Harrassment, vandalism and obstruction are all forms of disent...if Fox News chooses to put themself above the electoral process and manipulate coverage, then they deserve exactly what they get.   In my opinion, their intentions are crystal clear of their sole purpose regarding the election.. it is ridiculous for them to behave the way they do and then claim "we're just a news station".  Hopefully the message they are receiving is also crystal clear.. play with fire and you're going to get burned.

by Bob A. (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 18 comments) on Sunday, Jan 13, 2008 at 9:36:41 AM

  (0+)

There's also a video of the Paul supporter's angrily following and shouting at Sean Hannity. It's a U-tube video available about half-way down in the article, or you can view it at U-Tube here: LINK

William Cormier

by William Cormier (152 articles, 11 quicklinks, 21 diaries, 418 comments [9 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Jan 13, 2008 at 9:47:57 AM

  (0+)

  Media Reform has NOT WORKED!!!!!!!!   OTHEREWISE WHERE IS IT??? 

by Nathaniel Heidenheimer (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 47 comments) on Sunday, Jan 13, 2008 at 11:43:21 AM

  (0+)

  Apparently the high and mighty Rupert Murdoch, Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity really don't care what their viewers think because they were recorded at an Ann Coulter fund raiser saying that it's a good thing FoxNews viewers are all "white trash", "morons" and "trailer park trash. If you haven't heard this beauty yet go to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Freedom_of_Information/message/48023

by Rick Mason (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 26 comments) on Sunday, Jan 13, 2008 at 1:19:52 PM

  (0+)

Bill O’Reilly has been seen in videos actually putting his hands on people to push them out of the way and threatening them so his camera crew could get the picture they wanted of Obama hugging one of his campaign workers. He went so far as to claim that freedom of the press gave him the right to do this. The next thing that would have happened is FOX would have created an ongoing affair out of the innocent hug.

The Fox Corporate board includes war propagandist and Hillary fundraiser Rupert Murdoch; Viet Dinh, law professor and author of the patriot act; Andrew Knight of Rothschild international banker and large stock holder in the FRB and the Crown; and Rod Paige, former head of Education for Bush.

All of these people are practitioners of collectivism taken straight out of the communist manifesto (govt. education, govt control / complicity in control of communications, centralization of banking and credit).

FOX's attempt to exclude Ron Paul from the political process is an attempt to control the election. When they do allow him into a debate they try to attack him with Ron Paul specific questions that have nothing to do with the issues.

In a clear violation of the Constitution, their subsidiary, My Space, deleted 3800 profiles that supported Ron Paul.

FOX is the American nightmare that came true.

by Web Smith (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 28 comments) on Sunday, Jan 13, 2008 at 1:29:31 PM

  (0+)

     The message- terrorists hate Americans for our freedom.

     The spin- Americans hate Fox for their freedom.

     The conclusion- We are the terrorists.

     I don't want to get all giddy or anything, but it sure feels like their s*** is starting to 'spin' in a way that makes me think these guys are imploding. All I drink are triple espresso's so I know I'm not high, but are we making headway here? I know in the scheme of things it ain't much, but damn this tastes good.

     Hey Bill O. Keep it up. How's that bed you've made?

     peace.

by mikel paul (14 articles, 1 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 570 comments [13 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Jan 13, 2008 at 2:05:25 PM

  (0+)

I'm advocating a boycott of fox advertisers for fox's blatant undermining of our democracy.  Don't buy stuff advertised on fox and send a letter and/or call their corporate offices to tell them why.  If we can get a few major sponsors to drop, that's a lot of publicity and a lot of money lost for fox.  CRUSH FOX.

Also, go to: http://youtube.com/watch?v=2kvlnkLzBHM  for an original song and video, "Ron Paul for Freedom!"  :)  I'm the guy doing cartwheels, karate kicks, and passing out flyers.

by slcmcguire (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 2 comments) on Sunday, Jan 13, 2008 at 2:09:50 PM

  (0+)

The other media are no better. The other media are excluding Kucinich and Gravel from the debates.

by Ty (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 888 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Jan 13, 2008 at 2:12:08 PM

  (0+)

Furious GeorgeW: "They hate us because of our freedoms."

O’Lie-ry: "people are angry because of the success of the Faux network"

Hmmm, where did O'Really get that line, I wonder?

by t quigly (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 5 comments) on Sunday, Jan 13, 2008 at 2:28:57 PM

  (0+)

you have to admit, someone should have done some homework on foreign policy & domestic matters before getting into the '08 race.

rudy, mccain, romney, & o'reilly can't all be wrong... i mean, just look at some clips from the 9/11 commission report people. does ron paul really know anything about "why they attacked us?"

are you afraid of the truth:

http://zeromotivation.com/why_they_attacked_us.html

by zeroMotivation (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 4 comments) on Sunday, Jan 13, 2008 at 4:57:17 PM

  (0+)

This guy is my professor and he's been researching conservatives for nearly 4 decades. See his findings here, all pbased on psychology studies, that explain how their minds are compartmentalized in a way that doesn't allow them to see how stupid they really are.

http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/

by Paul O (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 6 comments) on Sunday, Jan 13, 2008 at 5:18:15 PM

  (0+)

So this is 'news' to the Paul crowd?

I find it speaking volumes that many of Dr. Paul's supporters actually embraced Fox News by shareholding and investing in the company until it did their boy wrong.

by C.Bid (0 articles, 7 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 739 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Jan 13, 2008 at 5:18:53 PM

  (0+)

well now, divestiture of any investment only works if you first acquired an asset of the company.

so following your brilliance, those who years ago divested themselves of south african investments, for the cause of apartheid, were equally... interesting...?

by zeroMotivation (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 4 comments) on Sunday, Jan 13, 2008 at 5:38:01 PM

  (0+)

Uh, how long has Fox been politically motivated, lop-sided, and lame?  It certainly didn't just happen.

I would never invest in something that I found morally repulsive from the beginning -and certainly not in hopes to make money.  I'm glad many pulled support of South African investments because of the stink over apartheid, but I find it more honorable to never have invested there in the first place seeing as how apartheid started there during the late 40's and wasn't exactly a secret...

Having scruples may not be brilliant, but it can prevent having to explain opposition to the Civil Rights Act, a vote against the Voters' Rights renewal, racist comments in newsletters bearing my name, and explaining why I'd want to own anything I associated with scumbags.

by C.Bid (0 articles, 7 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 739 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Jan 13, 2008 at 7:54:04 PM

  (0+)

What's in a name?  The Civil Rights act is about five times as long as the Consitution, almost 50 pages of gibberish that can mean anything you want it to.  Among other things, it meant compulsory attendance at sexual harassment and diversity training as a requirement of employment in America.  It is used in federal courts as a substitute for the Bill of Rights, inventing arbitrary rights and abolishing Constitutional rights.  One can oppose the so-called Civil Rights Act without opposing civil rights just as one can denounce the so-called Patriot act without being unpatriotic.  I have disagreements with Dr. Paul but he's on target in voting against the Civil Rights Act.  It is an abortion of civil rights.

by Larry Ward (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments) on Sunday, Jan 13, 2008 at 10:06:00 PM

  (0+)

being put in the larger context of things... the cumulative effect is a rather disturbing one that needs more examination and explanation than dismissal and defense of the questionable behavior.  Anyone that can see the common thread and underlying effect in those things should be concerned.  It's troubling to say the least.

And sorry folks, I've finally found common ground with Damail on this one...  Fox may deserve the attacks, but that doesn't make it right.  Should they cave to the fear of physical violence?  I don't think so.  A large section of the Paulite crowd are unnecessarily and childishly bullying in their efforts and IF they acted as alledged, should be held responsible for every single thing they did.  It's simple.  So what if they're finding out just now how shitty Fox is?  Through many people's observations, they've an incredible likeness to the Bush supporters during previous election cycles... only now they insist on violence and intimidation to enact changes at a 'news entertainment' network?  The boycott of advertisers and dumping of funds was a much better and legal route.  It even showed the power of a well-organized effort!

by C.Bid (0 articles, 7 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 739 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Jan 14, 2008 at 7:19:48 AM

  (0+)

The people who are vandalizing Fox News vehicles and cursing out FNC reporters are the ones who are scraping the bottom of the barrel - except I'm afraid they will stoop even lower. And let's face it: They are not sliming Ron Paul, they are simply ignoring him. Why? Because his poll numbers are weak, that's why. All the other networks are treating him the same way.

Actually, that's not totally accurate. CNN's Anderson Cooper actually did a story on the newsletters that have got Ron Paul in so much hot water. So does that mean that Cooper's vehicle will get trashed? I hope not.

by Scott (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 744 comments [30 recommended, 3 rejected]) on Sunday, Jan 13, 2008 at 9:36:34 PM

  (0+)

Fox has largely been responsible for sowing the seeds of discontent and I could give a rat's ass about their crying now that they are reaping the whirlwind. As the old Italian resistance saying goes you don't debate  fascists, you destory them. Like all bullies, the right wing blowhards finally picked a fight with the wrong people. I gotta admit, it is reassuring to see an American rebellion against this garbage. God knows that the political system is rigged so there won't be any hope of legitimate change so it looks like there is going to be an escalation and it's about time.

Just my two cents

EE

by Ed Encho (12 articles, 20 quicklinks, 65 diaries, 438 comments [14 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Jan 14, 2008 at 5:00:20 AM

  (0+)

re. Author in: "I’m not a Ron Paul supporter, however I do look upon him as the next best candidate compared to Dennis Kucinich"

The only thing similar about Ron Paul to Kucinich in his stance on Iraq. By supporting Kucinich, author claims to be a genuine liberal or progressive. But his 2nd 'best choice' shows he's not or ignorant of Ron Paul's right wing libertarian economic platform spouting a Randian virture of selfishness for an antiquated 19th century laissez-faire type of deregulated capitalism. Supporting Ron Paul also means you support the typical GOP authoritarian Christian social platform.

If author of this article were a geninue progressive, his 2nd choice would be Gravel. As 'John Q' knowingly references above in his link to Bob Altemeyer's [Right Wing] Authoritarians [RWA] personality 'disorder', the policies and platform of Ron Paul show him to be not that of a leftist or social libertarian anarchist, nor even in the social darwinist right wing libertarian quadrant, but that of a Right Wing Authoritarian diametrically opposed to what a genuine progressive libertarian believes or supports just like all other candidates in either party, excepting Kucinich and Gravel. See http://politicalcompass.org/usprimaries2008

A Synopsis of the RWA True Believer Personality

“True believers are not intent on bolstering and advancing a cherished self, but are those craving to be rid of unwanted self. They are followers, not because of a desire for self-advancement, but because it can satisfy their passion for self-renunciation! They are eternally incomplete and eternally insecure.”
Eric Hoffer; Author of ‘The True Believer’ and winner of the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) and Right Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) are well-studied variables in attitudes to measure intergroup dominance and submission to authority, respectively. They are important, and fairly recent developments in the study of psychology, sociology and behavioral science going back to the end of World War II. Then a new field in Behavioral Science to hopefully explain and identify how and why Hitler gained so much support from the German people. They are personality variables perhaps even more relevant now than in Hitler’s Germany to understand the mass psychosis affecting the 10s of millions of muddled minds in the huddled masses of America today.

SDO is associated with racism, warmongering (Pratto, Sidanius, Stallworth & Malle, 1994) and attitudes about women’s rights (Heaven, 1999). Whereas RWA is associated with xenophobia, homophobia and sexism (Altemeyer, 1998; Duckitt, 2001). SDO and RWA together are described as ‘two sides of the same coin’ because the measures are interrelated and non-overlapping as unique predictors of prejudiced attitudes (Altemeyer, 1998). Both SDO and RWA are ‘ideological attitude’ factors in personality.

The authoritarian personality is characterized as conventional, submissive to authority, and aggressive toward deviants and outsiders (Altemeyer, 1981). Most freethinkers can easily recognize this RWA personality that shares similar characteristics or ‘traits’ with the ‘true believer’ from: excessive conformity; submissiveness to authority; intolerance; insecurity; superstition and; ridged, stereotyped thought patterns. All the preceeding characteristics are identified by German sociologist and philosopher, Theodor W. Adorno as traits of an Authoritarian Personality.

Members of large authoritarian groups, regardless if religious, political or fraternal, are to a large degree, externally directed. Their immense need for external direction drives them to join mass movements by the droves to follow a charismatic leader. As long as dependent minded followers believe, their leader can get away with anything. A common hatred, enemy, or devil is essential to the success of both their leaders and their groups characterized by an ‘us versus them’ attitude of bigotry, and hate towards outsiders.

The true believer's RWA personality disorder has an internal dependence on external group thought and direction. It is the primary reason they’ve been so successful at imposing authoritarian rule throughout history using a few select faith-based leaders. The most extreme racist hate groups in America like the KKK, Aryan Nation and others, all have a Christian identity that supercedes their bigoted racial supremacy. Right wing political groups in America also have a primary Christian identity that supercedes their underlying right wing political goals.

True believers seem to almost always be raised in Right Wing Authoritarian environments. They have typically been taught ‘what’ to think, rather than ‘how’ to think from birth. Instead of a philosophy based in reason to guide them, or show them the path, they rely on others, typically authoritarian figures, both alive and dead, to direct their thoughts and actions taken in life. Like all that suffer from deeper levels of psychosis, they refuse to acknowledge they even have a mental disorder where contact with reality has been completely lost or at best, highly distorted.

“High RWAs are not likely to come up with the answers to our global problems. They are far too ethnocentric. Perhaps the most striking aspect of the simulation was how automatically right-wing authoritarians, placed in a room filled with people rather like themselves, still divided the world into small enclaves of ‘Us’ versus the global ‘Them’.”
Bob Altmeyer’s conclusion to an experiment including dominating authoritarians [High RWAs] amongst a second group of authoritarian followers in “What Happens When Authoritarians Inherit the Earth? A Simulation”, Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, Vol. 3, No. 1, 2003

Research shows authoritarian personalities are hierarchical, conventional, and intolerant. Religion depends and demands on intolerance and bigotry because of its prime requirement for obstinate and unreasoning attachment to it’s beliefs unfounded in fact. Intolerance is needed for indoctrination and continued adherence to religious dogma. If the believer is not bigoted, the believer does not remain a devout member. Altemeyer’s research in particular reveals the personality of a RWA [Right Wing Authoritarian] individual to be highly dependent upon strong group demands for high ideological conformity. Altemeyer’s RWA scale measures three reliable facets of authoritarianism: conventionalism, or rigid conformity to group norms; submission to higher status individuals; and aggression toward out-groups and unconventional group members. All ideal measures of individual and group norms so necessary to religion comprised of its ‘RWA true believer personalities’ of religious adherents.

Eigenberger (1998) hypothesized that authoritarian behavior results from fears associated with social exclusion and group dissolution, which were genuine threats to survival during much of our evolutionary past as homo sapiens. Monotheism gives homo sapiens an ultimatum based on a foundation of fear. The Bible God will punish anyone who doesn’t reach a particular and proper conclusion. There is nothing free about that type of will. Unlike freethinkers, religious adherents simplay cannot make objective conclusions because the use of fear tactics defiles any level of ‘freedom’ and independence in their thought process.

Former psychotherapist, and NLP [Neuro Linquistic Programming] Trainer Thom Hartmann suggests in ‘Cheney Speaks to the Reptile Brain’ that the Bushites are indeed trying to directly ‘relate’ to the ‘less than human’ survival brain of the susceptible populace in America. True believers of imaginary skygods are the most highly susceptible to Bushite fear tactics. “The reptile brain has a singular focus: survival. It doesn’t think in abstract terms, and doesn’t feel complex emotions. Instead, it’s responsible for fight-or-flight, hunger and fear, attack or run.” The fear-mongering Bushites succesfuly relate to the very same less than human ‘beast brain’, as I call it, that predominantly motivates the RWA true believer fight-or-flight emotions.

In groups of non-human primates [perhaps also not so ironically meaning ‘a senior clergyman and dignitary’], just as in ‘less than human’ RWA true believer groups, most primates, particularly males, are preoccupied with their concerns over dominant status, group affiliation and group integrity. Anything perceived as a threat to their place in the primate group is a powerful source of fear and apprehension just as it is for their allegedly homo sapien or ‘less than human’, RWA true believer counterparts. Non-human primates exhibit extreme xenophobia (fear of the strange) in encounters with different groups of the same species, just as the alleged homo sapien true believer primates do in expressing extreme xenophobia in their RWA personalities. Studies of proto-cultural transmission in Japanese macaques [Short-tailed monkey of rocky regions of Asia and Africa] show that the females and their young acquire new innovations and concepts, but their hierarchically ruled adult males are virtually closed to such new experiences. The xenophobic, closed-minded, control-driven non-human primate male, just like its RWA true believer counterpart, is ready to submit to a dominant and equally ready to oppress subordinates.

A defining factor between the true believer and the freethinker in human populations of all societies around the world appears to be distinguished by the each individual’s subsequent ability or inability to utilize the most rudimentary levels of reason. These same RWA true believer personalities exhibiting substandard abilities in reasoning flock to each other from finding emotional comfort in cults, mass movements, and large groups characterized by dependent group thought. All cults are composed of true believers with RWA personalities. They are the joiners and the followers who are always looking for authority, answers, meaning, guidance and enlightenment from outside themselves.

Most any freethinker that’s ever tried to ‘debate’ the RWA true believer personality, even the rare atheist or agnostic RWA personality, immediately sees their lesser ability to effectively utilize reason or critical thinking. They rarely relate to or even address logic, rational thinking or ‘reason’ at all. Instead the RWA personality relates to their feelings and emotions instead of the facts. I’ve yet to ‘debate’ any Right Winger, regardless if a skygod believer or not, whose entire argument isn’t comprised of almost pure fallacy from start to finish.

Perhaps Mike Hersh sums up the RWA personality the best not in the behavioral science sense, but in an empirical or observational style in the following excerpts from his article “What scares right Wingers to the Bone?”

“What scares right wingers to the bone? Freedom. Free speech. Free thoughts. Free people. Why? They feel insecure in an uncertain universe. Right wingers crave order and simplicity, and will impose these things where they are not and should never be. Right wingers are theocrats and pseudo-libertarian Social Darwinists or even fascists who embrace authority and power over the individual. Dissent threatens right wingers’ fragile sense of security. Right wingers’ reverence for authority makes them believe whatever their superiors tell them to believe. Their fear and insecurity make them shun the unknown and prevents them from questioning tradition or thinking in new ways. I’d say right wingers demand that everyone think whatever they think but right wingers don’t think. They listen and obey. Free thinking threatens right wingers. It weakens their precarious hold on their make-believe world.

Right wingers dislike education and they loath science. New information and the uncertainty fostered by the free flow of fresh thinking undermine their sense of stability. They are still in denial about evolution! Right wingers believe superstitions and embrace propaganda. They ignore information that challenges their prejudices and preconceptions. They therefore lack judgment and eschew conception. Right wingers believe in absurd contradictions, impervious to logic or education. Right wingers flock to cults of personality. Right wingers care about their feelings, not facts. Facts must either support rigid right wing beliefs, or else the facts must be wrong. Those who present facts which contradict right wing dogma must be evil.

Right wingers support idiotic, even fatal policies because they place nonsense over knowledge. They believe using condoms increases the chance of pregnancy and STDs. They think racism is OK, but pointing out racism is “playing the race card.” Poor white male right wingers blame poor non-whites and non-males for the injustices rich white males commit. Right wingers support the policies which comprise class warfare, but whine when anyone demonstrates the injustice of robbing the needy to enrich the greedy. Poor and working class right wingers believe increasing their taxes makes them richer, if Enron and Bill Gates get huge tax cuts. Right wingers support theocracy and fascism — actually craving a unified authority over their lives and even their afterlives! They support censorship. They want to impose their religious views on everyone. They want to punish anyone who strays from the fold. They brutally suppress anyone who questions authority, and they always obey abusive controllers. They are afraid of their own freedom. They are even more afraid of yours.

None of this would really matter, except for the tendency of right wingers to burn books; burn crosses, and burn people at the stake — although they tend not to do that so much any more. Lately they beat to death gays, firebomb nightclubs and women’s clinics, assassinate doctors, and vote for other right wingers. What scares right wingers to the bone? Essays like this, people like me who write them, and people like you who read them and pass them on.”

by Adnihilo (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 74 comments) on Monday, Jan 14, 2008 at 8:26:56 AM

  (0+)

conservatives are the slope-headed knuckle draggers and progressive liberals are the master race? Ok, I get it. 

by larry booth (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 303 comments) on Monday, Jan 14, 2008 at 3:18:31 PM

  (0+)

re: "...slope-headed knuckle draggers..."

-------

ummm, you omitted the unevolved opposable thumbs...

by zeroMotivation (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 4 comments) on Monday, Jan 14, 2008 at 8:38:30 PM

  (0+)

my apologies.

by larry booth (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 303 comments) on Tuesday, Jan 15, 2008 at 1:27:01 PM

  (0+)

Yikes! Why not just write an article that we can easily ignore instead of cluttering up this comments thread with your endless, mind-numbung rant?

by John Bowery (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 20 comments) on Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 12:42:16 PM

  (0+)

re. John Bowery in "Why not just write an article that we can easily ignore instead of cluttering up this comments thread with your endless, mind-numbung rant?"

Well Christian John 'active' in your 'Christian church' there in East Jesus Iowa, I'm sure anything confronting your faith [or antithesis to reason] in an imaginary Christian sky god based in mythological lies and deceptions will seem to be mind-numbing to you. What you call mind-numbing has been summarized from many behavioral science articles and authors with genuine science based Doctorate degrees. Where did you get yours - a now Texas accredited university advocating creationism as a science?

As an 'unreasoning' faith-based skygod believer John, you are are suffering from a severe mental disease called psychosis in which contact with reality is lost or highly distorted. When confronted with evidence against your faux faith based reality that muddled ‘dependent thinking’ mind of yours has become so dependent on its faith-based fallacies that you'll encounter an intense fear your entire faith based world view will come crashing down around you. Which it must in order to cure your religous psychosis so you can exist more fully in a rational reality.

It is the foundation of fear used by religion that causes a complete rejection of factual evidence to the contrary. When a religious psychotic such as yourself John rejects factual evidence, you are acting against reality. Rejecting a fact-based rational reality to foster a faith based one is an act of self-destruction John. Don't self destruct, but instead try learning how to think rather than relying on what you've been conditioned to think by attacking anything that confronts your faith-based [psychotic] reality.

by Adnihilo (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 74 comments) on Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 11:32:34 AM

  (0+)

kind of like the way you attack anything that confronts your science based (psychotic) reality?

by larry booth (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 303 comments) on Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 12:45:04 PM

  (0+)

re: "...cure your religous psychosis so you can exist more fully in a rational reality"

-------

in spite of the "intense fear" that my "entire faith based world view will come crashing down" on me, i would appreciate some of those "genuine science based" realities to fight the "faith-based fallacies."

would you mind providing a couple names of available science-based texts that prove the science of non-creationism?  thank you

by zeroMotivation (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 4 comments) on Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 6:05:23 PM

  (0+)

 zeroMotivation asserting zero motivation in "would you mind providing a couple names of available science-based texts that prove the science of non-creationism?"

I will not be baited into your fallacious argument twisting evolution into absurd religious terms by stating it as a 'science of non-creation'. 

First, using the scientific method, any homo sapien, or lesser reasoning sub species I refer to as 'homo religious', must prove the existence of some age old mythological omnipotent entity that has never scientifically proven to exist. Creationism is a faith-based belief in myth-ological fiction, not a science-based fact derived from logical reason.. 

There is only one valid position using the scientific method for any rational and sentient, sane homo sapien to take regarding a mythological-based omnipotent, invisible SkyGod: There is no proven ‘god’ existence for anyone to deny. One cannot deny what is nonexistent. It exists or it does not exist given the valid evidence. No matter if an atheist, a so called agnostic or a theist, the default position for those in the hominoid species of homo sapien, or 'thinking man', is that of nonexistence for any omnipotent ’supreme’ beings not proven to exist. We, or at least those of us who are homo sapiens, must assume things do not exist unless we have factual evidence proving otherwise. 

There is no valid reason nor argument any homo sapien or homo religious has ever presented to believe a God exists. The lesser reasoning sub species of hominid known as Homo Religious assumes this existence without valid scientific evidence. Homo Religious presume the existence of ‘god’ or gods not proven to exist.

No matter if one’s faith based belief is anthropomorphic in God or biblical based, regardless if it is a Christian God, a Jewish God, Yahweh, Allah, or any god in the minds of man, it can be invalidated in form and function as fallacious within the rules of inductive and deductive reasoning. One cannot presume the existence of ‘god’ or gods not proven to exist.

It is expected and accepted in critical thinking that we (as in homo sapien or 'thinking man') must assume things do not exist unless we have evidence that they do. Even theists otherwise referred to as homo religious here follow this rule “most” of the time; they don’t believe in Santa Claus, even though they can’t conclusively prove that no Santa Claus exists anywhere.

To assume that God exists is to make an assumption which cannot be tested in any reliable method. We cannot make an exhaustive search of everywhere God “might” be to prove that he doesn’t exist anywhere. Any rational, sentient homo sapien must take the default postion that God does not exist, since that is the only reliable position we can test using the scientific method.

One can ‘try’ to present proof for the existence of the nonexistent, but the again, the burden of proof needed is on those trying to prove the existence of something in its present form of nonexistence.

There is no valid reason or argument to believe a God exists. To do so would be presuming the existence of ‘god’ or gods not proven to exist. This is called faith. Faith is the antithesis of reason and critical thinking. Faith is irrational and a deragatory personal characteristic rather than the one drilled into the masses by educators and societal leaders in schools, churches (of course) and government as a commendable trait.

Faith is an act of mental destruction. If there is no evidence for a claim, then accepting it is irrational. It is more likely to be false then true (since there are more false ideas then true ones, being that their is only one reality). Building a structure of knowledge on such a flimsy foundation will leave it shaky and unstable. Eventually, even if confronted with evidence against it, one’s mind will be so dependent on the belief that fear of one’s world view collapsing will encourage one to reject the evidence. When this happens, one acts against reality.

Faith is an act of mental destruction. It is a mentally deranged state of mind defined as a psychotic individual. Psychosis: severe mental disorder in which contact with reality is lost or highly distorted. The deeper the faith, the more severe the psychosis.

ALL arguments presuming the existence of a god or gods without valid proof are all invalid from the start. Yes it is always possible valid reliable proof may come to fruition, as in the actual arrival on earth of some all knowing, all powerful supreme being that created the universe or mult-verse, but the reality of this ever happening is highly unlikely given proven scientific laws in quantum mechanics.

Adnihilo 

by Adnihilo (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 74 comments) on Saturday, Jan 19, 2008 at 11:13:09 AM

  (0+)

That is disgraceful. How dare anyone endorse the thuggish actions that the Paulbots have showered upon FNC employees. You don't see anybody giving Air America the same treatment, do you? That's because conservatives have more class and dignity than any of these lefty thugs will ever hope to have.

by Scott (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 744 comments [30 recommended, 3 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 19, 2008 at 9:44:18 PM

  (0+)