Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Most world leaders have accepted and in fact claimed evolution as the gospel truth and correspond accordingly for the values of new enterprising ideas and progress with the concensus (though failed in statistical substance) Kyoto Protocol. Prime MInister Stephen Harper seems still from the Albertan regions (sometimes the badlands) to have the repressed attitude of considering creationism for the technological truth. He officially has not come out and claimed evolution for the consequences that are so threatening this planet. And hides in parliament, in public that he believes in "good" science. What does he mean by that? Good science of late came down to refelcting that economic conditions and world food prices would come changes in such ideas as eliminating the National Wheat Board and let the free market operate for farmers in the Prairies. He concludes that evolution needs the XL pipeline to the U.S., the further development of the tar sands in northern Alberta. Is this evolution for the good science of expecting technology or the science is deviating from good science and evolution proper?
Most world leaders have accepted and in fact claimed evolution as the gospel truth and correspond accordingly for the values of new enterprising ideas and progress with the concensus (though failed in statistical substance) Kyoto Protocol. Prime MInister Stephen Harper seems still from the Albertan regions (sometimes the badlands) to have the repressed attitude of considering creationism for the technological truth. He officially has not come out and claimed evolution for the consequences that are so threatening this planet. And hides in parliament, in public that he believes in "good" science. What does he mean by that? Good science of late came down to refelcting that economic conditions and world food prices would come changes in such ideas as eliminating the National Wheat Board and let the free market operate for farmers in the Prairies. He concludes that evolution needs the XL pipeline to the U.S., the further development of the tar sands in northern Alberta. Is this evolution for the good science of expecting technology or the science is deviating from good science and evolution proper?
He appointed a Creationist as Science Minister. That's really nuts!
Science minister won't confirm belief in evolution - The Globe and Mail (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/article320476.ece - broken link)
Quote:
Canada's science minister, the man at the centre of the controversy over federal funding cuts to researchers, won't say if he believes in evolution.
"I'm not going to answer that question. I am a Christian, and I don't think anybody asking a question about my religion is appropriate," Gary Goodyear, the federal Minister of State for Science and Technology, said in an interview with The Globe and Mail.
After trying to slog through that posting (which, for some reason, I take to be in some form of English), I'm afraid I don't know if the actual subject is evolution, the Canadian Prime Minister, or science & technology.
Prime MInister Stephen Harper seems still from the Albertan regions (sometimes the badlands) to have the repressed attitude of considering creationism for the technological truth. He officially has not come out and claimed evolution for the consequences that are so threatening this planet. And hides in parliament, in public that he believes in "good" science. What does he mean by that?
So it seems, this guy believes in many of the conspiracy theories dealing with extraterrestrials (one of those theories being that we humans could be the descendants of ETs). Here's more from Paul Hellyer himself...
Being that Hellyer is a resident of Toronto and a former official within your country's government/defense, it is not a stretch to conclude that your current Prime Minister could be a friend of Hellyer (and could be secretly sharing the same conclusions about ETs). Again, I could be totally wrong here because I really haven't done much research on your country's officials and the topic of aliens. However, this could be what Stephen Harper meant when he said "technological truth" and "good science".
Right on!! Actually Paul Hellyer was an older politician who believed strongly in inherited wealth and the proof for enacted self-reliance of the usefulness of the finances. Finances were good order in his time and the U.S. took advantage of that with eventually a brain drain into America, which Helyer was worried about. But figure greedy scientists.
Canada's science minister, the man at the centre of the controversy over federal funding cuts to researchers, won't say if he believes in evolution.
"I'm not going to answer that question. I am a Christian, and I don't think anybody asking a question about my religion is appropriate," Gary Goodyear, the federal Minister of State for Science and Technology, said in an interview with The Globe and Mail.
The fact that he thinks a question about whether or not the Minister of State for Science and Technology accepts established science is a 'religious question' says volumes.
Is acceptance of evolution essential to the performance of that office?
No one politician can please everybody.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
