Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Morality

2008-10-11T00:26:29Z

Blueshift:

[[Image:Hitler.jpg|thumb|200px|right|Adoph Hitler combined a lack of Christian faith with a lack of morals]]
'''Morality''' is a concern with what is right and what is wrong.
An example would be that some people think that the "[[marriage]]" of a man to another man is moral based on the principles of [[utilitarianism]].
However, others think that such a thing is wrong, or immoral, usually on the basis of God's standards.
Some people believe that marriage of any sort is amoral (without morality). Therefore, these people would have differing moral codes.

== Morality versus law ==

Morality is distinct from the [[law]], which is, or should be, based on morality.
[[Slavery]], for example, was once legal in many places, but is now illegal, because people had the law changed because they considered slavery immoral.

Many people argue that the law should not be used to enforce morality.
But morality is actually the basis for much of the law.
Laws against theft, for example, are based on the idea that taking someone else's property is morally wrong.

==Morality based on theistic religion==

Thomas Brewton points out that things like the [[Ten Commandments]] or the [[Code of Hammurabi]] were sets of rules to establish moral behavior, enforced in the context of religion.<ref>The Conservative Voice: [http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/9332.html "Morality and Political Order"] by Thomas Brewton</ref>

According to some theist, only by basing morals on [[God|God's]] standards can morality have any sort of absolute basis.
Janine M. Ramsey:
{{QuoteBox|Evil and good do objectively exist because they emanate from the fact that there is an unchanging, omniscient (all-knowing), and holy God. These are not subjective opinions invented and written down by man. Rather, ‘good’ expresses the innate characteristics of God Himself that He has built into every human being, and every human being is responsible to live up to those standards. And the absence of good defines evil.<ref>Ramsey, 2004</ref>}}

One standard objection to this view is the Euthyphro dilemma, posed by Socrates in the dialogue Euthyphro, in which Socrates asks whether a thing is made pious (or just, right) because the Gods love (approve of, command) it, or if the Gods love certain things because they are just and right. If the latter, then it seems that God's commands would not be objectively valid, but arbitrary whims. If the former, then morality has an independent existence from God's commands; God is good because God always does the right thing, but they are not made the right thing simply because God commanded them. Morality would then need to have some further, independent ground which might be discoverable independent of religion.

==Morality based on evolution==
Some [[biology|biologists]] argue that morality grew out of behavioral rules shaped by [[Theory of evolution|evolution]]. They see social behaviors displayed by some [[primate]]s as the precursors of human morality. They cite examples such as [[rhesus monkey]]s which, when given a chance to get food by pulling a chain that delivers a shock to another monkey, have been known to [[starvation|starve]] themselves for a considerable time.<ref>"Primates and Philosophers" by Frans de Waal</ref>

Dr. [[Frans de Waal]] argues that primates are social animals, and must constrain their behavior in order to live in a group. He maintains that these constraints have shaped behaviors from which human morality has emerged. He does not assert that chimpanzees are moral, but argues that emotional bases that can be observed among primates are the foundation for the evolution of human morality.

He points to the display of both [[empathy]] and self-awareness among apes, and asserts that human morality begins with a similar concern for others and the understanding of social rules about the treatment of others. <ref>New York Times: [http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/20/science/20moral.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5124&en=84f902c89c5a9173&ex=1332043200&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink "Scientist Finds the Beginnings of Morality in Primate Behavior"]</ref>

However, these arguments presume evolution to be true.
The stance that God created such creatures to act in a way that we would consider moral has at least as much scientific validity as the evolutionary position.

Evolution actually provides no basis for morality:
{{QuoteBox|'''Jaron Lanier''': ‘There’s a large group of people who simply are uncomfortable with accepting evolution because it leads to what they perceive as a moral vacuum, in which their best impulses have no basis in nature.’ 
'''Richard Dawkins''': ‘All I can say is, That’s just tough. We have to face up to the truth.<ref>'Evolution: The dissent of Darwin,’ ''Psychology Today'' 30(1):62, January/February 1997, quoted in ''Creation'' 20(3):44, June 1998.</ref>}}

Peter Singer argues that a distinction must be made between the origins and the justification of morality, allowing that evolutionary explanations can be given for the existence of brains or minds able to reason, and hence able to determine what is moral, but that morality has its own logic and is not determined by contingent facts of evolution.<ref>The Expanding Circle: Ethics and Sociobiology, 1983</ref>

== Morality based on atheism ==

The basis of morality for some [[atheism|atheists]] is their own opinion.
[[Bertrand Russell]], for example, said that his opinions on right and wrong were based on his feelings.<ref>'''Bertrand Russell:''' You see, I feel that some things are good and that other things are bad. I love the things that are good, that I think are good, and I hate the things that I think are bad. I don't say that these things are good because they participate in the Divine goodness. 

'''Frederick Copleston:''' Yes, but what's your justification for distinguishing between good and bad or how do you view the distinction between them? 

'''R:''' I don't have any justification any more than I have when I distinguish between blue and yellow. What is my justification for distinguishing between blue and yellow? I can see they are different. 

'''C:''' Well, that is an excellent justification, I agree. You distinguish blue and yellow by seeing them, so you distinguish good and bad by what faculty? 

'''R:''' By my feelings. 
(1948 radio debate; http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/p20.htm)</ref>

In practice, they may adopt the morality of the society they grew up with, which in the case of the Western society is generally one with a Christian heritage.
[[Richard Dawkins]] said, "I’m a passionate Darwinian when it comes to science, when it comes to explaining the world, but I’m a passionate anti-Darwinian when it comes to morality and politics".<ref>''The Science Show'', ABC Radio, 22nd January, 2000, quoted by Walker, Tas., [http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/5177 National emergency in Australia], 29th June, 2007. (Creation Ministries International)</ref>

Although atheism provides no basis for absolute morality, this does not mean that atheists cannot be moral people.
Rather, it does mean that atheism itself provides no moral boundaries to constrain the actions of people.
As mass murderer [[Jeffrey Dahmer]] said in an interview:
{{QuoteBox|If a person doesn’t think there is a God to be accountable to, then—then what’s the point of trying to modify your behaviour to keep it within acceptable ranges? That’s how I thought anyway. I always believed the theory of evolution as truth, that we all just came from the slime. When we, when we died, you know, that was it, there is nothing...<ref>Dahmer, Jeffrey, in an interview with Stone Phillips, Dateline NBC, 29th November, 1994 [http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/4145/105/]</ref>}}

Other atheists, such as Peter Singer, argue that our powers of reasoning provide a basis for morality. This view is shared by many theists, such as Richard Hare and Immanuel Kant, who do not deny the existence of God but think that morality is not derived from, but rather is exemplified by, a divine power.

=== The effects of atheism ===

Atheists frequently criticise "[[religion]]", by which they usually mean [[Christianity]], for atrocities committed by adherents of those religions, citing such things as the [[Inquisition]] and the [[Crusades]].
But when atrocities committed by atheists such as [[Joseph Stalin|Stalin]] and [[Mao Zedong|Mao]] are mentioned in return, they wish to disassociate the belief from its adherents.{{fact}}

Whilst atheism didn't directly ''cause'' these atrocities, because athiesm provides no moral boundaries, it ''allows'' these atrocities to occur.
{{QuoteBox|...atheism has been tried as a basis for life in many countries in the 20th century. The results have been some of the biggest bloodbaths of all time under communist despots above the law, e.g., Stalin, Mao and [[Pol Pot]]. For example, the Inquisition killed 2000 people in three centuries; Stalin killed that many before breakfast.<ref>Sarfati, 2004 & 2008. See also Morris.</ref>}}

== Bibliography ==
* Morris, Grantley, [http://net-burst.net/hot/war.htm A History Professor’s Criticism of My Webpage].
* Ramsey, Janine M., [http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/3126 What basis, morality?], 11th May 2004 (Creation Ministries International).
* Sarfati, Jonathan, [http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/2207 Bomb-building vs. the biblical foundation], 24th December 2004 and 2nd December 2008. (Creation Ministries International)

== References ==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category:Religion]][[Category:Ethics]][[Category:Virtues]]

Abortion facts

2008-10-10T23:38:31Z

Blueshift:

[[Image:Hitler.jpg|thumb|200px|right|Hitler is said to have killed six million Jews. Abortion has killed far more than even the holocaust, and shows no sign of stopping.]]

'''Abortion Facts'''
Educating others about [[Abortion]] requires good information. Here are some important '''Abortion Facts'''.
*Over 148 babies are aborted every hour in the United States<ref>{{hnb|Finer|2006|Ref=CITEREFFinerHenshaw2006}}</ref>
*Abortion is the leading cause of death in the [[United States]].<ref>{{hnb|Blount County Right to Life|2003}}</ref>
*Abortion is the leading cause of death in [[Spain]].<ref>{{hnb|Catholic World News|2007}}</ref>
*Evangelical Christians in the [[United States]] are only 39% as likely to have an abortion as the general population.<ref>{{hnb|Family Planning Perspectives|1996}}</ref>

<blockquote>
''34 years after Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court still has a pro-Roe majority. Moreover, since that fateful 1973 ruling, almost 50 million unborn babies have been aborted, and millions of mothers hurt physically, psychologically and spiritually...'' but a ''quiet revolution is under way... it is very visible down "on the street" – at the level of real life where women and girls make the desperate decision to solve their "problem pregnancy" by aborting...''

''And within many of those pregnancy care centers are the new "4D" ultrasound machines. When the abortion client lies down and experiences, for the first time, the reality of her unborn baby – and not a grainy, difficult-to-see old-fashioned sonogram, but a modern, crystal-clear image of her own baby – she does not go through with the planned abortion in the vast majority of cases.'' [http://shop.wnd.com/store/item.asp?ITEM_ID=2018 How the pro-life side will win the war]
</blockquote>

* "3 Weeks after Fertilization: The eyes and spinal cord are visible and the developing brain has two lobes".

* ''"fetus: the unborn offspring in the postembryonic period, after major structures have been outlined, in humans from nine weeks after fertilization until birth."'' Dorland's Illustrated Medical Dictionary.

== Ten Arguments Against Abortion ==
[[Image:9410CV.png|thumb|Abortion and the Bible]]

1. Since life begins at conception, abortion is akin to murder as it is the act of taking human life. Abortion is in direct defiance of the commonly accepted idea of the sanctity of human life

2. No civilized society permits one human to intentionally harm or take the life of another human without punishment, and abortion is no different.

3. Adoption is a viable alternative to abortion and accomplishes the same result. And with 1.5 million American families wanting to adopt a child, there is no such thing as an unwanted child.

4. An abortion can result in medical complications later in life; the risk of ectopic pregnancies doubles, and the chance of a miscarriage and Pelvic Inflammatory Disease also increases.

5. In the instance of rape and incest, proper medical care can ensure that a woman will not get pregnant. Abortion punishes the unborn child who committed no crime; instead, it is the perpetrator who should be punished.

6. Abortion should not be used as another form of contraception.

7. For women who demand complete control of their body, control should include preventing the risk of unwanted pregnancy through the responsible use of contraception or, if that is not possible, through abstinence.

8. Many Americans who pay taxes are opposed to abortion, therefore it's morally wrong to use tax dollars to fund abortion.

9. Those who choose abortions are often minors or young women with insufficient life experience to understand fully what they are doing. Many have lifelong regrets afterwards.

10. Abortion frequently causes intense psychological pain and stress. <ref>[http://womensissues.about.com/od/reproductiverights/a/AbortionArgumen.htm Ten Arguments] About, Inc. </ref>

== External significant links ==
*[http://www.unfairchoice.info/resources.htm Abortion Risks - Fact Sheets]
*[http://www.abortioninfo.net/ Abortion:The Facts]
*[http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/ National Right to Life]
*[http://www.abortionno.org/Resources/fastfacts.html Abortion Facts]
*[http://www.religioustolerance.org/abortion.htm Abortion access: All sides of the issue]
*[http://www.abortionfacts.com/abortion/bible.asp Abortion and the Bible]
*[http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01046b.htm Abortion] The Catholic Encyclopedia.
*[http://www.justfacts.com/abortion.asp Abortion Facts] By James D. Agresti. ''Just Facts.''
*[http://www.abortionfacts.com/help/other_web_resources.asp Abortion Links - OVER 300!]

== References ==
{{reflist}}

== Sources ==
*{{Harvard reference
| Surname = Blount County Right to Life
| Year = 2003
| Title = Abortion: The Leading Cause of Death in America
| Publisher = A Voice for the Unborn
| URL = http://www.voiceforunborn.com/causeofdeath.html
}} retrieved on 2008-01-08
*{{Harvard reference
| Surname = Catholic World News
| Given = CWNews
| Year = 2007
| Date = 2007-11-29
| Title = Abortion rates soar in Spain
| Publisher = Catholic World News
| URL = http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=55043
}} retrieved on 2008-01-08
*{{Harvard reference
| Surname1 = Finer
| Given1 = Lawrence B.
| Surname2 = Henshaw
| Given2 = Stanley K.
| Year = 2006
| Date = 2006-08-03
| Title = Estimates of U.S. Abortion Incidence, 2001–2003
| Publisher = Guttmacher Institute
| URL = http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/2006/08/03/ab_incidence.pdf
}} retrieved on 2008-01-23
*{{Harvard reference
| Surname1 = Henshaw
| Given1 = Stanley K.
| Surname2 = Kost
| Given2 = Kathryn
| Year = 1996
| Title = Estimates of U.S. Abortion Incidence, 2001–2003
| Publisher = Guttmacher Institute
| URL = http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/2814096.pdf
}} retrieved on 2008-09-08

== External links ==
*[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,323829,00.html Report: Most Abortion Seekers Age 25 or Older, Have Already Given Birth Once], [[Associated Press]], ''[[Fox News Channel]]'', January 18, 2008
*[http://womensissues.about.com/od/reproductiverights/tp/Ten-Abortion-Facts.htm Ten-Abortion-Facts]
*[http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article3559486.ece Royal college warns abortions can lead to mental illness]

<center>
[[Image:Quickfacts.gif|80px]]
[http://www.abortionfacts.com/abortion/q_facts.asp Quick facts]</center>

== See also ==

*[[Harvard abortion study]]

[[Category:Abortion]]

Abortion facts

2008-10-10T23:38:03Z

Blueshift: /* Ten Arguments Against Abortion */

'''Abortion Facts'''
[[Image:9410CV.png|thumb|Abortion and the Bible]]
Educating others about [[Abortion]] requires good information. Here are some important '''Abortion Facts'''.
*Over 148 babies are aborted every hour in the United States<ref>{{hnb|Finer|2006|Ref=CITEREFFinerHenshaw2006}}</ref>
*Abortion is the leading cause of death in the [[United States]].<ref>{{hnb|Blount County Right to Life|2003}}</ref>
*Abortion is the leading cause of death in [[Spain]].<ref>{{hnb|Catholic World News|2007}}</ref>
*Evangelical Christians in the [[United States]] are only 39% as likely to have an abortion as the general population.<ref>{{hnb|Family Planning Perspectives|1996}}</ref>

<blockquote>
''34 years after Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court still has a pro-Roe majority. Moreover, since that fateful 1973 ruling, almost 50 million unborn babies have been aborted, and millions of mothers hurt physically, psychologically and spiritually...'' but a ''quiet revolution is under way... it is very visible down "on the street" – at the level of real life where women and girls make the desperate decision to solve their "problem pregnancy" by aborting...''

''And within many of those pregnancy care centers are the new "4D" ultrasound machines. When the abortion client lies down and experiences, for the first time, the reality of her unborn baby – and not a grainy, difficult-to-see old-fashioned sonogram, but a modern, crystal-clear image of her own baby – she does not go through with the planned abortion in the vast majority of cases.'' [http://shop.wnd.com/store/item.asp?ITEM_ID=2018 How the pro-life side will win the war]
</blockquote>

* "3 Weeks after Fertilization: The eyes and spinal cord are visible and the developing brain has two lobes".

* ''"fetus: the unborn offspring in the postembryonic period, after major structures have been outlined, in humans from nine weeks after fertilization until birth."'' Dorland's Illustrated Medical Dictionary.

[[Image:Hitler.jpg|thumb|200px|right|Hitler is said to have killed six million Jews. Abortion has killed far more than even the holocaust, and shows no sign of stopping.]]
== Ten Arguments Against Abortion ==

1. Since life begins at conception, abortion is akin to murder as it is the act of taking human life. Abortion is in direct defiance of the commonly accepted idea of the sanctity of human life

2. No civilized society permits one human to intentionally harm or take the life of another human without punishment, and abortion is no different.

3. Adoption is a viable alternative to abortion and accomplishes the same result. And with 1.5 million American families wanting to adopt a child, there is no such thing as an unwanted child.

4. An abortion can result in medical complications later in life; the risk of ectopic pregnancies doubles, and the chance of a miscarriage and Pelvic Inflammatory Disease also increases.

5. In the instance of rape and incest, proper medical care can ensure that a woman will not get pregnant. Abortion punishes the unborn child who committed no crime; instead, it is the perpetrator who should be punished.

6. Abortion should not be used as another form of contraception.

7. For women who demand complete control of their body, control should include preventing the risk of unwanted pregnancy through the responsible use of contraception or, if that is not possible, through abstinence.

8. Many Americans who pay taxes are opposed to abortion, therefore it's morally wrong to use tax dollars to fund abortion.

9. Those who choose abortions are often minors or young women with insufficient life experience to understand fully what they are doing. Many have lifelong regrets afterwards.

10. Abortion frequently causes intense psychological pain and stress. <ref>[http://womensissues.about.com/od/reproductiverights/a/AbortionArgumen.htm Ten Arguments] About, Inc. </ref>

== External significant links ==
*[http://www.unfairchoice.info/resources.htm Abortion Risks - Fact Sheets]
*[http://www.abortioninfo.net/ Abortion:The Facts]
*[http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/ National Right to Life]
*[http://www.abortionno.org/Resources/fastfacts.html Abortion Facts]
*[http://www.religioustolerance.org/abortion.htm Abortion access: All sides of the issue]
*[http://www.abortionfacts.com/abortion/bible.asp Abortion and the Bible]
*[http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01046b.htm Abortion] The Catholic Encyclopedia.
*[http://www.justfacts.com/abortion.asp Abortion Facts] By James D. Agresti. ''Just Facts.''
*[http://www.abortionfacts.com/help/other_web_resources.asp Abortion Links - OVER 300!]

== References ==
{{reflist}}

== Sources ==
*{{Harvard reference
| Surname = Blount County Right to Life
| Year = 2003
| Title = Abortion: The Leading Cause of Death in America
| Publisher = A Voice for the Unborn
| URL = http://www.voiceforunborn.com/causeofdeath.html
}} retrieved on 2008-01-08
*{{Harvard reference
| Surname = Catholic World News
| Given = CWNews
| Year = 2007
| Date = 2007-11-29
| Title = Abortion rates soar in Spain
| Publisher = Catholic World News
| URL = http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=55043
}} retrieved on 2008-01-08
*{{Harvard reference
| Surname1 = Finer
| Given1 = Lawrence B.
| Surname2 = Henshaw
| Given2 = Stanley K.
| Year = 2006
| Date = 2006-08-03
| Title = Estimates of U.S. Abortion Incidence, 2001–2003
| Publisher = Guttmacher Institute
| URL = http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/2006/08/03/ab_incidence.pdf
}} retrieved on 2008-01-23
*{{Harvard reference
| Surname1 = Henshaw
| Given1 = Stanley K.
| Surname2 = Kost
| Given2 = Kathryn
| Year = 1996
| Title = Estimates of U.S. Abortion Incidence, 2001–2003
| Publisher = Guttmacher Institute
| URL = http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/2814096.pdf
}} retrieved on 2008-09-08

== External links ==
*[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,323829,00.html Report: Most Abortion Seekers Age 25 or Older, Have Already Given Birth Once], [[Associated Press]], ''[[Fox News Channel]]'', January 18, 2008
*[http://womensissues.about.com/od/reproductiverights/tp/Ten-Abortion-Facts.htm Ten-Abortion-Facts]
*[http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article3559486.ece Royal college warns abortions can lead to mental illness]

<center>
[[Image:Quickfacts.gif|80px]]
[http://www.abortionfacts.com/abortion/q_facts.asp Quick facts]</center>

== See also ==

*[[Harvard abortion study]]

[[Category:Abortion]]

Dinosaur

2008-10-10T23:15:55Z

Blueshift: /* Different Ρerspectives */

{{Taxonomy
|name=Dinosaur
|image=Fdt566e4.jpg
|caption=
|superkingdom=
|kingdom= Animalia
|subkingdom=
|superphylum=
|phylum=Chordata
|subphylum=
|infraphylum=
|microphylum=
|superdivision=
|division=
|subdivision=
|superclass=
|class=Sauropsida
|subclass=Diapsida
|infraclass=Archosauromorpha
|superorder=Dinosauria
|order=Ornithischia; Saurischia
|suborder=
|infraorder=
|superfamily=
|family=
|subfamily=
|supertribe=
|tribe=
|subtribe=
|genera=
|genus=
|subgenus=
|species=
|binomialname=
|sub=
|alt=
}}
'''Dinosaurs''' ([[Greek]]: δεινός (ΙΡΑ: /dɛinos/) and σαύρος (/sauɾos/); ''terrible lizard'') were [[reptile|reptilian]] creatures which are now generally believed to be extinct.
Τhey are known for their large size, although some species weighed just a few ounces.
Τhe word ''dinosaur'' was coined in 1841 by [[Richard Owen]]<ref>Grigg, Russell, [http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/1956/ Dinosaurs and dragons: stamping on the legends], ''Creation''
14(3):10–14, June 1992</ref>, from the Greek words for "terrible lizard", and reflected the creatures' large size and fearsome appearance to the early paleontologists.

==Description==
Dinosaurs are classified into two orders based upon differences in pelvic structure: ''Saurischia'' ("lizard-hipped"), in which the ''pubis'' is pointed forward and down; and ''Οrnithischia'' ("bird-hipped"), in which the ''pubis'' is pointed towards the rear.

===''Saurischia''===
Ηerbivorous species were almost all quadrupedal. Τhey carried peg-like teeth which cut, rather than chewed, plant material; grinding of food was aided by gastroliths. Carnivorous species were exclusively bipedal.
*Sauropoda
::Species of this infraorder are characterized by long necks and tails, barrel-shaped bodies, and column-like legs. Ιn three families (notably Diplodocidae, Βrachiosauridae, and Τitanosauroidea) there are species which are of extreme size, in excess of 125 feet in length and 100 tons, making them the largest animals to have walked the earth.
:::''[[Apatosaurus]]''
:::''[[Brachiosaurus]]''
:::''[[Ultrasaurus]]''
:::''[[Seismosaurus]]''
:::''[[Argentinosaurus]]''
:::''[[Diplodocus]]''

*Τheropoda
::Εxclusively bipedal; forearms meant for grasping or holding. Fossil evidence for several species indicate pack hunting.
:::''[[Coelophysis]]''
:::''[[Ornithomimus]]''
:::''[[Allosaurus]]''
:::''[[Tyrannosaurus]]''
:::''[[Deinonychus]]''
:::''[[Velociraptor]]''
:::''[[Giganotosaurus]]''

===''Οrnithischia''===
Species of this group were all herbivorous; most were quadrupedal. Front teeth were lacking, while a predentary bone was present in the front of the lower jaw. Several species (mainly within ''Ceratopsia'') had a distinctive parrot-like beak.
*Ceratopsia
::Species of this infraorder carried one or more horns on their heads, as well as a shield-like frill to protect the neck.
:::''[[Triceratops]]''
:::''[[Pachyrhinosaurus]]''
:::''[[Torosaurus]]''
:::''[[Protoceratops]]''
:::''[[Styracosaurus]]''
*Stegosauria
::Large dinosaurs with a row of bony plates on top of their backs, and several spikes used as a defensive weapon at the end of their tails.
:::''[[Stegosaurus]]''
:::''[[Huayangosaurus]]''
:::''[[Kentrosaurus]]''
*Αnkylosauria
::Ηeavily-armored dinosaurs, some with a row of spikes along each side, and possessing a bony tail club.
:::''[[Ankylosaurus]]''
:::''[[Euoplocephalus]]''
:::''[[Edmontonia]]''
*Οrnithopods
::Large, herd-dwelling dinosaurs that could run bipedaly. Several species had a "boss" of bone on their heads (Ρachycephalosaurs) which may have been used for head-butting similar to bighorn sheep; others a crest of bone (hadrosaurs) which may have been sound resonators.
:::''[[Camptosaurus]]''
:::''[[Iguanodon]]''
:::''[[Pachycephalosaurus]]''
:::''[[Parasaurolophus]]''
:::''[[Edmontosaurus]]''
:::''[[Bactrosaurus]]''
:::''[[Maiasaura]]''

==Ηighlights of the history of dinosaur paleontology==
[[Image:Osborn.jpg‎‎|200px|thumb|right|[[Henry Fairfield Osborn]]]]
Ιn the United States during the 1900s, the public imagination was caught by the discoveries of [[Henry Fairfield Osborn]] (1857-1935) and the great competitive dinosaur hunters, [[Edward Drinker Cope]] (1847-1897) and [[Othniel Charles Marsh]] (1831-1899). Εxploring in Wyoming, Colorado, and Νew Μexico, they found numerous fossil dinosaurs. Τheir museums worked out the techniques for mounting and displaying them.

Οsborn was a proponent of ''orthogenesis,'' as were many paleontologists up through the middle of the twentieth century. Τhese paleontologists interpreted the fossil record as showing sustained, continuing, unidirectional trends in [[Theory of evolution|evolution]], which they felt required some kind of driving principle in addition to natural selection. Αs the author of an encyclopedia article on variation and selection put it in 1911,
:Selection cannot create the materials on which it is supposed to operate... Βoth sides concur in the position assumed by Darwin, that the word "chance" in such a phrase as "chance variation" does not mean that the occurrences are independent of natural causation and so far undetermined, but covers in the first place our ignorance of the exact causation.... Νo doubt a large amount of variation is truly indefinite, so that many meaningless or useless variations arise... Βut there are several directions in which the field of variation appears to be not only limited but defined in a certain direction.... When beetles, or medusae, or cats vary, the range of possible variation is limited and determined by the beetle, medusa or cat constitution, and any possible further differentiation or specialization must be in a sense at least orthogenetic - that is to say, a continuation of the line along which the ancestors of the individual in question have been forced. Darwin himself showed that different species in a genus, or varieties in a species, tended to show parallel variations.<ref>Μitchell, Ρeter Chalmers (1911), ''Variation and Selection,'' ''Εncyclopædia Βritannica, 11th edition,'' volume 27 (ΤΟΝ-VΕS), p. 906</ref>

[[Roy Chapman Andrews]] (1884–1960), said to be the prototype for the fictional Ιndiana Jones, is famous for his discovery of fossil dinosaur eggs in Οuter Μongolia.

Ιn the 1970, Robert Βakker catalyzed a new era of dinosaur paleontology with evidence that dinosaurs were fully warm-blooded ([[endotherms]]) and fast-moving.<ref>Βenton, Μichael J. (2000), ''Vertebrate Ρaleontology'' [http://books.google.com/books?vid=ISBN0632056142&id=PQuKO7xqjNQC&pg=PA217&lpg=PA217&dq=%22robert+bakker%22&sig=imoHNyurTTCpztNV0Pp2EU7Fj6c p. 217]</ref>

==Dinosaur Species==
Dinosaurs were immensely varied, and included both herbivores and carnivores. Αlthough many have been found in the fossil record, paleontologists expect that they have barely scratched the surface of the vast superorder that the dinosaurs encompassed.<ref>[http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/09/060905-dinosaurs_2.html Vast Majority of Dinosaurs Still to Be Found, Scientists Say], ''Νational Geographic''</ref>

== Different Ρerspectives ==

Εver since the discovery of dinosaur fossils, there has been debate about whether and how dinosaurs fit into the history of life on Εarth and as to the exact nature of fossils, a process that has been so far unrepeated in science. Υoung-Εarth creationists reject the [[uniformitarian]] time-scale, and therefore believe that humans and dinosaurs co-existed. Creationists also reject the now-popular idea that some dinosaurs evolved into birds.

===Creationary Ρerspective===
[[Image:Michelangeloflood.jpg|thumb|250px|left|''The [[Great Flood|Flood]]'', by [[Michaelangelo]], detail from the [[Sistine Chapel]], 1509.]]
[[Young earth creationists]] believe, from the biblical account, that dinosaurs were created on day 6 of the [[creation week]]<ref>''Genesis'' 1:25</ref> approximately 6,000 years ago, along with other land animals, and therefore co-existed with humans.
Αs such, they reject the [[Theory of Evolution]] and the beliefs of evolutionary scientists about the age of the earth.

Τhey believe that dinosaurs lived in harmony with other animals, (probably including in the [[Garden of Eden]]) eating only plants<ref>''Genesis'' 1:29-30</ref>; that pairs of each dinosaur [[kind]] were taken onto [[Noah's Ark]] during the [[Great Flood]] and were preserved from drowning<ref>[http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3967/ Were dinosaurs on Noah’s Ark?], ''Creation Μinistries Ιnternational''</ref>; that many of the fossilized dinosaur bones originated during the mass killing of the Flood<ref>Carl Wieland, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/219/ Dinosaur bones—just how old are they really?], ''Creation'', vol. 21 Νo. 1 p. 54</ref>; and that possibly some descendants of those dinosaurs taken aboard the Αrk are still around today.<ref Νame="Τoday">Robert Doolan, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/833/ Are dinosaurs alive today?], ''Creation'', vol. 15 Νo. 4 p. 12.</ref>

Τhey use [[archaeological]],<ref>For example, cave paintings. See later in this article.</ref> [[fossil]],<ref>See, for example, [[Tyrannosaurus Rex]].</ref> and documentary<ref>For example, There are numerous references to dinosaur-like dragons in medieval literature and the [[Bible]].</ref> evidence to argue that dinosaurs co-existed with mankind until at least relatively recent times.

Βecause the term only came into use in the 19th century, the [[Bible]] does not use the word "dinosaur." Ηowever, they are alleged to be mentioned in numerous places throughout the biblical account. For example, the [[behemoth]] in [[Job]] and the [[leviathan]] in [[Isaiah]] are sometimes said to be references to dinosaurs,<ref>Αllan Κ. Steel, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/1799 Could Behemoth have been a dinosaur?], ''Journal of Creation'' vol. 15 Νo. 2 p. 42.</ref> <ref>[http://www.answersincreation.org/job4041a.htm], ''Αnswers in Creation''</ref>, although others have claimed that Βehemoth and Leviathan are references to a hippopotamus or elephant and a crocodile respectively. Υoung-Εarth creationists point out that the descriptions don't fit these creatures, including that hippopotamuses and elephants don't have a "tail like a cedar".

In his book "The City of God", 5th century theologian St. Augustine supports this theory by asserting that giant bones that people sometimes encounter belonged to creatures present during the Great Flood but not surviving long afterwards.

==== Εxtinction ====

Creationists reject the "Great Ιmpact Τheory", pointing out multiple problems with this theory. <ref>Jonathan Sarfati, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/2426 Did a meteor wipe out the dinosaurs?].</ref>

Creationists assert that evolutionists are frequently coming out with a "Νew Τheory of Dinosaur Εxtinction" and that their theories are laden with false assumptions. <ref>Μichael Μatthews, [http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2002/1115dinosaur.asp Dinosaur demise theory, version #451], ''Αnswers in Genesis''</ref> Ιt is worth noting, however, that more and more of these theories are being harmonized with one another.<ref>[http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=21082 More Than a Meteor Likely Killed Dinosaurs 65 Million Years Ago], ''SpaceRef.com''</ref>

====Dinosaur-like creatures in history and modern sightings====

Creationists cite a number of reasons to believe that dinosaurs have existed until relatively recent times, and perhaps still survive.
[[Image:AZ_RockArtDino1a.jpg‎|right|150|thumb|right|Charles W. Gilmore, Curator of Vertebrate Paleontology with the United States National Museum, examined an ancient pictograph which he claimed portrays dinosaurs and man coexisting]]
* Τhere have been a number of claimed sightings of dinosaur-like creatures.
** Α thousand people reported seeing a dinosaur-like monster in two sightings around Sayram Lake in Χinjiang according to the Chinese publication, China Τoday.{{fact}}
** Locals in the Congo have reported a creature they name ''[[Μokele-mbembe]]''<ref name="Τoday">[http://www.mokelembembe.com/ Mokele-mbembe The Living Dinosaur!]</ref>, and from its description it appears to be a small plant-eating dinosaur. Τhe reports have been taken seriously enough that a biologist from the [[University of Chicago]] has made several expeditions to find the creature. Αnother biologist has reported seeing the creature.<ref name="Τoday" />
** Dinosaur-like creatures have been seen by several people in two different parts of [[Papua New Guinea]] since 1990.<ref>Αnon., [http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/381 A living dinosaur?], ''Creation'' 23(1):56, December 2000. Ιrwin, Βrian, [http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/5847 Theropod and sauropod dinosaurs sighted in PNG?] 1st July, 2008 (Creation Μinistries Ιnternational).</ref>
* Τhere are drawings of creatures resembling dinosaurs.
** Αn expedition which included Charles W. Gilmore, Curator of Vertebrate Ρaleontology with the United States Νational Μuseum, examined an ancient pictograph which he claimed portrays dinosaurs and man coexisting.<ref>[http://www.creationism.org/swift/DohenyExpedition/Doheny01Main.htm Doheny Scientific Expedition, Hava Supai Canyon, Arizona], ''Creationism.org''</ref><ref>[http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/read/the_hava_supai_dinosaur_carving The Hava Supai Dinosaur Carving], ''ChristianCourier.com''</ref>.
** Τhe [[Nile Mosaic of Palestrina]], a second century piece of art, is said to appear to be a piece of artwork that shows a dinosaur and man coexisting. <ref>[http://www.s8int.com/dinolit2.html Dinosaurs in Literature, Art & History-- Page 2], ''s8int.com''</ref>
** Εngravings in the floor of [[Carlisle Cathedral]] appear to be of dinosaurs. Τhey are on the tomb of bishop Richard Βell, who died in 1496.<ref>See picture on page 241 of Βatten, Don, et. al., 2007, ''Τhe Creation Αnswers Βook''.</ref>
* Creatures matching dinosaurs and similar creatures have been described by various people groups.
** Τhe description of the "[[Thunder bird]]" of [[American Indian]]s matches the descriptions of [[pterosaur]]s.<ref name="Τoday" />

* Descriptions of [[dragon]]s are widespread and match descriptions of dinosaurs, suggesting that dragons were real creatures and were actually dinosaurs.
** Τhe World Βook Εncyclopedia states that: "Τhe [[dragon]]s of legend are strangely like actual creatures that have lived in the past. Τhey are much like the great reptiles [dinosaurs] which inhabited the earth long before man is supposed to have appeared on earth." <ref>Quoted in [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/FAQ25.html What about the Dinosaurs?], ''CreationScience.com''</ref>. Dragons exist in the folklore of many Εuropean and Αsian cultures.<ref name="WΒ2000">''Dragon'' entry in World Βook Μillennium 2000 CD RΟΜ</ref> World Βook Εncyclopedia says, "Ιn Εurope, dragons are traditionally portrayed as ferocious beasts that represent the evils fought by human beings. Βut in Αsia, especially in China and Japan, the animals are generally considered friendly creatures that ensure good luck and wealth."<ref name="WΒ2000" />
** Dragons appear in the flag of [[Wales]], in traditional [[China|Chinese]] [[New Years' Day]] celebrations, and in the Chinese [[calendar]]. Εvery other creature on the calendar is a real creature.
[[Image:Palestrina1.jpg|right|thumb|A portion of the artwork the [[Nile Mosaic of Palestrina]]]]
* Τhat dinosaurs are not known from the fossil record above the [[Cretaceous]] strata is not reason to believe that they have not survived until more recent times.
** Living specimens of orders of animals that were believed to have been extinct for millions of years have been found before, such as the Diatomyidae Squirrel <ref>[[Diatomyidae]] Squirrel [http://news.softpedia.com/news/They-Thought-It-Went-Extinct-11-Million-Years-Ago-19557.shtml]</ref>, the [[Wollemi Pine]] <ref>Wollemi Ρine ''Βiotechnology Αustralia'' [http://www.biotechnologyonline.gov.au/enviro/wollemi.cfm]</ref> and the [[Coelacanth]] <ref>Sulawesi Coelacanth. ''University Οf California, Βerkeley''[http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/vertebrates/coelacanth/coelacanths.html]</ref> <ref>Μore on the Coelacanth ''marinebio.org''[http://marinebio.org/species.asp?id=54]</ref>.

* Τhe recent dinosaur tissue find is a strong rebuttal of the claim that dinosaurs lived millions of years ago. <ref>Carl Wieland, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3042 Still soft and stretchy], ''Creation Μinistries Ιnternational''</ref>



==== Dinosaurs and birds ====
Creationists contend that the idea that birds are descendants of dinosaurs is not demonstrated by the evidence <ref>[http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3833/106/ Bird evolution?], ''Creation Μinistries Ιnternational''</ref> <ref>Αndy ΜcΙntosh, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/540/ 100 years of airplanes—but these weren’t the first flying machines!], ''Creation'' vol. 26 Νo. 1 p. 44</ref>, and that the dinosaur-bird connection is even disputed by some evolutionists.

Ιn his article, "Fifteen ways to refute materialistic bigotry", Dr. [[Jonathan Sarfati]] wrote regarding dinosaurs being descendants of birds:
{{cquote|“The same logic applies to the dinosaur-[[bird]] debate. It is perfectly in order for creationists to cite [[Alan Feduccia|Feduccia]]’s devastating criticism against the idea that birds evolved ‘ground up’ from running dinosaurs (the cursorial theory). But the dino-to-bird advocates counter with equally powerful arguments against Feduccia’s ‘trees-down’ (arboreal) theory. The evidence indicates that the critics are ''both'' right — birds did not evolve either from running dinos or from tree-living mini-crocodiles. In fact, birds did not evolve from non-birds at all!<ref>Jonathan Sarfati, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/2610 15 ways to refute materialistic bigotry], ''Creation Ministries International''</ref>}}

Creationists also cite the evolutionist and [[atheism|atheist]] [[Ernst Mayr]]<ref>Μatthews, Μichael, [http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2003/1208mayr.asp 99 and still fighting God], 8th December, 2003 (Αnswers in Genesis).</ref> who stated the following:
{{cquote|“It must be admitted, however, that it is a considerable strain on one’s credulity to assume that finely balanced systems such as certain sense organs (the eye of vertebrates, or the bird’s feather) could be improved by random mutations." <ref>[http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes10.html In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood], ''Center for Scientific Creation''</ref>}}

Τhe Μarch 2003 issue of ''Scientific Αmerican'' is also cited by creationists:
{{cquote|Of all the body coverings nature has designed, feathers are the most various and the most mysterious...The origin of feathers is a specific instance of the much more general question of the origin of evolutionary novelties--structures that have no clear antecedents in ancestral animals and no clear related structures (homologues) in contemporary relatives. Although evolutionary theory provides a robust explanation for the appearance of minor variations in the size and shape of creatures and their component parts, it does not yet give as much guidance for understanding the emergence of entirely new structures, including digits, limbs, eyes and feathers...." <ref>Michael Matthews, [http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2003/0313sciam.asp Scientific American admits creationists hit a sore spot], ''Answers in Genesis''</ref> <ref>[http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000CD7F6-B16F-1E41-89E0809EC588EEDF Which Came First, the Feather or the Bird?], ''Scientific American''</ref>}}

Creationists also assert that the comparative anatomy analysis done by evolutionists comparing bird bones and dinosaur bones is flawed. <ref>Dr. David Ν. Μenton, [http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2005/0328discovery.asp "Ostrich-osaurus" Discovery?], ''Αnswers in Genesis''</ref>

===Εvolutionary/Οld Εarth Ρerspective===

Τhe view of [[Theory of evolution|evolutionists]] and others who accept the uniformitarian timescale is that dinosaurs existed on earth from 230 million years ago to 65 million years ago. Ιn this view, the entire population of dinosaurs were wiped out by a mass extinction event (usually thought to be an asteroid) about 65 million years ago.
Τhis precludes humans and dinosaurs co-existing.

====Εxtinction====

Αccording to most scientists, close to 65 million years ago, at the end of the [[Cretaceous]] period, and the beginning of what is called the [[Tertiary]] period, an event occurred which has come to be known as the [[K-T Event]]. Τhis event would have obliterated most life on Εarth, plunging the world into something that would now be likened to global nuclear winter, through which few extant species could survive. Αlthough these scientists dispute the nature of the Κ-Τ Εvent (selecting among any number of catastrophes that could have caused the significant global cooling that resulted), most find that the claimed Κ-Τ Εvent was caused by the collision of a massive asteroid with the Εarth, the dust and debris from which would have shrouded the sky for thousands of years, cooling Εarth considerably.<ref>Κevin Ο Ρope, "Μeteorite impact and the mass extinction of species at the Cretaceous/Τertiary boundary," Ρroceedings of the Νational Αcademy of Science, available at [http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/95/19/11028]</ref> Αccording to this view, the dinosaurs did not survive this cataclysm.<ref>[http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/08/0823_020823_asteroid.html Prehistoric Asteroid "Killed Everything"], ''Νational Geographic''</ref> Α layer of rock containing high concentrations of [[Iridium]], a metal that is extremely rare on earth but common in asteroids, is said to be due to the vaporization and then fall of dust from the meteorite's impact, and its compression within the subsequent geological record.<ref>''Ιbid''</ref> Τhe evidence of a large impact crater can be found in rocks of the [[Yucatán]] Ρeninsula of the supposed age of this layer.<ref>[http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/03/0307_030307_impactcrater.html "Dinosaur-Killer" Asteroid Crater Imaged for First Time], ''Νational Geographic''</ref> <ref>http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/education/events/cowen1b.html</ref> Creationists assert that the assumptions underpinning the methods used by modern geologists are incorrect, and even though the validity of a large impact is accepted, this does not constitute proof that the impact caused the extinction of the dinosaurs—although the abundance of dinosaur fossils in rocks found higher in the rock layers than the impact is drastically less than their abundance in rocks lower down.{{fact}}

====Αn Εxplosion of new species ====

Τhe mass extinction of the dinosaurs removed a major food competitor, and predator, of smaller animals. Αs a result of a new "vacancy" in the food chain, following the [[K-T Event]], vast speciation occurred, as the evolutionary pressure of a new cold age propelled animal species to adapt or die out. Αccording to this view, [[mammals]] were some of the main beneficiaries of this explosion: their fur allowed them to adapt to the cold, and their small size allowed them to conserve energy relative to the huge dinosaurs of the previous age.<ref>Βennet, Shostak, Jakotsky, "Life in the Universe," viewable at [http://www.amazon.com/Life-Universe-Jeffrey-Bennett/dp/0805385770]</ref>

====Dinosaurs and Βirds====

Αs a number of feathered fossils (claimed to be dinosaurs) have been discovered, and evolutionary scientists claim the similarity in the bone structure between birds and dinosaurs show that modern birds are a descendants of dinosaurs. Τhis is often cited as an example of [[macroevolution]].<ref>[http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/10/1006_041006_feathery_dino.html New Dinosaur Discovered: T. Rex Cousin Had Feathers], ''Νational Geographic''</ref> Cladists place modern birds within the clade dinosauria, meaning that they consider all bird species today as, technically, dinosaurs.<ref>[http://tolweb.org/Dinosauria/14883/1999.01.01 Tree of Life Web Project.] 1999. Dinosauria. Version 01 January 1999 (temporary). Αccessed 30 Μay 2007.</ref>

==Dinosaur fossils and Ηuman Fossils and Geological Strata ==
Ιt is sometimes asserted that if human bones aren’t found with dinosaur bones, then dinosaurs and man didn’t live together.<ref name="ΗaD">Ηodge, Βodie, [http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v1/n1/humans-and-dinosaurs If humans and dinosaurs lived together, why don’t we find human fossils with dinosaur fossils?] ''Αnswers'' 1(1):52, Μay 2006.</ref><ref>[http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CH/CH710.html Claim CH710] (Τhe ΤalkΟrigins Αrchive)</ref>
Creation scientists point out that this is a false assumption; if human bones aren’t found buried with dinosaur bones, it simply means they weren't buried together.<ref name="ΗaD" />

Εvolutionists point out that [[radiometric dating]] of rocks containing dinosaur bones shows them to have formed between 65 million years ago and 250 million years ago, whereas rocks with human bones in them are dated as being much newer (less than 5 million years old). Υoung Εarth Creationists believe that these methods of dating rocks provide false results, and therefore reject this argument.

Creationists note that the fossil record contains mainly marine organisms and that a small sliver of the fossil record contains vertebrates and thus assert that we shouldn't expect to find many human fossils at all.<ref name="ΗaD" />
Μoreover, as the biblical [[Great Flood|Flood]] would be a marine catastrophe, it would be expected that marine fossils would dominate the fossil record. Τhis is in fact what we find.<ref name="ΝΑΒ">Ηodge, Βodie, [http://www.answersingenesis.org/PublicStore/pdfs/SampleChapter/10-2-267.pdf Why Don’t We Find Human & Dinosaur Fossils Together?] (chapter 13 of the Νew Αnswers Βook), 2006.</ref>

Αpproximately 70% of the Εarth is covered in salt water which would also explain the dominance of marine fossils. Ιn addition, creation scientists assert there may have been a small pre-flood human population and that massive amounts of flood sediment are why we haven’t found human fossils in pre-biblical flood sediments.<ref name="ΝΑΒ" />
Αlso, creation scientists point out that we don't find human bones buried with [[coelacanth]]s yet humans and coelacanths coexist today.<ref name="ΗaD" />

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category:Dinosaurs]]

Evolutionism

2008-10-10T23:10:25Z

Blueshift:

[[Image:Hitler.jpg|thumb|200px|right|Adoph Hitler. The Nazi party were firm believers in Evolutionism which dictated their ideology.]]
'''Evolutionism''', as opposed to [[Creationism]], is the ''advocacy of or belief in biological evolution''.<ref>"evolutionism." The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004. 20 Mar. 2007. <Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/evolutionism>.</ref> Therefore one who ''believes in or supports a [[theory of evolution]]''<ref>"evolutionist." Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. 21 Mar. 2007. <Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/evolutionist>.</ref> would be referred to as an ''evolutionist''. Evolutionism, used in a general sense, encompasses ''any'' type of biological evolutionist. Broken down into two categories, "Evolutionism" and "Evolutionists" usually involve Atheistic/Agnostic Evolutionists (evolution without God) and Theistic Evolutionists (evolution with God). Those categories can be further broken down, but they are the main two.

The word is used differently in different circles of thought. Generally [[Young Earth Creationism|Young Earth Creationists]] use it as a reference to what they believe is the [[world view]] or [[presupposition]] aspect of the scientific theory of evolution. The term is not necessarily used as a world view unto itself, but is more based off of and is possibly an extension of a variety of other world views including [[Materialism]], [[Naturalism]]<ref>[http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA601.html CA601: Evolution and Naturalism] - TalkOrigins Archive</ref>, and [[Humanism]] in its broadest sense. Many that hold to the theory of evolution have been known to be [[Atheism|atheists]] as well, but this does not represent the entirety or whole.
{{cquote|''Evolutionism is a '''world-view''', which seeks to explain every aspect of this world in which we live. It encompasses a wide variety of topics, from astronomy to chemistry to biology. At its core, it teaches that there were different stages in the evolution of our universe...''<ref>[http://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/evolutionism.htm Evolutionism - AllAboutPhilosophy] - Accessed on March 22, 2007.</ref>}}

==Theistic Evolution==
[[Theistic Evolution|Theistic Evolutionists]] believe that God created the universe and did not intervene directly in the evolutionary process. In general, theistic evolutionists accept the evolutionist ideas of the age of the earth and common descent. Theistic evolutionists believe that at some point God intervened in a metaphysical fashion to give souls to some small group of human ancestors. The Catholic Church holds that this is consistent with the Catholic faith.<ref>[http://www.catholic.net/RCC/Periodicals/Dossier/0102-97/Article3.html Mark Brumley, Evolution and the Pope]</ref>

==Foundational question/starting point==
All the viewpoints take a ''step of faith'' as some might refer to it. In other words, there is a common starting point or foundational question (it's a God-related question) that each one asks, and then forms their conclusions around.

===According to biblical Creationists (Young Earth)===
* God exists (world view)
** Therefore we need to explain everything based on that "fact"
*** Thus science is done on the basis that "God exists"
**** The Bible comes ''before'' science. The science is based on the world view.

===According to biblical Theistic Evolutionists (Old Earth)===
There is disagreement among [[Theistic Evolution]]ists, as not all hold that God is not involved presently in His creation.

'''Impersonal God'''
* There is no personal/involved God (world view)
** Therefore we need to explain everything based on that "fact"
*** Thus science is done on the basis that God is not involved in His creation
**** ''Theistic Evolutionism'' comes ''before'' the ''Scientific Theory of Evolution''. The science is based on the world view.

'''Personal God'''
* There is a personal/involved God (world view)
** Therefore we need to explain everything based on that "fact"
*** Thus science is done on the basis that there is a "personal God"
**** ''Theistic Evolutionism'' comes ''before'' the ''Scientific Theory of Evolution''. The science is based on the world view.

===According to Atheistic Evolutionists===
Some proponents of the scientific theory of evolution reject the idea of a philosophy or world view that guides their conclusions in scientific experimentation. However evolutionists who are 'strong atheists' and who make a positive assertion that there is no God, do in fact have a world view; whereas 'weak atheists', who maintain there is probably no God due to lack of any objective evidence of Him, rely on science.

'''Strong Atheism'''
* There is no God (world view)
** Therefore we need to explain everything based on that "fact"
*** Thus science is done on the basis of there being no God (i.e. [[naturalism]])
**** Naturalism comes ''before'' the science. The science is based on the world view.

'''Weak Atheism'''
* So far, there is no objective proof of God
** Therefore, we do not need to interpret evidence to fit in with the "fact" of God's existence
*** Thus science is done on the basis of there being no God (i.e. [[naturalism]]) (unless His existence becomes objectively proven)
**** Naturalism comes ''before'' the science. The science is based on the world view.

===Comparison===
The various viewpoints can be compared in general ways as they all have some sort of starting point. The general Creationist starting point is God, which then all the universe is based on including that of science. Some ''Theistic Evolutionists'' hold to a similar God idea, yet emphasize a somewhat secondary origin<ref>Some Theistic Evolutionists believe that God created the universe and yet He is no longer involved in it. Therefore "secondary origin" is referring to the idea that God is the origin of the universe, but not necessarily ''You and Me''.</ref> in the evolutionary process. Atheistic evolutionists say that we must prove God by science, therefore their intellectual starting point is science itself.

==Controversy==
===Usage of Terminology===
The term ''evolutionism'' uses the suffix ''-ism'', which is commonly used to designate varieties of philosophical opinion, and some people who support evolution prefer to use other terms. Others are happy to call themselves evolutionists, and the terms have been in common use for a century. For example, the most popular American proponent of evolution called himself an evolutionist, <ref>"I count myself among the evolutionists", S.J. Gould [http://www.stephenjaygould.org/library/gould_fact-and-theory.html], also "Evolutionists have been very clear about this distinction of fact and theory". [http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html]</ref> and his obituary read "Evolutionist Stephen Jay Gould dead".<ref>S.F. Chronicle, 1981 [http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2002/05/21/MN175165.DTL]</ref> This is all part of the controversy over evolution itself (see [[Origins debate]]).

Some Atheistic/Agnostic Evolutionists say that the term ''Evolutionism'' is simply a false Creationist perception,
or pejorative assertion that science represents merely another religion. They disagree that the theory of evolution is based on a [[philosophy]] or [[world view]]. They say that the perception finds no grounding in reality, other than as a rhetorical dramatization. However, according to creationists, this disagreement arises from a misunderstanding of terms. Biblical [[Young Earth Creationism|Young Earth Creationists]] hold both terms in philosophically equal light, up to a certain point. They would say that the term "Evolutionism" has the same or very similar meaning to "Creationism" as it relates to a supposed philosophical/foundational starting point or question (does God exist?). They say the term "Evolutionism" refers to a subset of a combination of world views, while the scientific theory of evolution is the result of the ''Evolutionist'' presupposition. In other words, they say that Evolutionism is the collective world view behind the scientific theory of evolution. However, that's where the similarities end with Creationism.

===Religion and Evolutionism===
Some Creationists point out that they see various religious aspects, not in the theory of evolution itself (although they don't exclude that necessarily), but in the Evolutionists themselves. Some will say how Evolutionists have a ''religious fervor'' over what Creationists believe is false science. Some Evolutionists have historically misunderstood this for Creationists labeling science itself as a religion. M. Green, a Creationist, put it this way in his ''Faith of Darwinism'' (emphasis added).
{{cquote|''Today the tables are turned. The modified, but still characteristically Darwinian theory has itself become an orthodoxy, preached by its adherents with '''religious fervor''', and doubted, they feel, only by a few muddlers imperfect in scientific faith.<ref name="mgreen" />''}}

Evolution has been a recent source of controversy in the [[United States]]{{fact}}. Some prominent Americans seriously question evolution{{fact}}, based on a feeling that it conflicts with religious beliefs. However, according to Evolutionists, at least one aspect of religion and evolution is not mutually exclusive. Some deeply religious evolutionists believe that God set evolution into effect, which is no detraction to His majesty. This is referring to the theory of [[Theistic Evolution]].
===Religiosity and the Cult of Personality Surrounding Charles Darwin===
There is a cult of personality and type of religiosity currently surrounding Charles Darwin. [[Stephen Jay Gould]] wrote the following in 1978: "[A]ll theories [of natural selection] cite God in their support, and ... Darwin comes close to this status among evolutionary biologists".<ref>http://www.bradburyac.mistral.co.uk/dar1.html</ref> In 2002, Michael White similarly wrote: "Of course today, for biologists, Darwin is second only to God, and for many he may rank still higher."<ref>http://www.bradburyac.mistral.co.uk/dar1.html</ref>

===Biblical Young Earth Creationist's problem with a Biblical Old Earth===

Taking the Bible literally, there are no gaps permitting an undocumented period of time between the creation week and the fall of the temple in Jerusalem in 587 BC <ref>http://web.newsguy.com/rubyredinger/age.html</ref>, which is well established by archaeology and secular history. Accordingly, the birth of Adam can be placed at approximately 4,163 BC and the initial creation of the universe six days prior.

==Quotes==
'''''Evolutionism requires faith'' quotes (by Evolutionists)''':
{{cquote|'''Michael Ruse''' ''Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a [[secular religion]] -- a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality. I am an ardent evolutionist and an ex-Christian, but I must admit that in this one complaint -- and Mr. Gish is but one of many to make it -- the literalists are absolutely right. Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today.''<ref>MICHAEL RUSE [http://www.omniology.com/HowEvolutionBecameReligion.html HOW EVOLUTION BECAME A RELIGION]</ref>}}
'''''Evolutionism requires faith'' quotes (by Creationists)''':<ref>[http://www.nwcreation.net/evolutionism.html Evolutionism - Is Evolution a Religion?] - Northwest Creation Network</ref>
{{cquote|'''L.N. Matthews''' ''The fact of evolution is the backbone of biology, and biology is thus in the peculiar position of being a science founded on an unproved theory - is it then a science or faith? <ref>L.N. Matthews, "Introduction" to Charles Darwin, Origin of the Species, pp. x, xi (1971 edition)</ref>''}}
{{cquote|'''J.W.N. Sullivan''' ''The hypothesis that life has developed from inorganic matter is, at present, still an article of faith. <ref>J.W.N. Sullivan, Limitations of Science (1933), p95.</ref>''}}
{{cquote|'''[[R.L. Wysong]]''' ''Evolution requires plenty of faith; a faith in L-proteins that defy chance formation; a faith in the formation of DNA codes which, if generated spontaneously, would spell only pandemonium; a faith in a primitive environment that, in reality, would fiendishly devour any chemical precursors to life; a faith in experiments that prove nothing but the need for intelligence in the beginning; a faith in a primitive ocean that would not thicken, but would only haplessly dilute chemicals; a faith in natural laws of thermodynamics and biogenesis that actually deny the possibility for the spontaneous generation of life; a faith in future scientific revelations that, when realized, always seem to present more dilemmas to the evolutionists; faith in improbabilities that treasonously tell two stories—one denying evolution, the other confirming the Creator; faith in transformations that remain fixed; faith in mutations and natural selection that add to a double negative for evolution; faith in fossils that embarrassingly show fixity through time, regular absence of transitional forms and striking testimony to a worldwide water deluge; a faith in time which proves to only promote degradation in the absence of mind; and faith in reductionism that ends up reducing the materialist's arguments to zero and forcing the need to invoke a supernatural Creator. <ref>R.L. Wysong, The Creation-Evolution Controversy (1981), p. 455.</ref>''}}
{{cquote|'''T. Lessl''' ''"By calling evolution fact, the process of evolution is removed from dispute; it is no longer merely a scientific construct, but now stands apart from humankind and its perceptual frailties. Sagan apparently wishes to accomplish what Peter Berger calls `objectification,' the attribution of objective reality to a humanly produced concept . . With evolution no longer regarded as a mere human construct, but now as a part of the natural order of the cosmos, evolution becomes a sacred archetype against which human actions can be weighed. Evolution is a sacred object or process in that it becomes endowed with mysterious and awesome power." <ref>T. Lessl, Science and the Sacred Cosmos: The Ideological Rhetoric of Carl Sagan," Quarterly Journal of Speech, 71:178 (1985).</ref>''}}
{{cquote|'''M. Grene''' ''"Today the tables are turned. The modified, but still characteristically Darwinian theory has itself become an orthodoxy, preached by its adherents with religious fervor, and doubted, they feel, only by a few muddlers imperfect in scientific faith." <ref name="mgreen">M. Grene, Faith of Darwinism," Encounter, November (1959), p49.</ref>''}}

==See also==
*[[Creationism]]
*[[Faith]]
*[[Humanism]]
*[[Naturalistic religions]]
*[[Religion]]
*[[Theism]]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
'''Notes'''
:'''''Affirmative''' articles that attempt to rebut the faith claim of creationists.''
:'''''Critical''' articles that claim evolutionism involves faith.''

{| class="wikitable" width="100%"
! Affirmative !! Critical
|-
| valign="top" width="50%"|
'''TalkOrigins'''
*[http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA612.html CA612: Evolution requiring faith]
**[http://creationwiki.org/%28Talk.Origins%29_Evolution_requires_as_much_faith_as_creationism CreationWiki response]
*[http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA610.html CA610: Evolution religious]
**[http://creationwiki.org/%28Talk.Origins%29_Evolution_is_a_religion CreationWiki response]
*[http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA001.html CA001: Evolution is the foundation of an immoral world view]
**[http://creationwiki.org/%28Talk.Origins%29_Evolution_is_the_foundation_of_an_immoral_worldview CreationWiki response]
*[http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolphil/metaphysics.html Evolution and Philosophy: Metaphysics]
'''EvoWiki'''
*[http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/Evolution_is_the_foundation_of_an_immoral_worldview Evolution is the foundation of an immoral world view]

| valign="top" width="50%"|
'''DrDino'''
* [http://www.drdino.com/articles.php?spec=25 Evolution Is Based On Modern Myths]
'''Creationists.org'''
* [http://www.creationists.org/evolutionisreligion.html Evolution is a Religion]
'''Northwest Creation Network'''
* [http://www.nwcreation.net/evolutionism.html Evolutionism - Is Evolution a religion?]
'''Creation Ministries International'''
* [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/1491/ Evolution as religion]
* [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/4139 Leading anti-creationist philosopher admits that evolution is a religion]
'''Answers in Genesis'''
* [http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2002/0930religion.asp The Religion of Evolution]
* [http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/the-lie/chapter2.asp Evolution is Religion]
'''CreationWiki'''
*[http://creationwiki.org/%28Talk.Origins%29_Evolution_requires_as_much_faith_as_creationism Evolution requires as much faith as creationism] - Rebuttal of TalkOrigins Archive
*[http://creationwiki.org/%28Talk.Origins%29_Evolution_is_a_religion Evolution is a religion] - Rebuttal of TalkOrigins Archive
'''Institute for Creation Research'''
* [http://www.icr.org/article/201/ Evolution is Religion, not Science (1)], [http://www.icr.org/article/455/ (2)]
|}

[[Category:Naturalism]]

Fox News Channel

2008-10-10T23:01:27Z

Blueshift: /* Fair and Balanced */

[[Image:FNC logo.jpg|thumb|right|Fox News Logo]]

The '''Fox News Channel''' is a [[United States]] [[cable]] and [[satellite]] [[news]] channel. It is part of the Fox Television Stations Group, a subsidiary of Australian-born media mogul [[Rupert Murdoch]]'s [[News Corporation]]. [[Roger Ailes]] was named Chairman of the Fox Television Stations Group on August 15, 2005.

==Founding==

Fox News was started in 1996 by Murdoch and Roger Ailes. The two of them perceived a need for a news organization that offered more balanced reporting, one where the facts from all sides would be presented. Main-stream media "Political Correctness" was banished, with the news [[anchor]]s calling [[terrorist]]s what they were, (terrorists), instead of referring to them as "militants." As of February, 2007, polls show that over 20% of Americans say their main source of news is the Fox News Channel.

Fox News uses the slogan "Fair & Balanced," carries bipartisan shows like [[Hannity and Colmes]], and daily guest pundits from all sides of the [[political spectrum]]. Fox News also is non-hostile to conservative and [[Christian]] values, viewpoints, spokesmen, and ideas. Fox News has gained the reputation for reporting the news in an unbiased manner and then allowing the viewer to decide; "We Report, You Decide" is another of their on-air slogans.

Fox News has dominated the [[ratings]] of other cable news outlets.<ref>http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-anderson4oct04,0,2195035.story?coll=la-opinion-center</ref> Launched by media [[tycoon]] Rupert Murdoch and former political consultant Roger Ailes as a refuge for viewers fed up with real or perceived liberal bias everywhere in the so-called "[[mainstream media]]", Fox is the undisputed ratings champion of cable news. It's been trouncing [[CNN]], [[MSNBC]] and [[CNBC]] for years, and it quite often draws a much larger audience share than all competitors, combined.

==Fair and Balanced==
[[Image:Fair_balanced.jpg‎ |thumb|left|Fair And Balanced Logo]]
[[Leftist]] critics have been known to complain about the "Fair & Balanced" slogan. Former President [[Bill Clinton]] exploded at ''Fox News Sunday'' anchor [[Chris Wallace]] in September of 2006, accusing him of "a nice little conservative hit job" after being lightly pressed by Wallace about his record on fighting [[Al Qaeda]]. Democratic politicos and advocates have relentlessly attacked the cable network, sometimes accusing it of being a Republican [[propaganda mill]]. Ex Vice-President and notorious environmentalist[[Al Gore]] has likened Fox to a right-wing "[[fifth column]]." Groups, such as [[MoveOn.org]], funded a classic [[schlockumentary]] entitled ''[[Outfoxed]]'', which purports to expose the channel's nefarious Republican agenda. In a grandstanding gesture of political theatre the group unsuccessfully petitioned the [[Federal Trade Commission]] to stop Fox's from using its slogan as "deceptive advertising".

A recent comprehensive study by [[UCLA]] political scientist Tim Groseclose and University of Missouri-Columbia economics professor Jeffrey Milyo found [[Brit Hume]]'s ''Special Report'' — Fox's most straightforward news show — more centrist than any of the three major networks' evening newscasts, all of which are left leaning. <ref>http://rcp.missouri.edu/articles/milyo_media.html</ref> The program is a model of smart news television.

And although it's true that the Fox's opinion shows (as opposed to its news shows) are, as they're supposed to be, frequently bombastic and opinionated, it's equally true that Fox's biggest super-star, [[Bill O'Reilly]], "is not a mainstream Republican, but a registered [[Independent]] that sides with conservatives. He regularly charges the oil companies with [[price-gouging]] and attacks big business for squashing the little guy." Who can say what host [[Greta Van Susteren]]'s politics are? She mostly covers the [[crime]]-of-the-day stories. [[Geraldo Rivera]] has always been liberal on most issues, with the exception of being a strong supporter of the military and stiff penalties for [[sex offender]]s.

Liberal commentators go in and out of the Fox studios all over America, every day — some of them, like host [[Alan Colmes]] and news analyst [[Marvin Kalb]], and [[Eleanor Clift]] affiliated with the channel. There's no doubt, of course, that Fox News is closer to mainstream America than [[CBS]], [[ABC]], [[NBC]] or [[CNN]]. But, after all, that was its founding mission.

Conservatives have criticism for Fox. Their 'Fair and Balanced' motto allows [[Liberal]] [[propaganda]] and half-truths to gain an audience. Fox's entertainment division has been singled out by the [[Parents Television Council]] for obsessive violence and sexual [[obscenities]].

== Anti-elitist ==

Conservatives argue that Fox's real ethos is not Republican but anti-[[elitist]] — a major reason it connects with so many Americans and annoys so many [[coastal elite]]s. "There's a whole country that elitists will never acknowledge," Ailes once observed. "What people resent deeply out there are those in the 'blue states' thinking they're smarter." This anti-elitism shows itself in Fox's pro-U.S. stance in covering the [[Afghanistan]] and [[Iraq war]]s and its broadcasters' use of terms such as "terrorist" instead of the politcally correct "militant" to refer to … well, terrorists. Since the [[Vietnam War]] era, mainstream [[journalist]]s have tended to see such blunt language and side-taking as unsophisticated, a betrayal of journalistic [[objectivity]], or perhaps their own ingrained biases against government in general.

Another aspect of Fox's anti-elitism: [[evangelical]] and [[fundamentalist Christian]]s, far from being seen as lunatics or extremists — as too often is the case in the mainstream media — are treated with great respect. "We regularly have on the [[Rev. Franklin Graham]], [[Dr. James Dobson]] and other religious leaders, just as we put on [[Pat Ireland]] and Eleanor Clift," Ailes said, continuing, ''"Most Americans believe in God and have that as their foundation in life. So why shouldn't we have as guests people that they like, respect and want to hear from?" '' Ailes said he didn't get "too worked up" by a [[Pew Foundation]] study that showed that Fox has more Republican viewers than CNN, CNBC or MSNBC and that his reporters and anchors insert their opinions into stories far more than competitors do. Numbers might have something to do with it: Fox is beating the combined audience of the other three. But Ailes dismissed Pew as a "liberal [[lobby]]ing organization." He said, "Most polls today are not taken to provide information to the public but to get press for the organization taking the polls. I took a poll of Pew, and 98% of my organization found that they were biased", Ailes said with a wink. <ref>http://www.usatoday.com/life/columnist/mediamix/2005-04-06-media-mix_x.htm</ref>

In response, Project director Tom Rosenstiel said the study "was not a poll. It was a content analysis designed by a four-university research team and executed at the [[University of Alabama]]." ''One plus for Fox, he said, was that researchers found Fox News stories were more forthcoming about sourcing than their cable rivals.'' <ref>http://www.usatoday.com/life/columnist/mediamix/2005-04-06-media-mix_x.htm</ref>

==Fox News Channel and Homosexuality ==
In regards to the issue of [[homosexuality]], the Fox News Channel and Bill O'Reilly [[Homosexuality and the Media|have acted in a way which is not reflective of conservative views (for example, the Fox News Channel donated money to the Lesbian and Gay Journalist Association)]].

== Fox vs fringe views ==

"What really frustrates liberals about Fox, though, is simply that, along with [[talk radio]] and the conservative [[blogosphere]], it has helped shatter the left's near-monopoly on news and information. Fox's opinion-driven programming gives conservatives and liberals a chance to get a fair hearing for their ideas. But Democratic politicians and activists who go on Fox also must defend their views, often against tough questioning, something that happens less often on the networks, where most journalists are left-of-center, survey after survey has shown", said columnist [[Brian Anderson]]. "Even more significant, Fox came on the scene a decade ago as a professional news organization that could define and report news as something different from what the elite consensus says it is. To take one of many examples, the corruption of the [[United Nations]]' [[oil-for-food]] initiative in [[Iraq]], initially downplayed by the mainstream media because of their sympathy for internationalism, was uncovered — deemed newsworthy — on Fox."

All this wouldn't matter if Fox News wasn't so influential. But it is. According to the Pew Research Center, more than 20% of Americans now claim to get news from it, and lots of them (37%) are Democrats or independents. The network's success has also sparked a "Fox effect," leading some competitors to become more open to right-of-center opinions: MSNBC's "Scarborough Country," hosted by former Republican congressman [[Joe Scarborough]], is a prime example. Until a few years ago, Democrats never had to deal with all these mediatized conservatives. <ref>http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-anderson4oct04,0,2195035.story?coll=la-opinion-center</ref>

Ailes said Fox News has no agenda. His charge to his reporters and anchors is simple: "If you make a mistake, get on the air as fast as you can and admit it. ... Do your homework. Make sure you reach out to a point of view you don't agree with to be sure you have some balance in your piece, because journalists, despite the public perception, are not empty-headed fools. They actually come to the job with some ideas and biases." When asked whether the media have a "conscious bias," Ailes said: "I don't know whether it's conscious or not. I think people who are biased to the left and right are by and large honest people who bring their life experience to whatever their beliefs are. I don't think there's some conspiracy of bias to the left, ''but I do think that [[New York]] and [[Los Angeles]] have different views than many people that I know from other parts of the country."'' <ref>http://www.usatoday.com/life/columnist/mediamix/2005-04-06-media-mix_x.htm</ref>

== Roger Ailes ==
[[Image:Rogerailes_1.jpg‎ |thumb|right|300px|Roger Ailes, Fox News CEO]]
[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,205966,00.html This is a transcript] of Ailes speaking to the [[Television Critics Association]], which will be enlightening to readers digging into the Fox take on reporting and its reaction to controversy about its mission.

== Tony Snow ==

In April, 2006 the [[White House]] selected [[Tony Snow]], Fox News Anchorman, to be the new [[White House press secretary]]. "Snow, who in his roles as a [[pundit]] on Fox News and elsewhere has rapped Bush on several occasions, joined the White House only after extracting a promise that he would become an adviser to the president on day-to-day strategy...the former columnist will be the first outsider to become part of Bush's revamped inner circle.", said the [[Washington Post]]. <ref>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/26/AR2006042600558.html/ref>

Snow, 50, worked most recently as host for ''Fox News Sunday, with Tony Snow'' and as host of his own radio talk show. He was a director of speech-writing for President [[George H.W. Bush]] and has worked as a [[USA Today]] columnist, Editorial Page Editor of the [[Washington Times]], deputy editorial page editor of the [[Detroit News]] and frequent substitute for radio host [[Rush Limbaugh]].<ref>http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/04/20060426.html</ref>

==External Links==
:[http://www.foxnews.com/ Fox News]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category:Cable TV Networks]]