely man made and inconsistent with thought, logic, parenthood and the scriptures.

Stephen, when he was being stoned declared that he saw Jesus, on the right hand of God. Jesus prayed to his Father in Heaven. Jesus asked that his followers could be one with him and God as he is one with God.

This prayer of Jesus is very clear, and straightforward, yet some men have corrupted a simple concept and have made many falsely think that there is some magical trinity. Yet the scripture clearly shows the concept of oneness does not mean one entity all rolled into one. If it does, it means that all of his followers also become this one God, consisting of millions of souls. Which is really kind of childish.

John 17
18 As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.
19 And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth.
20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;
21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:
23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

So we have plain words, clearly showing that being made one means to share the same truth, and accept the same gospel and to be in agreement on the truth. Yet man has come along and twisted the simple parent child relationship into something it was never meant to be.

2 Timothy 4

3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

Nick| 5.22.09 @ 4:36PM

Again, you skip over your original assertion: "...I believe that God is most likely the result of an eternity of evolution, that created a society of very intelligent beings..." Try to stay focused.

I showed you one of many verses that show your belief is not Scriptural. From Genesis 1:1, all the way through to the New Testament, the Scriptures say God created the universe and everything in it. The Gospel of Saint John, chapter one, shows Christ is the Eternal Word and the Light. He was "with God" and "was God".

The Trinity is not "magical", it is a Mystery of Faith. At the end of the Gospel of Saint Matthew Jesus commanded the Apostles to "Baptize them in the name of Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."

I never wrote I was "offended" and I've been nothing but respectful. I haven't called your beliefs "childish" or "magical", or "inconsitent with thought, logic...".

My faith in the Gospel of Jesus Christ is a Deposit of Faith that goes back 2,000 years to the beginning. Saint Paul taught (2 Thes. 2:15): " So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the [TRADITIONS] which you were taught by us, either by [WORD OF MOUTH] or by letter.

When I hear his warning to Saint Timothy I hear a warning about, not only the Gnostics and other heretics to come, but also those who would wrench the meaning of Scripture out of the context the Holy Spirit intended.

kmichaels| 5.22.09 @ 5:53PM

My original assertion is that God was the result of a process, which is very natural and makes sense. The fact that the earthly description of God is that he had a son and has children on earth backed up in both old and new testament shows a definite pattern that God has children that can become like him. This portion of concept you refuse to deal with, most likely because your teachers were void of a deeper understanding of the purpose of God, of life, of his creating children in his image, etc. What is the outcome of the children of God in your opinion? Most likely you have no clue because your teachers dare not touch that subject. However the scriptures themselves touched upon that subject quite frequently.

Yes you have been respectful, and I thank you for it. But calling some beliefs childish is no different than Paul saying that some beliefs are fables. The trinity is not scriptural it is man made. Show me where it says that the Father, Christ and the Holy Ghost are one entity. It is not a godly mystery, it is simply a lie that has been perpetuated for a long time.

You say you stand with a 2000 year old tradition. I say your tradition of the trinity was made up, was never scriptural and there are plenty of other scriptures that show that the three in the God head are three separate entities.

It is a rather childish idea that Jesus stood there and prayed to himself. This idea only becomes a mystery when you add the childish idea that it is one entity. But since it is two entities, mystery solved.

Is it I that am wrenching the scriptures or is it man that has taught the doctrines of man hoping to pass them off as God's doctrine. My view is strictly scriptural. Your view of the trinity is historical, but not scriptural.

The scriptures call us Gods, even the sons of God, yet you wish to deny it because it is new to your ears, but it is not new to the scriptures. It has been there from the beginning.

Now, if Jesus helped in the creation of all things, did he do it all at once or gradually? Is there an end to God's creations are will he create new things later?

If you are a joint heir with Christ, as the scriptures say, and that "All which my Father hath shall be given unto you" who are you to limit all that he hath?

We are referred to as his children but you want to limit your final outcome to something less than God. The scriptures say otherwise.

Jesus was accused of blasphemy for saying he was the son of God. So called Christians of today accuse others of blasphemy if we say we can fulfill what the scriptures say and become like God.

Jesus said this about such accusations ...

John 10
33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou lasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

See
Psalms 82
6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.

It seems that scriptures are well aware of the status of man being able to become Gods, similar to their father.

It seems that some feel it blasphemous that we can follow Christs example and become joint heirs with him, receiving "All that my Father hath."

I am not trying to be disrespectful, just pointing out the common error in so many Christians understanding.

If only people understood their true potential.

kmichaels| 5.22.09 @ 6:22PM

Romans 8 makes it clear that those that accept Christ and God become like him, and become heirs to his kingdom. Any other idea that says less than this is non-scriptural ...

14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.
16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:
17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.
18 For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us.
19 For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.
21 Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.
28 And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.
29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.
30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.
32 He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?
33 Who shall alay any thing to the charge of God’s elect? It is God that justifieth.
34 Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.

DAPHNE KENWARD IS A DOLT! | 5.22.09 @ 7:44PM

President Bush was in office for 8 years, idiot--not 10. Research a little, dolt.

Bitch| 5.23.09 @ 4:16PM

JEWS & EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANS claim that the modern State of Israel is a fulfillment of Biblical prophecy. This claim evinces a shallow and errant understanding of the Bible.

The meek shall inherit the earth said Jesus Christ to His disciples. But where do we see any hint of “meekness” in the conduct of the Jews? Jesus also said, Blessed are the peacemakers. But the Jews are warmongers not peace makers. The world has experienced nothing but turmoil since the creation of Israel in 1948.

The theft of Arab lands by the Jews before and after the U.N. partition of Palestine in 1948 is evidence enough to incriminate the Jews of breaking the commandment: “Thou Shalt Not Steal.” Why make God an accomplice to thievery by saying that Israel is a fulfillment of Biblical prophecy?
See Records Of Dispossession, Fischbach

The prophet Isaiah said: The Lord shall regather Israel a second time. (Isaiah 11). Jews and Evangelicals claim that the “second time” of the return of the Jews was fulfilled in the creation of the State of Israel in 1948. But the “second time” already took place 500 years before Christ:

The 1st Return Of The Jews: The Jews were living as exiles in Egypt when Moses brought the 12 tribes back to the land of Canaan in 1445 BC.

The 2nd Return Of The Jews: The Jews were living as exiles throughout the vast Babylonian Empire which Isaiah perceived as the four corners of the world when Ezra brought only 3 tribes back to the land of Israel in 536 BC. These were the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, and Levi. The other tribes were lost forever. Just prior to 70 AD, Herod destroyed the remaining tribal records, especially those of Levi, the priestly tribe.

*** A “3rd Regathering” Of The Jews Was Never Predicted In The Bible. ***

Hello Bitch| 5.23.09 @ 4:19PM

Ruth you Jewish Bitch.

You want to find some thing stink look up your Jewish mothers Pussy, and you may find what you are looking for.

Hahahahahhh.| 5.23.09 @ 4:35PM

These bits of shit thinks they will control the world, keep dreaming you bunch of shit you hate me because America is waking up, and so is the rest of the world you bunch of theives.

Calling me stink I dont even know you. You bit of monkies shit.

Don't ever Fuck with me again| 5.23.09 @ 5:12PM

RUTH the JEW.
What ever a Dolt is, you and your Jewish thiving fucking dirty Assholes are it. As if I don't know who you are. I never had a problem with Jews till I found out who they are. A bunch of liars, theives, Nazis, people full of hate, willing to kill others who are none Jew, and after I read the Talmud, I discovered who you are. and because I know who you are you attack all those who are aware of you. Professor William Robinson of LA, is another victim of Jewish hatred, of people who have discovered their SATANIC hatred of all Gentiles. You really want to insult me for reading about Jews, well too bad I know too much now to stop. I don't hate good people or honest people it's people like you, that has a problem because they disagree with the killing of innocent children who are of a different race, tough shit, I love humanity more than a bunch of NAZI JEWS.
You think I am stink, you should have told Hitler that, and he may have told you what he thought of you. I am a lover of Justice, not JEWS.

Ruth at Chimp ExChange| 5.23.09 @ 6:07PM

Chimp Change.

Ruth, you take a good photpgraph. Thin lips big ears, well you never know, Vanity Fair may be interested next year.

Hahahahaha| 5.23.09 @ 6:19PM

Ruth go tell the ADL. Hahahahah!
Right-Wing Execution Video Under Investigation
The gruesome video shows one man decapitated and another shot in the head beneath a swastika flag. Many think it is authentic -- and on Wednesday, the Russian authorities made the first arrest.

AFP
A screenshot of the video showing the apparent execution of two men by a Russian neo-Nazi group.
Russian authorities on Wednesday have made the first arrest in the case of a shocking neo-Nazi

Nick| 5.23.09 @ 9:09PM

Why do you keep changing the subject to something I never commented on? Why can't you defend your original statement?

The Scriptures say God created the universe. So why do you believe He evolved? You must have SOME basis for this notion. Why can't you articulate it?

I notice you left out verse 23, where Saint Paul says, "we await [ADOPTION] as sons". Why is that? Also, do you agree with Saint Paul that suffering with Christ is redemptive (v 17)?

You quote the Scriptures to make your points, yet have you ever comtemplated how the Bible came into being? If you can't trust teachings like the Holy Trinity, how can you trust in the Scriptures, which weren't put together in one book until centuries after Christ rose from the dead? If the Trinity is a lie, why not the Scriptures you cite?

Read the early Church Fathers, especially the ones taught by the Apostles or men that knew them. Didn't you catch what Saint Paul said about traditons being taught both ORALLY and by the written word? That means there are teachings that were not written down, Like the term Holy Trinity to explain 3 persons in one God. Although the Trinity is alluded to in Matthew 28:19, as I stated ealier.

Roy Hogue| 5.23.09 @ 10:11PM

I just love a good fight over evolution vs. creation -- the perfect unwinnable fight. You can beat your opponent over the head with your position for ever and ever and ever. Then you pat yourself on the back every evening in front of your mirror and say, "Look what a good boy I've been today. Look what I've done for the cause." But you've not done squat! Get a useful job!

Terry| 5.24.09 @ 9:07AM

Posters, such as Dave Mathews and those agreeing with him are liberals on this page to distract and marginalize conservatives. Andrew Klavan (pjtv.com) points out that the real meaning of what they say is, "Just shut up." Personally, I very much enjoy real thoughtful (as opposed to contrarian for its own purpose) comments on this and other conservative web sites. Liberals, such as DM may be fun to insult, but then we're in the liberal position of resorting to insults to stop conversation. Instead, I enjoy visiting a liberal site from time to time and do exactly what DM does here (except for having facts) and stir up the libs.

AStubbs| 5.24.09 @ 4:20PM

The Overthrow Of The
American Republic - Part 1
By Sherman H. Skolnick
skolnick@ameritech.net
http://www.skolnicksreport.com
9-23-1

Starting after the multiple bombings of the Federal office building in Oklahoma City, April 19, 1995, I wrote and then spoke on talk radio about an aborted military coup. Brought home to me, however, was the reality that my fellow Americans had little knowledge or understanding of the masterstroke, the overthrow of government, whether for the good or for evil.

In the past, had we as Americans been clearly informed by the popular press of a putsch, the overthrow of government by violence, by political assassination, such as to benefit domestic or foreign powers? After all, who benefitted from the political assassination of President Abraham Lincoln if not the British and the French who held the means to swoop upon us at the time from their entrenched positions to the south and north of us, in Canada and Mexico. The British wanted to split apart the nation by aggravating the natural friction between the ideas of the North and the South in America. The French were ready to carve up America as well. Since at least the War of 1812, the British had plotted to take back this continent as a puppet colony with so-called "Americans" again as subjects of the British Crown. [To their credit, Czarist Russia at the time of the War Between The States, or as called, the American Civil War, attempted to aid Lincoln with the Czar's naval fleet coming right offshore the U.S.]

Look what happened in the decades after the murder of Lincoln. President James Garfield was against the British controlling the growing financial power of the U.S. President William McKinley [the Brits hate the Irish] opposed the British trying to strangle the rise of American industrial power. Their political assassination in the years after that of Lincoln, in its simplest explanation, benefitted British attempts to grab back America.

Seldom, if ever, are these events explained in this way.

The Clinton White House with prior knowledge, allowed the Oklahoma bombings to occur, to restore his power following the debacle of the 1994 Congressional elections putting a GOP majority to confront him in Congress. And, with Clinton as a marionette, it aided the Establishment in their continuing propaganda to make common Americans helpless to oppose tyranny by disarming them.

Two days before the Oklahoma bloodshed, on April 17, 1995, a plane-load of top military brass were murdered when their sabotaged plane blew up near Alexander City, Alabama. It was a real life version of "Seven Days in May". According to federal grand jurors we interviewed, there was an attempt, later blocked, by a grand jury to investigate this aborted coup. It was actually part of a series of events involving twenty four Admirals and Generals, some of the most patriotic flag officers in the history of this Republic. They vowed, under the Uniform Military Code, to arrest their Commander-in-Chief Bill Clinton, for his various acts of treason aiding and abetting sworn enemies of the United States, such as Red China and Iraq. If Clinton had them arrested for mutiny, they were prepared, if not assassinated, to defend themselves with their heavily documented charges of his treachery against the U.S. Constitution and the people of the United States.

Some of the coup plotters, deciding to be out of uniform, took up residence in a Paris suburb. The French CIA, aware of all this, used it to blackmail advantages out of the U.S. government. Such as, to blockade the U.S. Justice Department, itself a highly corrupt entity, from prosecuting some fourteen French nationals, resident in the U.S., who stole U.S. industrial and financial secrets. [The French used similar blackmail threatening to publicize their knowledge of Iran's complicity in the missile attack on TWA Flight 800. Eight top officials of the French CIA along with some 60 other French nationals died in the plane that had been scheduled for Paris. A top official, however, of the French CIA at the last minute refused to board Flight 800. The Clinton White House had a secret business/peace deal pending with the Teheran oligarchs which the missile disclosures would have wrecked.]

The purpose of several attempts to pull off a coup was NOT to install a junta [pronounced HOON-tah], that is, an evil military dictatorship. Rather, to restore by necessary force the American Republic, which has gone down hill since the overthrow, by the American secret political police, of the U.S. government, by way of the murder in 1963 of President John F. Kennedy.

In the months and years that followed the Alexander City incident, some ten like-minded Admirals, Generals, and other officials and former officials, were assassinated. Such as, Admiral Jeremy Boorda, Chief of Naval Operations, the highest naval officer in uniform. Such as General David McCloud, head of the Alaska Military District. Such as, former Director of Central Intelligence, DCI, William Colby. Our interviews with their family members, relatives, and confidants convinces us of the validity of our reports. The monopoly press wrote off their demise as "airplane accidents", "suicide", and "boat accident".

Some of those hearing me on the radio, wrote to me. I could see immediately they had no understanding of the subject. One letter stated simply, "Mr. Skolnick, send me your papers on the koo [sic]." Evidently, this subject is not in the usual U.S. history text books in the usual high schools and colleges.

[As to the Iraqi connection, visit our website stories. Such as "U.S. Government Prior Knowledge of Emergency", "The Secrets of Timothy McVeigh".]

Because of my analyses of the current emergency, I should, I suppose, expect to be heckled and reviled by some well-meaning but poorly- informed fellow Americans. Notwithstanding the pronouncements of the American secret political police, the FBI and CIA, and the oil-soaked, spy-riddled monopoly press, and the White House, the plot to destroy the American republic is entirely based WITHIN THIS NATION.

It is obviously good and proper to respect the U.S. flag, perpetuated with the blood of American heroes. On the other hand, it can be a fatal mistake, a nuking of the Bill of Rights, not to recognize scoundrels who wrap themselves in the same flag to cover up their crimes against the American common people.

In its simplest form, the Persian Gulf War was just the falling out of former private business partners. I was the only journalist to be in attendance in 1991, at the hearing of a federal court case in Chicago. My exclusive interviews of the participants confirmed why certain bank records had to be concealed, the subject matter of the litigation. They showed the secret private business partnership in the 1980s of George Herbert Walker Bush, President in 1991, and Saddam Hussein, the Iraqi strongman installed by Bush, starting when Bush was head of the secret police in 1976. [My exclusive highly detailed story ran in a populist newspaper, "Spotlight", August 19, 1991.]

Profoundly corrupt Chicago federal appeals judges put the case out of court and the file has been scattered to the wind. We apparently are the only ones still having the court file. [Visit our website story, "The Secrets of Timothy McVeigh", for the name and number of the case and details of the judges.]

The Elder Bush during the Gulf War, wanted the American public to falsely believe that putting the head of Saddam Hussein on a platter and delivering it to the White House, would cure every domestic and foreign problem of the U.S. On July 17, 1993, Saddam Hussein murdered some ten of his top military officers who were plotting, he said, to overthrow him. The Clinton White House, with Bill Clinton as a Bush Family crony, had apparently committed treachery in leaking CIA details to Saddam of the plot against him. Working on investigating both Clinton and Bush as to this treasonous leak, was FBI Director William Sessions who was unceremoniously sacked on frivolous charges two days later, all to protect the treachery from being disclosed of Bush/Clinton. The very next day, Vincent W. Foster, Jr., Clinton White House Deputy Counsel, who also knew what had happened, was assassinated and clumsily disguised as a "suicide". The aborted plot against Saddam did not become even a watered down version of what happened, in the U.S. monopoly press, until November 1, 1993. [See, "U.S. Accused of Betraying Plot To Kill Iraq's Hussein", Chicago Tribune, 11/1/93.]

In 1991, the Elder Bush, as President, put some half a million Americans in harm's way, by way of Bush instigating a fight over Gulf oil properties with his former business partner, Saddam Hussein. Together, in the 1980s, as known to the participants in the lawsuit mentioned, Saddam and Bush, as business partners, split billions of dollars extorted from the oil-soaked weak sheikdoms of the Persian Gulf. The same as done by gangsters who would extract "protection money" from shopkeepers and tax-cheating auto dealers.

As a sizeable stockholder of a unit of a French firm, American LaFarge, the Elder Bush was implicated in reportedly supplying the ingredients for poison gas to be manufactured by Iraq, to be used against Iraq's domestic dissidents, namely, the Kurds, as well as against the Iranians, during the Iran-Iraq War, 1980 to 1988. A Director of American LaFarge, naturally, was Hillary Rodham Clinton, wife of the Bush Family pal.

Ten years after 1991, the Elder Bush's son, as "resident" and "occupant" of the White House, installed under highly suspect means, is going to war AGAINST HIS reputed former business partner, Osama bin Laden. Like father, like son.

George W. Bush's business partner has been a Houston, Texas businessman, James R. Bath. Together, they owned an oil drilling company, Arbusto Energy. [The son, like his father, likes to name his businesses with Spanish names. The Elder Bush named his firm Zapata Petroleum, later, Zapata Offshore, with 600 units worldwide as outposts for the American CIA, starting as early as 1959. The younger Bush's Arbusto is Spanish for "Bush".]

By and through James R. Bath, George W. Bush has been a business partner, in the tens of millions of dollars, with Osama bin Laden and his father. As an example, Bath had many millions of dollars of dealings with the Elder bin Laden who was part of the infamous spy/assassination/money laundry scandal of Bank of Credit and Commerce International, BCCI. See the details in "The Outlaw Bank---A Wild Ride Into The Secret Heart of BCCI", by Jonathan Beaty and S.C. Gwynne, Random House, New York, 1993, pages 227-230.

Notice in our prior story about the Emergency, the details of Osama bin Laden's secret joint accounts (stemming from the George W. Bush/James R. Bath/bin Laden business partnerships) in the Harris Bank, a unit of Bank of Montreal, owned largely by the Bronfman Family, who have been the owners of the Seagrams booze cartel, and another major owner of the bank being U.S. Senator Peter Fitzgerald (R., Ill.). The U.S. units of Barclays Bank, United Kingdom, have also sought to conceal such reputed joint accounts of Osama bin Laden/James R. Bath/George W. Bush. Who can believe the White House when they say they would freeze Osama bin Laden's accounts if they can find them? Also please notice, in my exclusive story about the Elder Bush/Saddam Hussein business partnership, the banks involved were Banca Nazionale del Lavoro, BNL, owned in part by the Vatican, and its bank twin, BCCI. [My exclusive story in the "Spotlight", 8/19/91.]

So, father and son, ten years apart, George Herbert Walker Bush amd George W. Bush, went to war or are going to war against their former business partners. Throughout history, regimes have created an "enemy", as a straw man, and then sent their armies to fight their "enemy". This by way of consolidating their power and diverting attention from their domestic problems, and repressing the poorly informed populace.

From the sarcastic standpoint of those who rule us WITHOUT OUR CONSENT, in violation of the U.S. Constitution, America is becoming too populated for there to be supposedly guaranteed rights. Remember, the Bill of Rights is heavily packed with the word NO. It is a shield against a tyrannical central government. At the hands, however, of a corrupt and venal federal judiciary and a treasonous central government, and a bought off and blackmailed Congress, the Bill of Rights is a worthless, useless piece of paper. The cowardly mass media are mere scriveners, writing down what they are dictated.

Under the disguise of leading a religious "crusade" against the Moslem world, every utterance dripping with the word "terrorist", are the ruling elites in the process of overthrowing the American Republic?

Who all benefitted from treasonous prior knowledge of the violence against America on September 11, 2001? Are some flag officers in the U.S. military, with full knowledge of all this, opposed to going to a war instigated by the highest circles WITHIN THE UNITED STATES? More coming.

Stay tuned.

====================================================
Since 1958, Mr. Skolnick has been a court-reformer, and since 1963,
Founder/Chairman, Citizen's Committee To Clean Up the Courts.

Since 1991, a regular panelist and since 1995, Moderator/Producer of a
one-hour, weekly, public access Cable TV program, "Broadsides",
cablecast within Chicago to upwards of 400,000 viewers each Monday
evening, 9 p.m., Channel 21 Cable TV.

For a heavy packet of our printed stories, send $5.00 [U.S. funds] and a stamped, self-addressed BUSINESS size envelope [#10 envelope, 4-1/8 x 9-1/2] WITH THREE STAMPS ON IT, to
Citizen's Committee to Clean up the Courts
Sherman H. Skolnick, Chairman,
9800 So. Oglesby Ave., Chicago IL
60617-4870. Office, 8 a.m. to midnight, most 7 days

BUT DO NOT BOMBASRD THIS LISTED PHONE WITH
"JUST ROUTINE" CALLS- (773) 375-5741. For a recorded message update, a
regular phone call, not expensive, (773) 731-1100. WEB-SITE:
http://www.skolnicksreport.com [NOTE "s" after NAME IN WEBSITE.] E-MAIL:
skolnick@ameritech.net

MainPage
http://www.rense.com

This Site Served by TheHostPros

Daphne Kenward| 5.24.09 @ 5:13PM

Obama is the chimp with the thin blue lips and big ears. I am the crazy hater committed to a dirty rundown mental institution who mangles the English language and despises everything good and just. Electric shock is just not working for me.

Richard| 5.24.09 @ 9:35PM

Based on observations made during nearly fifty years teaching at the college level, I can state with conviction that we humans have descended from the apes. I can also state that some of us have not descended far enough.

Terminator| 5.24.09 @ 10:39PM

And liberals have descended into hell. I don't want to go with them.

Old Texican| 5.25.09 @ 9:17AM

I have chuckled a lot reading the comments here.

As many of you know, I attended Baylor University. There, (wouldn't you know it), the Family Counseling school was part of the Religion Department. I got to study a lot of fascinating ideas and history of ideas relating to the excellent article written by Mr. Tyrrell.

I'm sorry folks. All of your comments have been hashed and re-hashed for hundreds of years, by believers and non-believers.
I will summarize the best I can from the point of view of believers, (In an Eternal God/Creator/Carer).
A. God created heaven and earth
B. That God is larger and longer lived than time and space. (Call it the universe)
C. God created all in a stepwise fashion (pictured by an ancient man to be the six days followed by a day of rest.)
D. After He, (Her) smile) created all the rest He created mankind in fellowship with Him

(In my master's thesis I argued that God created mankind FOR fellowship with Him....and with one another.)
D. One fine day, mankind chose to "go it independently" ...without its Creator looking over its shoulder every single moment and guiding its every choice.
(Sin, capital S is thus defined), and God made a covenant with mankind to step back apace and let mankind discover what it may.
E. Mankind then voluntarily turned its back on its fellowship with Him.
F. God has kept His covenant. The only way an individual man or woman can become aware of God's eternal caring and fellowship is to turn back around...voluntarily...("repent" means simply, "turn around 180 degrees" ).
G. This "turning back around" generally takes place when a person sorta "hits the wall" of spiritual (emotional/psychological?) despair becoming aware of the essential emptiness and meaninglessness of his/her existence.

Some persons CHOOSE to reach out to meaning, and purpose in their lives. Quite often they find not only a life-task worthy of the doing...but also a Taskmaster confronting their limited existence.

This occurence is what the Bible often refers to as "choosing life".

Conversely, many persons CHOOSE an idol...a political idol, a stone idol, a gold idol, a "science/discovery" idol, a human idol...etc.

Just in the last few years, physicists have discovered some fascinating things:
1. muons that travel so fast that they seem to turn time into a pure circle. It cannot be expressed in words ,but only in math....but it involves several words like gravitational effects etc.
2. Biological scientists have discovered what many call the "God-spot" or "god button" (little g) in the human brain. A fascinating search engine browse if you want to pursue it.

Kmichaels
I'm sorry, but you pushing the question back billions of years to another "source" gets into all that "Ontological stuff" I have forgotten the words to discuss.
On this Memorial Day, I am praying that many, and maybe all, of our fallen Soldiers chose "life"
before they fell.
Best regards, all

Tom Anderson| 5.25.09 @ 12:39PM

"David Mathews| 5.21.09 @ 7:12AM
Is Bob Tyrrell such an idiot as to argue that since our species is 60,000 years old that means that it cannot go extinct? He is completely misreading the story of evolution. "

No, Mr. Matthews, Tyrrel is claiming no such thing. He makes the point that human beings have survived a lot in those 60,000 years and on that basis will probably find a way to survive the soft-core totalitarian state the Anointed One is attempting to impose upon an American electorate not given, it seems, to paying much to the words and actions of those whom it elects to positions of political power. Tyrrel merely expresses here his impish sense of humor.

"Bob, one reason why our ancestors could entertain religious nonsense about the uniqueness of humankind is because all of our closest ancestors had already gone extinct."

While I am an atheist, gay, and an advocate of laissez-faire capitalism, I don't understand your point in puffing yourself up as a self-righteous atheist. It is one thing to say there exists no compelling evidence for a belief in a personal, creative deity, at least since Darwin's Origin of Species, but it is also an anthropological fact that all cultures, all societies that we know of, all seem to have cultivated religious beliefs, thus providing a rudimentary conceptual grasp of human experience. As advocates of reason, don't we shortchange ourselves by not acknowledging the power of religion to motivate behavior, some of it very good, some of it very evil?

"Bob fails to comprehend science and fails to perceive risk in an accurate manner."

How so?

"Thank God he is a member of a dying political party mired in 19th century thinking and religious fundamentalism."

19th century political theory and discourse tended very dramatically toward the collectivist practice we have experienced in the 20th century. Christian orthodoxy far preceeds the religious revivals of the 19th, and 18th centuries. From my vantage point, the current crop of "progressive", "liberal" and "Left wing" hacks owe their emotional heritage to the Progressive Movement of the late 19th century. Advocates of radical capitalism, that is, laissez-faire, may well use the Republican Party as the institutional base from which to launch a counter-attack against the intellectually impoverished Democrats, perhaps not. But if you oppose collectivism, the Republican Party is the only game in town right now. If it disappears, then so too will any hope of putting some restraints upon an all-powerful Presidency who appeals to the Left as an idol sufficiently attractive that he appears, for all intents and purposes, as a Messiah, leading liberals to Promised Land of a communism that works.

"The ignorant people can continue clinging to their Bibles and SUVs, the rest of the nation can move ahead without you. "

Pardon me, Mr. Matthews, but you are out of line to criticize Tyrrel for ignorance, for you show less than perfect knowledge about the things you discuss. If you have a factual argument to make, why not make it? If all you can do is share your antipathies to religion, to capitalism, to individual rights, to limited government, then why not just confine your activities to taking lovely photographs of wild life in the Tampa Bay region?

Nick| 5.26.09 @ 11:54PM

Where'd you go? I'm waiting for a reply.

Polyester Mather DD| 5.27.09 @ 5:31PM

Though it seems only a matter of time before zeal unites neo- and theo-cons in a crusade to bomb the road to Damascus in hope of turning up relics of their forebear, Saul the Tarsier, it is not too late to raise the scientific tone of TAS by anointing Sherman Skolnick as Tom Bethell's worthy successor.

I do hope that _ sero sed serio _ RET will send each a copy of Coyne's admirable book.

jr| 6.17.09 @ 5:14PM

Whoops, I'm sorry, after reading the title, I thought it was another story about Hussein Obama.

jiner| 8.10.09 @ 11:20PM

Nike Air jordan
Dunk SB Shoes
Dunk SB Shoes
NBA Basketball Shoes
Cheap Nike shoes
Air jordan 23
cheap jordan shoes
air max tn
dunk shoes

tiffany jewellery| 8.14.09 @ 4:06AM

Very good to see the tiffany jewellery tiffany jewellery tiffany jewellery links of london hollister clothing ed hardy christian audigier abercrombie
feeling quite.

Nfl jerseys| 8.27.09 @ 11:13PM

It is a wonderful article: NFL jerseys,Photoshop CS2,ghd Hair Straightener,Adobe Photoshop CS4.

Wholesale Lingerie| 9.5.09 @ 9:33PM

sexy lingerie lingerie

Wedding Dresses| 9.9.09 @ 3:31AM

This handbag is so unique, Wedding Dresses
Designer Wedding Gowns
Bridal Gowns
and I never see it’s sold in the stores, where did you get this one please?