doon.  Can you cite a traditional value to which the media is "blatantly hostile"?

The lack of reporting both sides of a story is having a pernicious effect on America, breeding anti-Americanism, victimology, feelings over facts and form over substance. The traditional values which made America great, are being cast aside, along with Christianity, capitalism, families and other factors which have served to unite and define America as a nation.

The media would have us believe that inclusiveness, multiculturalism, equality and the environment are the most important issues facing our country today. And millions of Americans blindly accept their version of reality as truth. What they fail to report is the fact that each and every one of those policies has been an expensive, catastrophic failure, breeding social pathologies, hate and divisiveness. But, hey, its that thought that counts, right?

What would happen if America won a war and no one reported it?  If???  It has never happened.

Is it still news?  No, it is not news it never happened.

What if a credible argument were made pretty much demolishing Darwin's theory of evolution?  What an if again....  Second answer same as the first, it has never happened.

If no media outlet conveyed this information to the American public, does that mean its not a valid argument? Does that mean its not news?  What the hell, another if.  Again third answer same as the first.....

Hey hens, what started the "big bang"? If the cosmos was created in an instant what caused that instance to happen and where did it come from? Isn't evolution simply an instance of correcting past mistakes? Even if there is evolution doesn't there have to be a beginning, if so what began the beginning?

As I am not a scentist, I can not provide you an explanation of how the universe began support by the application of the scientific method.

 

If you can, please offer it.....

 

Do you do anything but post tired cliches numbnutz?  If so, given you have already done the tired cliche thang, try doing the alternative.....

"Isn't evolution simply an instance of correcting past mistakes? "

 

Absolutely not. There are no evolutionary advantages and disadvantages.

 

If evolution is false wouldn't Man have walked with the dinosaurs?

 

 

 

 

 

only evolutionary advantages and disadvantages.

more tired effortless cliches...Talk about calliong the ketttle black.....

The scientific community has made a lot of claims that 15-20 billion years ago some hard-to-define event, the Big Bang, started time, gave us spatial dimensions (length, width, height) and initiated the universe. Over time this model has been refined to explain how subsequently stars and galaxies, our own galaxy the Milky Way, our solar system, and our home planet earth were formed.

However, it intrigues me how little attention is given to the question: why did this Big Bang happen? How could it happen?  Before the Big Bang there was nothing; no time/space, no universe, no energy, no matter.  Then boom, suddenly all the energy and matter required to develop into our universe “pops�?into existence.  How can that be?

Assuming this would happen independently of an outside force such as a Creator directly violates one of the best proved and observed natural laws of science: the law of preservation of energy (or matter), technically known as the First Law of Thermodynamics. This principle states:

“Within a closed system, during any transformation the net energy increase or decrease is zero.�?lt;O:P> </O:P>

This means energy (or matter) cannot be created or destroyed, and the net effect of any transformation is zero. Simply stated, without energy from the outside, no reaction or transformation alone can generate additional energy, nor will energy merely disappear.

For instance when you operate a car, all energy put into powering the car (by the combustion engine) will be transformed into mechanical energy (moving the car) and heat (exhaust). But the sum of the mechanical energy and the heat/exhaust produced will be exactly equal to the energy produced by the burning of the gas/oxygen. No net energy is created or lost.

This also relates to the Big Bang.  The explosion cannot have just happened by itself, as the energy released then (and even today drives the expansion of the universe) must have come from somewhere �?the ONLY source possible would be a creating force, i.e. a Creator. Evolution has no explanation for this initial energy, a dilemma also described as the cause and effect problem.  There simply is no explanation �?other than just to pronounce dogmatically all matter eternal!

Dr. William Lane Craig summarizes this cause and effect principle in what is called the Kalam cosmological argument.   The Kalam argument is as follows:

1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
2. The universe began to exist.
3. Therefore the universe has a cause (being a Creator).

Atheists are eager to claim that this argument is invalid, because even the Creator would need a cause (something must have created the Creator). However, the Kalam argument does not claim that everything that exists needs a cause, but only whatever BEGINS to exist. As God, the Creator always has existed; He does not need a cause. He is the �?I>uncaused cause.�?The universe started to exist; i.e., according to the Big Bang theory and as can be proved by the concept of time and by the expansion of the universe. Thus the universe had to be caused by a Creator.

This principle (law) applies to all things in our cosmos. There is no dispute about this law in the scientific community.  The only exception would the Big Bang. But, how can something come from nothing?

Science has no explanation for this; even its greatest minds are at a loss. Honest scientists are forced to admit that the Big Bang is strong evidence for the existence of a Creator. Steven Hawking, perhaps the most famous scientist alive, made this startling admission during the 1997 PBS program, Universe:

By any measure, America and the allies have won the war in Iraq. Our mission has been accomplished. This is news, even though the media has failed to report it. Iraq's economy is on track, thanks to much improved security and increased production of oil. Iraq's fledgling parliament is operating. In other words, we won. The Iraqi people have won. Against tremendous odds.

Because American victory and military success don't fit the media's liberal version of America, most Americans remain unaware of the tremendous accomplishments that have been brought about, thanks to president Bush and our brave fighting men. Instead, their focus emcompasses only the price we paid, not the victory we achieved.

Ignoring inconvenient news and embarrassing facts is a tried and true tactic of the liberal media. A prime example is conservative author, Thomas Sowell. Sowell has written dozens of books dealing with race, culture, economics and other issues vital to America. More importantly, his facts have never been rebutted. Knowing there is no chance of disputing Sowell's studies and conclusions, the media elite have chosen to ignore him. He is simply not a part of their carefully fashioned reality.

Does it seem that calamity and disorder are on the increase lately? Everything in America  and world currently gives the impression that it is coming apart at the seams; from those dangerously high prices at the pump last summer, to the equal uneasiness of such low gas prices at present, to the economic meltdown and dubious “bailout,�?to the corruption eruption in Illinois, to the outbreak of a new war in the Middle-East. And the list goes on.

Even on that infamous date September 11, 2001, though a stunned America was momentarily uncertain of what its future held, the general understanding was that the nation would identify the culprits, take appropriate action to deal with them, and thereby ensure an eventual return to normality. Yet an ominous pattern shortly emerged. The uncertainties of that triumphant outcome for America were insidiously aggravated by the media who, along with their liberal cohorts on Capitol Hill, concocted one scenario after another in which America was either partly to blame for the hostility of the Islamists, or was somehow impotent in its effort to prevent future acts of terrorism.

It was prominent Democrats and their media parrots that first pronounced the Iraq war a “defeat�?for the United States. And if one was to believe their characterization of the entire War on Terror, it was futility in vanquishing the Taliban in Afghanistan, amidst an endless parade of human rights abuses by Americans, and a general deterioration of life for innocent Iraqis. Meanwhile, the rights of Americans were ostensibly being obliterated by the monitoring of incoming calls from foreign terrorists, an effort that was collectively branded as the U.S. government “spying on Americans.�?/P>

Looks like ABC News is starting out 2009 with a partisan bang. On its main page, ABC News is hosting a slide show featuring what it is calling the "All Time Dumb Quotes." Now, these are not all strictly political dumb quotes, to be sure. They also have the empty headed Christina Aguilera, that sharp as a tack Jessica Simpson and other denizens of the Hollywood Mensa club among the 16 featured quotes -- and some of them are doozies, too. But, there are six political quotes five by Republicans and one by Tina Fey making fun of a Republican (Palin, naturally), yet there are no "All Time Dumb Quotes" from any Democrats. Not a one. Apparently ABC doesn't think there's ever been a dumb Democrat?

Even more absurdly, all these "dumb quotes" are from the last year or so. Apparently, ABC also is not aware of anything "dumb" that was ever said before contemporary history. Yet, even as all these supposedly "All Time Dumb Quotes" are recent, they have one quote.... just one... from farther back in time than just recently. And guess who it’s from? Amazingly, the ONLY "All Time Dumb Quote" ABC can find from before the year 2008 is a 1988 quote by... drum roll please... Dan Quayle!