https://conservapedia.com/api.php?action=feedcontributions&user=Ispellcheck&feedformat=atomConservapedia - User contributions [en]2024-03-30T04:41:47ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.24.2https://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Jonathan_Wells&diff=784531Jonathan Wells2010-06-03T20:01:14Z<p>Ispellcheck: minor, grammatical fix</p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:250px-Jonathan_wells.jpg|200px|right|thumb|Jonathan Wells]]<br />
Dr. '''Jonathan Wells''' is a [[biologist]] who objects to the way [[evolution]] is taught in [[America]]. His book, ''[[Icons of Evolution]]'', claims to expose ten major distortions of science which evolution advocates and especially biology textbooks use to support standard evolutionary theory.<br />
<br />
Wells, a prominent advocate of [[intelligent design]], is a senior fellow at the [[Discovery Institute]]'s Center for Science & Culture. [http://creationwiki.org/Jonathan_Wells] Dr. Wells has obtained two Ph.D.s. - one in molecular and cell biology from the [[University of California at Berkeley]], and the other in religious studies from [[Yale University]].[http://creationwiki.org/Jonathan_Wells]<br />
Dr. Wells has received criticism for denying the connection between [[HIV]] and [[AIDs]] without any scientific support. Wells, along with many others, signed a petition which claimed "It is widely believed by the general public that a retrovirus called HIV causes the group of diseases called AIDS. Many biochemical scientists now question this hypothesis. We propose that a thorough reappraisal of the existing evidence for and against this hypothesis be conducted by a suitable independent group. We further propose that critical epidemiological studies be devised and undertaken"<ref>Undercover at the Discovery Institute</ref><ref>The Group for the Scientific Reappraisal of the HIV-AIDS Hypothesis</ref>.<br />
<br />
==Bibliography==<br />
<br />
*Jonathan Wells. ''Charles Hodge's Critique of Darwinism: An Historical-Critical Analysis of Concepts Basic to the 19th Century Debate''. (Edwin Mellen Press, April 1988.) ISBN 0889466718 <br />
*Jonathan Wells and William A. Dembski ''How to be an Intellectually Fulfilled Atheist (Or Not)''. (Intercollegiate Studies Institute, October 28, 2008) ISBN 1933859849 <br />
*Jonathan Wells, ''[[Icons of Evolution]]''. (Regnery Publishing, 2000) ISBN 0-89526-276-2<br />
*Jonathan Wells, ''The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design''. (Regnery Publishing, 2006) ISBN 1-59698-013-3<br />
*Jonathan Wells and William A. Dembski. ''The Design of Life''. (Foundation for Thought and Ethics, 2007) ISBN 0980021308<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
<br />
== External Links ==<br />
*[http://www.discovery.org/a/1106 Inherit the Spin] - Wells says that [[The National Center For Science Education]] Answers “Ten Questions To Ask Your Biology Teacher About Evolution” with Evasions and Falsehoods<br />
*[http://creationwiki.org/Jonathan_Wells Jonathan Wells - CreationWiki]<br />
<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Wells, Jonathan}}<br />
[[Category:Authors]]<br />
[[Category:Intelligent Design Theorists]]</div>Ispellcheckhttps://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Jonathan_Wells&diff=784530Jonathan Wells2010-06-03T20:00:12Z<p>Ispellcheck: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:250px-Jonathan_wells.jpg|200px|right|thumb|Jonathan Wells]]<br />
Dr. '''Jonathan Wells''' is a [[biologist]] who objects to the way [[evolution]] is taught in [[America]]. His book ''[[Icons of Evolution]]'' claims to expose ten major distortions of science which evolution advocates and especially biology textbooks use to support standard evolutionary theory.<br />
<br />
Wells, a prominent advocate of [[intelligent design]], is a senior fellow at the [[Discovery Institute]]'s Center for Science & Culture. [http://creationwiki.org/Jonathan_Wells] Dr. Wells has obtained two Ph.D.s. - one in molecular and cell biology from the [[University of California at Berkeley]], and the other in religious studies from [[Yale University]].[http://creationwiki.org/Jonathan_Wells]<br />
Dr. Wells has received criticism for denying the connection between [[HIV]] and [[AIDs]] without any scientific support. Wells, along with many others, signed a petition which claimed "It is widely believed by the general public that a retrovirus called HIV causes the group of diseases called AIDS. Many biochemical scientists now question this hypothesis. We propose that a thorough reappraisal of the existing evidence for and against this hypothesis be conducted by a suitable independent group. We further propose that critical epidemiological studies be devised and undertaken"<ref>Undercover at the Discovery Institute</ref><ref>The Group for the Scientific Reappraisal of the HIV-AIDS Hypothesis</ref>.<br />
<br />
==Bibliography==<br />
<br />
*Jonathan Wells. ''Charles Hodge's Critique of Darwinism: An Historical-Critical Analysis of Concepts Basic to the 19th Century Debate''. (Edwin Mellen Press, April 1988.) ISBN 0889466718 <br />
*Jonathan Wells and William A. Dembski ''How to be an Intellectually Fulfilled Atheist (Or Not)''. (Intercollegiate Studies Institute, October 28, 2008) ISBN 1933859849 <br />
*Jonathan Wells, ''[[Icons of Evolution]]''. (Regnery Publishing, 2000) ISBN 0-89526-276-2<br />
*Jonathan Wells, ''The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design''. (Regnery Publishing, 2006) ISBN 1-59698-013-3<br />
*Jonathan Wells and William A. Dembski. ''The Design of Life''. (Foundation for Thought and Ethics, 2007) ISBN 0980021308<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
<br />
== External Links ==<br />
*[http://www.discovery.org/a/1106 Inherit the Spin] - Wells says that [[The National Center For Science Education]] Answers “Ten Questions To Ask Your Biology Teacher About Evolution” with Evasions and Falsehoods<br />
*[http://creationwiki.org/Jonathan_Wells Jonathan Wells - CreationWiki]<br />
<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Wells, Jonathan}}<br />
[[Category:Authors]]<br />
[[Category:Intelligent Design Theorists]]</div>Ispellcheckhttps://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=The_God_Delusion&diff=676940The God Delusion2009-06-21T03:41:54Z<p>Ispellcheck: </p>
<hr />
<div>'''''The God Delusion''''' is a book by the [[biologist]] [[Richard Dawkins]], in which he attempts to show that belief in [[God]] is irrational.<br />
<br />
Dawkins' main objectives are to convince his readers that the existence of [[God]] or any other [[deity]] is highly unlikely, that the Bible is incoherent, that [[morality]] does not come from [[religion]], and that if religion does effect morality, it only does so negatively.<br />
<br />
Critics have called the book "surprisingly intolerant".<ref>{{cite book | quote=For a scientist who criticizes religion for its intolerance, Dawkins has written a surprisingly intolerant book, full of scorn for religion and those who believe. | publisher=Publishers Weekly | title=The God Delusion | year=2006 | month=August | url=http://www.amazon.com/God-Delusion-Richard-Dawkins/dp/0618680004 | }}</ref><br />
<br />
Dawkins also intends to teach that atheists can live happy, intelligent, lives&mdash;perhaps even happier lives than religious people. He asserts that atheists do not do evil things in the name of [[atheism]], while [[religion|religious]] people have been known to commit atrocities in the name of their religion.<br />
<br />
==Chapters==<br />
<br />
=== Deeply Religious Non-Believer===<br />
Dawkins attempts to establish [[Albert Einstein]] as an avowed atheist, and to prove that religion is unworthy of any respect.<br />
<br />
===The God Hypothesis===<br />
Dawkins explains the different kinds of religion, including the divide between [[Monotheism]] and [[Polytheism]]. He also asserts viciously that the founding fathers of the [[United States of America]] were nonreligious. He continues to explain [[Secularism]], [[Agnosticism]], and some basic assertions of the religious.<br />
<br />
===Arguments for God's Existence===<br />
Dawkins summarizes some common [[proof]]s for God and attempts to debunk them.<br />
<br />
===Why There Almost Certainly is No God===<br />
Dawkins gives his reasons for believing that God is about as likely as "[[fairy|fairies]] living under his garden", and asks the fallacious question of where God came from.<br />
<br />
===The Roots of Religion===<br />
Dawkins gives and explains some thoughts about the origins of religion that have been proposed by atheists, trying to undermine the [[Christianity|church]].<br />
<br />
===The Roots of Morality: Why are We Good?===<br />
Dawkins explains why he believes that morality "evolved" from [[animal]]s.<br />
<br />
===The 'Good' Book and the Changing [[Moral Zeitgeist]]===<br />
Dawkins suggests that morality does not come from religion, but rather a changing moral ''Zeitgeist''.<br />
<br />
===What's Wrong With Religion? Why Be So Hostile?===<br />
Dawkins shows why he believes that religion is [[evil]] and repressive, and must be stopped.<br />
<br />
===Childhood, Abuse and the Escape from Religion===<br />
Dawkins explains why he believes that religion is a form of "[[child abuse]]", and that the scars from the "indoctrination" last into [[adult]]hood and even the child's entire life.<br />
<br />
===A Much Needed Gap?===<br />
Dawkins concludes his book on a more positive level, giving inspiration to those whom he may have convinced to "de-convert" from their religion.<br />
<br />
==Criticism==<br />
''The God Delusion'' has been subject to a great deal of criticisms from the religious and the non-religious alike.<br />
<br />
===Andrew Brown: Prospect Magazine===<br />
{{Cquote|<br />
"It has been obvious for years that Richard Dawkins had a fat book on religion in him, but who would have thought him capable of writing one this bad? Incurious, dogmatic, rambling and self-contradictory, it has none of the style or verve of his earlier works."<ref>http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=7803</ref><br />
}}<br />
Andrew Brown of Prospect Magazine was unimpressed by Dawkins' book. Brown calls atheism "unnatural" and points out that many atheists were violent in their belief (or lack thereof), citing Stalin killing members of the clergy.<br />
<br />
Brown also attacks Dawkins' argument that suicide bombers are caused by religious schools. While Dawkins states that if these children were not taught what he calls "faith without question", suicide bombings would not be an issue. Brown, however, says that religion is not a necessity in suicide bombings. He points out that it is a tactic used by Marxists in Sri Lanka.<br />
<br />
===Marilynne Robinson: Harper's Magazine===<br />
<blockquote><br />
"There is a pervasive exclusion of historical memory in Dawkins's view of science. Consider this sentence from his preface, which occurs in the context of his vision of a religion-free world: 'Imagine . . . no persecution of Jews as 'Christ-killers.'"<ref>http://solutions.synearth.net/2006/10/20</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Robinson's major complaints about ''The God Delusion'' lie in how sheerly false the book is in many aspects. Although Dawkins claims that "the majority of us believe in free speech", she points out that most countries do not, pointing out that [[China]] (population 1.3 billion<ref>http://geography.about.com/od/populationgeography/a/chinapopulation.htm</ref>) does not. In her review, Robinson basically says that Dawkins purposefully ignored important parts of history in his attempt to convince his readers. "It's a shame," she says, "to see him reduced to one long argument from professorial incredulity."<br />
<br />
===Terry Eagleton: London Review of Books===<br />
<blockquote><br />
"Card-carrying rationalists like Dawkins [...] are in one sense the least well-equipped to understand what they castigate, since they don’t believe there is anything there to be understood, or at least anything worth understanding."<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Alister McGrath: The Dawkins Delusion?===<br />
''The Dawkins Delusion?'' is a response to Dawkins' ''The God Delusion'' by [[Alister McGrath]].<br />
<br />
== Quotes from ''The God Delusion'' ==<br />
"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."<br />
::-Chapter 2<br />
<br />
"I am one of an increasing number of biologists who see religion as a ''by-product'' of something else."<br />
::-Chapter 5<br />
<br />
"By contrast, what I, as a scientist, believe (for example, [[evolution]]) I believe not because of reading a holy book but because I have studied the evidence... Books about evolution are believed because they present overwhelming quantities of mutually buttressed evidence."<br />
::-Chapter 8<br />
<br />
"... [Moral absolutism] rules the minds of a great number of people in the world today, most dangerously so in the Muslim world and in the incipient American theocracy... Such absolutism nearly always results from strong religious faith, and it constitutes a major reason for suggesting that religion can be a force for evil in the world."<br />
::-Chapter 8<br />
==See also==<br />
*[[Atheism]]<br />
{{Nb Atheism}}<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== External Links ==<br />
*[http://www.richarddawkins.net RichardDawkins.net]<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Books|God Delusion, The]]<br />
[[Category:Popular Science]]<br />
[[Category: Biology]]</div>Ispellcheckhttps://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=The_God_Delusion&diff=676939The God Delusion2009-06-21T03:41:00Z<p>Ispellcheck: </p>
<hr />
<div>'''''The God Delusion''''' is a book by the [[atheist]] [[Richard Dawkins]], in which he attempts to show that belief in [[God]] is irrational.<br />
<br />
Dawkins' main objectives are to convince his readers that the existence of [[God]] or any other [[deity]] is highly unlikely, that the Bible is incoherent, that [[morality]] does not come from [[religion]], and that if religion does effect morality, it only does so negatively.<br />
<br />
Critics have called the book "surprisingly intolerant".<ref>{{cite book | quote=For a scientist who criticizes religion for its intolerance, Dawkins has written a surprisingly intolerant book, full of scorn for religion and those who believe. | publisher=Publishers Weekly | title=The God Delusion | year=2006 | month=August | url=http://www.amazon.com/God-Delusion-Richard-Dawkins/dp/0618680004 | }}</ref><br />
<br />
Dawkins also intends to teach that atheists can live happy, intelligent, lives&mdash;perhaps even happier lives than religious people. He asserts that atheists do not do evil things in the name of [[atheism]], while [[religion|religious]] people have been known to commit atrocities in the name of their religion.<br />
<br />
==Chapters==<br />
<br />
=== Deeply Religious Non-Believer===<br />
Dawkins attempts to establish [[Albert Einstein]] as an avowed atheist, and to prove that religion is unworthy of any respect.<br />
<br />
===The God Hypothesis===<br />
Dawkins explains the different kinds of religion, including the divide between [[Monotheism]] and [[Polytheism]]. He also asserts viciously that the founding fathers of the [[United States of America]] were nonreligious. He continues to explain [[Secularism]], [[Agnosticism]], and some basic assertions of the religious.<br />
<br />
===Arguments for God's Existence===<br />
Dawkins summarizes some common [[proof]]s for God and attempts to debunk them.<br />
<br />
===Why There Almost Certainly is No God===<br />
Dawkins gives his reasons for believing that God is about as likely as "[[fairy|fairies]] living under his garden", and asks the fallacious question of where God came from.<br />
<br />
===The Roots of Religion===<br />
Dawkins gives and explains some thoughts about the origins of religion that have been proposed by atheists, trying to undermine the [[Christianity|church]].<br />
<br />
===The Roots of Morality: Why are We Good?===<br />
Dawkins explains why he believes that morality "evolved" from [[animal]]s.<br />
<br />
===The 'Good' Book and the Changing [[Moral Zeitgeist]]===<br />
Dawkins suggests that morality does not come from religion, but rather a changing moral ''Zeitgeist''.<br />
<br />
===What's Wrong With Religion? Why Be So Hostile?===<br />
Dawkins shows why he believes that religion is [[evil]] and repressive, and must be stopped.<br />
<br />
===Childhood, Abuse and the Escape from Religion===<br />
Dawkins explains why he believes that religion is a form of "[[child abuse]]", and that the scars from the "indoctrination" last into [[adult]]hood and even the child's entire life.<br />
<br />
===A Much Needed Gap?===<br />
Dawkins concludes his book on a more positive level, giving inspiration to those whom he may have convinced to "de-convert" from their religion.<br />
<br />
==Criticism==<br />
''The God Delusion'' has been subject to a great deal of criticisms from the religious and the non-religious alike.<br />
<br />
===Andrew Brown: Prospect Magazine===<br />
{{Cquote|<br />
"It has been obvious for years that Richard Dawkins had a fat book on religion in him, but who would have thought him capable of writing one this bad? Incurious, dogmatic, rambling and self-contradictory, it has none of the style or verve of his earlier works."<ref>http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=7803</ref><br />
}}<br />
Andrew Brown of Prospect Magazine was unimpressed by Dawkins' book. Brown calls atheism "unnatural" and points out that many atheists were violent in their belief (or lack thereof), citing Stalin killing members of the clergy.<br />
<br />
Brown also attacks Dawkins' argument that suicide bombers are caused by religious schools. While Dawkins states that if these children were not taught what he calls "faith without question", suicide bombings would not be an issue. Brown, however, says that religion is not a necessity in suicide bombings. He points out that it is a tactic used by Marxists in Sri Lanka.<br />
<br />
===Marilynne Robinson: Harper's Magazine===<br />
<blockquote><br />
"There is a pervasive exclusion of historical memory in Dawkins's view of science. Consider this sentence from his preface, which occurs in the context of his vision of a religion-free world: 'Imagine . . . no persecution of Jews as 'Christ-killers.'"<ref>http://solutions.synearth.net/2006/10/20</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Robinson's major complaints about ''The God Delusion'' lie in how sheerly false the book is in many aspects. Although Dawkins claims that "the majority of us believe in free speech", she points out that most countries do not, pointing out that [[China]] (population 1.3 billion<ref>http://geography.about.com/od/populationgeography/a/chinapopulation.htm</ref>) does not. In her review, Robinson basically says that Dawkins purposefully ignored important parts of history in his attempt to convince his readers. "It's a shame," she says, "to see him reduced to one long argument from professorial incredulity."<br />
<br />
===Terry Eagleton: London Review of Books===<br />
<blockquote><br />
"Card-carrying rationalists like Dawkins [...] are in one sense the least well-equipped to understand what they castigate, since they don’t believe there is anything there to be understood, or at least anything worth understanding."<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Alister McGrath: The Dawkins Delusion?===<br />
''The Dawkins Delusion?'' is a response to Dawkins' ''The God Delusion'' by [[Alister McGrath]].<br />
<br />
== Quotes from ''The God Delusion'' ==<br />
"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."<br />
::-Chapter 2<br />
<br />
"I am one of an increasing number of biologists who see religion as a ''by-product'' of something else."<br />
::-Chapter 5<br />
<br />
"By contrast, what I, as a scientist, believe (for example, [[evolution]]) I believe not because of reading a holy book but because I have studied the evidence... Books about evolution are believed because they present overwhelming quantities of mutually buttressed evidence."<br />
::-Chapter 8<br />
<br />
"... [Moral absolutism] rules the minds of a great number of people in the world today, most dangerously so in the Muslim world and in the incipient American theocracy... Such absolutism nearly always results from strong religious faith, and it constitutes a major reason for suggesting that religion can be a force for evil in the world."<br />
::-Chapter 8<br />
==See also==<br />
*[[Atheism]]<br />
{{Nb Atheism}}<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== External Links ==<br />
*[http://www.richarddawkins.net RichardDawkins.net]<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Books|God Delusion, The]]<br />
[[Category:Popular Science]]<br />
[[Category: Biology]]</div>Ispellcheckhttps://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Jonathan_Wells&diff=676934Jonathan Wells2009-06-21T03:35:54Z<p>Ispellcheck: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:250px-Jonathan_wells.jpg|200px|right|thumb|Jonathan Wells]]<br />
Dr. '''Jonathan Wells''' is a scientist who objects to the way [[evolution]] is taught in [[America]]. His book ''[[Icons of Evolution]]'' exposes ten major distortions of science which evolution advocates and especially biology textbooks use to support standard evolutionary theory.<br />
<br />
Wells, a prominent advocate of [[intelligent design]], is a senior fellow at the [[Discovery Institute]]'s Center for Science & Culture. [http://creationwiki.org/Jonathan_Wells] Dr. Wells has obtained two Ph.D.s. - one in molecular and cell biology from the [[University of California at Berkeley]], and the other in religious studies from [[Yale University]].[http://creationwiki.org/Jonathan_Wells]<br />
Dr. Wells has received criticism for denying the connection between [[HIV]] and [[AIDs]] without any scientific support. Wells, along with many others, signed a petition which claimed "It is widely believed by the general public that a retrovirus called HIV causes the group of diseases called AIDS. Many biochemical scientists now question this hypothesis. We propose that a thorough reappraisal of the existing evidence for and against this hypothesis be conducted by a suitable independent group. We further propose that critical epidemiological studies be devised and undertaken"<ref>Undercover at the Discovery Institute</ref><ref>The Group for the Scientific Reappraisal of the HIV-AIDS Hypothesis</ref>.<br />
<br />
==Bibliography==<br />
<br />
*Jonathan Wells. ''Charles Hodge's Critique of Darwinism: An Historical-Critical Analysis of Concepts Basic to the 19th Century Debate''. (Edwin Mellen Press, April 1988.) ISBN 0889466718 <br />
*Jonathan Wells and William A. Dembski ''How to be an Intellectually Fulfilled Atheist (Or Not)''. (Intercollegiate Studies Institute, October 28, 2008) ISBN 1933859849 <br />
*Jonathan Wells, ''[[Icons of Evolution]]''. (Regnery Publishing, 2000) ISBN 0-89526-276-2<br />
*Jonathan Wells, ''The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design''. (Regnery Publishing, 2006) ISBN 1-59698-013-3<br />
*Jonathan Wells and William A. Dembski. ''The Design of Life''. (Foundation for Thought and Ethics, 2007) ISBN 0980021308<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
<br />
== External Links ==<br />
*[http://www.discovery.org/a/1106 Inherit the Spin] - Wells says that [[The National Center For Science Education]] Answers “Ten Questions To Ask Your Biology Teacher About Evolution” with Evasions and Falsehoods<br />
*[http://creationwiki.org/Jonathan_Wells Jonathan Wells - CreationWiki]<br />
<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Wells, Jonathan}}<br />
[[Category:Authors]]<br />
[[Category:Intelligent Design Theorists]]</div>Ispellcheckhttps://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Jonathan_Wells&diff=676932Jonathan Wells2009-06-21T03:34:16Z<p>Ispellcheck: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:250px-Jonathan_wells.jpg|200px|right|thumb|Jonathan Wells]]<br />
Dr. '''Jonathan Wells''' is a scientist who objects to the way [[evolution]] is taught in [[America]]. His book ''[[Icons of Evolution]]'' exposes ten major distortions of science which evolution advocates and especially biology textbooks use to support standard evolutionary theory.<br />
<br />
Wells, a prominent advocate of [[intelligent design]], is a senior fellow at the [[Discovery Institute]]'s Center for Science & Culture. [http://creationwiki.org/Jonathan_Wells] Dr. Wells has obtained two Ph.D.s. - one in molecular and cell biology from the [[University of California at Berkeley]], and the other in religious studies from [[Yale University]].[http://creationwiki.org/Jonathan_Wells]<br />
Dr. Wells has received criticism for denying the connection between [[HIV]] and [[AIDs]] without any scientific support. Wells, along with many others, signed a petition which claimed "It is widely believed by the general public that a retrovirus called HIV causes the group of diseases called AIDS. Many biochemical scientists now question this hypothesis. We propose that a thorough reappraisal of the existing evidence for and against this hypothesis be conducted by a suitable independent group. We further propose that critical epidemiological studies be devised and undertaken"<ref>Undercover at the Discovery Institute</ref>.<br />
<br />
==Bibliography==<br />
<br />
*Jonathan Wells. ''Charles Hodge's Critique of Darwinism: An Historical-Critical Analysis of Concepts Basic to the 19th Century Debate''. (Edwin Mellen Press, April 1988.) ISBN 0889466718 <br />
*Jonathan Wells and William A. Dembski ''How to be an Intellectually Fulfilled Atheist (Or Not)''. (Intercollegiate Studies Institute, October 28, 2008) ISBN 1933859849 <br />
*Jonathan Wells, ''[[Icons of Evolution]]''. (Regnery Publishing, 2000) ISBN 0-89526-276-2<br />
*Jonathan Wells, ''The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design''. (Regnery Publishing, 2006) ISBN 1-59698-013-3<br />
*Jonathan Wells and William A. Dembski. ''The Design of Life''. (Foundation for Thought and Ethics, 2007) ISBN 0980021308<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
<br />
== External Links ==<br />
*[http://www.discovery.org/a/1106 Inherit the Spin] - Wells says that [[The National Center For Science Education]] Answers “Ten Questions To Ask Your Biology Teacher About Evolution” with Evasions and Falsehoods<br />
*[http://creationwiki.org/Jonathan_Wells Jonathan Wells - CreationWiki]<br />
<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Wells, Jonathan}}<br />
[[Category:Authors]]<br />
[[Category:Intelligent Design Theorists]]</div>Ispellcheckhttps://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Jonathan_Wells&diff=676924Jonathan Wells2009-06-21T03:19:32Z<p>Ispellcheck: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:250px-Jonathan_wells.jpg|200px|right|thumb|Jonathan Wells]]<br />
Dr. '''Jonathan Wells''' is a scientist who objects to the way [[evolution]] is taught in [[America]]. His book ''[[Icons of Evolution]]'' exposes ten major distortions of science which evolution advocates and especially biology textbooks use to support standard evolutionary theory.<br />
<br />
Wells, a prominent advocate of [[intelligent design]], is a senior fellow at the [[Discovery Institute]]'s Center for Science & Culture. [http://creationwiki.org/Jonathan_Wells] Dr. Wells has obtained two Ph.D.s. - one in molecular and cell biology from the [[University of California at Berkeley]], and the other in religious studies from [[Yale University]].[http://creationwiki.org/Jonathan_Wells]<br />
Dr. Wells has received criticism for denying the connection between HIV and AIDs without any scientific support. Wells, along with many others, signed a petition which claimed "It is widely believed by the general public that a retrovirus called HIV causes the group of diseases called AIDS. Many biochemical scientists now question this hypothesis. We propose that a thorough reappraisal of the existing evidence for and against this hypothesis be conducted by a suitable independent group. We further propose that critical epidemiological studies be devised and undertaken"<ref>Undercover at the Discovery Institute</ref>.<br />
<br />
==Bibliography==<br />
<br />
*Jonathan Wells. ''Charles Hodge's Critique of Darwinism: An Historical-Critical Analysis of Concepts Basic to the 19th Century Debate''. (Edwin Mellen Press, April 1988.) ISBN 0889466718 <br />
*Jonathan Wells and William A. Dembski ''How to be an Intellectually Fulfilled Atheist (Or Not)''. (Intercollegiate Studies Institute, October 28, 2008) ISBN 1933859849 <br />
*Jonathan Wells, ''[[Icons of Evolution]]''. (Regnery Publishing, 2000) ISBN 0-89526-276-2<br />
*Jonathan Wells, ''The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design''. (Regnery Publishing, 2006) ISBN 1-59698-013-3<br />
*Jonathan Wells and William A. Dembski. ''The Design of Life''. (Foundation for Thought and Ethics, 2007) ISBN 0980021308<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
<br />
== External Links ==<br />
*[http://www.discovery.org/a/1106 Inherit the Spin] - Wells says that [[The National Center For Science Education]] Answers “Ten Questions To Ask Your Biology Teacher About Evolution” with Evasions and Falsehoods<br />
*[http://creationwiki.org/Jonathan_Wells Jonathan Wells - CreationWiki]<br />
<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Wells, Jonathan}}<br />
[[Category:Authors]]<br />
[[Category:Intelligent Design Theorists]]</div>Ispellcheckhttps://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Jonathan_Wells&diff=676923Jonathan Wells2009-06-21T03:18:41Z<p>Ispellcheck: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:250px-Jonathan_wells.jpg|200px|right|thumb|Jonathan Wells]]<br />
Dr. '''Jonathan Wells''' is a scientist who objects to the way [[evolution]] is taught in [[America]]. His book ''[[Icons of Evolution]]'' exposes ten major distortions of science which evolution advocates and especially biology textbooks use to support standard evolutionary theory.<br />
<br />
Wells, a prominent advocate of [[intelligent design]], is a senior fellow at the [[Discovery Institute]]'s Center for Science & Culture. [http://creationwiki.org/Jonathan_Wells] Dr. Wells has obtained two Ph.D.s. - one in molecular and cell biology from the [[University of California at Berkeley]], and the other in religious studies from [[Yale University]].[http://creationwiki.org/Jonathan_Wells]<br />
Dr. Wells has received criticism for denying the connection between HIV and AIDs without any scientific support. Wells, along with many others, signed a petition which claimed "It is widely believed by the general public that a retrovirus called HIV causes the group of diseases called AIDS. Many biochemical scientists now question this hypothesis. We propose that a thorough reappraisal of the existing evidence for and against this hypothesis be conducted by a suitable independent group. We further propose that critical epidemiological studies be devised and undertaken"<ref>Undercover at the Discovery Institute</ref>.<br />
<br />
==Bibliography==<br />
<br />
*Jonathan Wells. ''Charles Hodge's Critique of Darwinism: An Historical-Critical Analysis of Concepts Basic to the 19th Century Debate''. (Edwin Mellen Press, April 1988.) ISBN 0889466718 <br />
*Jonathan Wells and William A. Dembski ''How to be an Intellectually Fulfilled Atheist (Or Not)''. (Intercollegiate Studies Institute, October 28, 2008) ISBN 1933859849 <br />
*Jonathan Wells, ''[[Icons of Evolution]]''. (Regnery Publishing, 2000) ISBN 0-89526-276-2<br />
*Jonathan Wells, ''The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design''. (Regnery Publishing, 2006) ISBN 1-59698-013-3<br />
*Jonathan Wells and William A. Dembski. ''The Design of Life''. (Foundation for Thought and Ethics, 2007) ISBN 0980021308<br />
<br />
== External Links ==<br />
*[http://www.discovery.org/a/1106 Inherit the Spin] - Wells says that [[The National Center For Science Education]] Answers “Ten Questions To Ask Your Biology Teacher About Evolution” with Evasions and Falsehoods<br />
*[http://creationwiki.org/Jonathan_Wells Jonathan Wells - CreationWiki]<br />
<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Wells, Jonathan}}<br />
[[Category:Authors]]<br />
[[Category:Intelligent Design Theorists]]</div>Ispellcheckhttps://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Jonathan_Wells&diff=676920Jonathan Wells2009-06-21T03:15:52Z<p>Ispellcheck: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:250px-Jonathan_wells.jpg|200px|right|thumb|Jonathan Wells]]<br />
Dr. '''Jonathan Wells''' is a scientist who objects to the way [[evolution]] is taught in [[America]]. His book ''[[Icons of Evolution]]'' exposes ten major distortions of science which evolution advocates and especially biology textbooks use to support standard evolutionary theory.<br />
<br />
Wells, a prominent advocate of [[intelligent design]], is a senior fellow at the [[Discovery Institute]]'s Center for Science & Culture. [http://creationwiki.org/Jonathan_Wells] Dr. Wells has obtained two Ph.D.s. - one in molecular and cell biology from the [[University of California at Berkeley]], and the other in religious studies from [[Yale University]].[http://creationwiki.org/Jonathan_Wells]<br />
Dr. Wells has received criticism for denying the connection between HIV and AIDs without any scientific support. Wells, along with many others, signed a petition which claimed "It is widely believed by the general public that a retrovirus called HIV causes the group of diseases called AIDS. Many biochemical scientists now question this hypothesis. We propose that a thorough reappraisal of the existing evidence for and against this hypothesis be conducted by a suitable independent group. We further propose that critical epidemiological studies be devised and undertaken"<ref>Undercover at the Discovery Institute</ref>.<br />
<br />
==Bibliography==<br />
<br />
*Jonathan Wells. ''Charles Hodge's Critique of Darwinism: An Historical-Critical Analysis of Concepts Basic to the 19th Century Debate''. (Edwin Mellen Press, April 1988.) ISBN 0889466718 <br />
*Jonathan Wells and William A. Dembski ''How to be an Intellectually Fulfilled Atheist (Or Not)''. (Intercollegiate Studies Institute, October 28, 2008) ISBN 1933859849 <br />
*Jonathan Wells, ''[[Icons of Evolution]]''. (Regnery Publishing, 2000) ISBN 0-89526-276-2<br />
*Jonathan Wells, ''The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design''. (Regnery Publishing, 2006) ISBN 1-59698-013-3<br />
*Jonathan Wells and William A. Dembski. ''The Design of Life''. (Foundation for Thought and Ethics, 2007) ISBN 0980021308<br />
<br />
== External Links ==<br />
*[http://www.discovery.org/a/1106 Inherit the Spin] - Wells says that [[The National Center For Science Education]] Answers “Ten Questions To Ask Your Biology Teacher About Evolution” with Evasions and Falsehoods<br />
*[http://creationwiki.org/Jonathan_Wells Jonathan Wells - CreationWiki]<br />
<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Wells, Jonathan}}<br />
[[Category:Authors]]<br />
[[Category:Intelligent Design Theorists]]</div>Ispellcheckhttps://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Sean_Hannity&diff=676905Sean Hannity2009-06-21T02:28:36Z<p>Ispellcheck: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:SHannity.jpg|right|thumb|230px]]<br />
'''Sean Hannity''' (born December 30, 1961) is a [[conservative]] talk show host and [[television]] host of [[Fox News]]'s show [[Hannity]], as well as host of [[Hannity's America]]. The youngest of four children, Hannity was born in [[New York City]] to Irish immigrants. He dropped out of college to embark on a [[radio]] career, and in 1988 was at a small-town station of WVNN in [[Huntsville, Alabama]]. Within a year he left this position following a dispute with the station's managers. They were upset with they called homophobic remarks Sean made in reference to a lesbian caller<ref>Cohen, Jeff (2006). Cable News Confidential: My Misadventures in Corporate Media. Polipoint Press.</ref>. He later broke into a Top 10 market in Atlanta at 640 AM WGST. His national recognition came as an occasional substitute host on the top rated ''The [[Rush Limbaugh]] Show''. Allegedly on his first guest show, he dropped the golden [[EIB]] microphone because of a case of high nerves. The attention gained from substitute-hosting the show paved his way to national syndication.<br />
<br />
==Television==<br />
Sean Hannity was asked to join the newly formed Fox News Channel (FNC) in September 1996<ref>http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,1242,00.html</ref>. <br />
He accepted the offer and became co-host with Alan Colmes of ''Hannity and Colmes'', a prime time one-hour debate-driven talk show focusing on the controversial issues and newsmakers of the day.<ref>http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,1242,00.html</ref> January 9th, 2009 was the final show of Hannity & Colmes, replaced the following week with Seans solo self-entitled show [[Hannity_(tv_show)|Hannity]]. ''Hannity and Colmes'' ranked among the leading cable TV news show (just behind ''Larry King Live'' and the ''O'Reilly Factor''). Hannity also has a weekend show on Fox News, [[Hannity's America]].<br />
<br />
==Controversy== <br />
Hannity angered some traditional [[Catholics]] with his antagonistic treatment of Father Thomas Euteneuer on August, 2006, during which Hannity criticized Fr. Euteneuer for prominent sex scandals in the Catholic Church.<ref>http://thebadguy.wordpress.com/2007/03/15/video-of-the-hannity-euteneuer-squabble</ref> After heated remarks by Hannity during the interview, he finally asked the priest, "Wait, would you deny me Communion?" To which Fr. Euteneuer responded, "I would."<ref>http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/abbott/070320</ref><br />
<br />
==Books==<br />
Hannity's books use patriotic rhetoric as a main theme. His first book, in 2002, was entitled ''Let Freedom Ring: Winning the War of Liberty over Liberalism''. The book remained on the ''New York Times'' bestseller list for 17 weeks.<ref>http://www.harpercollins.com/authors/24930/Sean_Hannity/index.aspx</ref> <br />
In 2004 he wrote ''Deliver Us from Evil: Defeating Terrorism, Despotism, and Liberalism''. In this book he "reveals how the disgraceful history of appeasement has reached forward from the days of [[Neville Chamberlain]] and [[Jimmy Carter]] to corrupt the unrepentant leftists of the modern [[Democratic Party]] from [[Howard Dean]] and [[John Kerry]] to [[Bill Clinton|Bill]] and [[Hillary Clinton]]."<br />
<br />
==Radio==<br />
Hannity reaches approximately 12.5 million radio listeners each day, second only behind Rush Limbaugh.<ref>''Newsweek'', April 27, 2007, p. 29</ref><br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
{{reflist|2}}<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
*[[Conservative Links]]<br />
<br />
==External Links==<br />
*[http://www.hannity.com/ Sean Hannity's Official Website]<br />
*[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,1242,00.html Biography] at Fox News<br />
<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Hannity, Sean}}<br />
[[Category:Conservative Commentators]]<br />
[[Category:Broadcasters]]</div>Ispellcheckhttps://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Sean_Hannity&diff=676904Sean Hannity2009-06-21T02:28:12Z<p>Ispellcheck: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:SHannity.jpg|right|thumb|230px]]<br />
'''Sean Hannity''' (born December 30, 1961) is a [[conservative]] talk show host and [[television]] host of [[Fox News]]'s show [[Hannity]], as well as host of [[Hannity's America]]. The youngest of four children, Hannity was born in [[New York City]] to Irish immigrants. He dropped out of college to embark on a [[radio]] career, and in 1988 was at a small-town station of WVNN in [[Huntsville, Alabama]]. Within a year he left this position following a dispute with the station's managers. They were upset with they called homophobic remarks Sean made in reference to a lesbian caller<ref>Cohen, Jeff (2006). Cable News Confidential: My Misadventures in Corporate Media. Polipoint Press.</ref> He later broke into a Top 10 market in Atlanta at 640 AM WGST. His national recognition came as an occasional substitute host on the top rated ''The [[Rush Limbaugh]] Show''. Allegedly on his first guest show, he dropped the golden [[EIB]] microphone because of a case of high nerves. The attention gained from substitute-hosting the show paved his way to national syndication.<br />
<br />
==Television==<br />
Sean Hannity was asked to join the newly formed Fox News Channel (FNC) in September 1996<ref>http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,1242,00.html</ref>. <br />
He accepted the offer and became co-host with Alan Colmes of ''Hannity and Colmes'', a prime time one-hour debate-driven talk show focusing on the controversial issues and newsmakers of the day.<ref>http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,1242,00.html</ref> January 9th, 2009 was the final show of Hannity & Colmes, replaced the following week with Seans solo self-entitled show [[Hannity_(tv_show)|Hannity]]. ''Hannity and Colmes'' ranked among the leading cable TV news show (just behind ''Larry King Live'' and the ''O'Reilly Factor''). Hannity also has a weekend show on Fox News, [[Hannity's America]].<br />
<br />
==Controversy== <br />
Hannity angered some traditional [[Catholics]] with his antagonistic treatment of Father Thomas Euteneuer on August, 2006, during which Hannity criticized Fr. Euteneuer for prominent sex scandals in the Catholic Church.<ref>http://thebadguy.wordpress.com/2007/03/15/video-of-the-hannity-euteneuer-squabble</ref> After heated remarks by Hannity during the interview, he finally asked the priest, "Wait, would you deny me Communion?" To which Fr. Euteneuer responded, "I would."<ref>http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/abbott/070320</ref><br />
<br />
==Books==<br />
Hannity's books use patriotic rhetoric as a main theme. His first book, in 2002, was entitled ''Let Freedom Ring: Winning the War of Liberty over Liberalism''. The book remained on the ''New York Times'' bestseller list for 17 weeks.<ref>http://www.harpercollins.com/authors/24930/Sean_Hannity/index.aspx</ref> <br />
In 2004 he wrote ''Deliver Us from Evil: Defeating Terrorism, Despotism, and Liberalism''. In this book he "reveals how the disgraceful history of appeasement has reached forward from the days of [[Neville Chamberlain]] and [[Jimmy Carter]] to corrupt the unrepentant leftists of the modern [[Democratic Party]] from [[Howard Dean]] and [[John Kerry]] to [[Bill Clinton|Bill]] and [[Hillary Clinton]]."<br />
<br />
==Radio==<br />
Hannity reaches approximately 12.5 million radio listeners each day, second only behind Rush Limbaugh.<ref>''Newsweek'', April 27, 2007, p. 29</ref><br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
{{reflist|2}}<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
*[[Conservative Links]]<br />
<br />
==External Links==<br />
*[http://www.hannity.com/ Sean Hannity's Official Website]<br />
*[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,1242,00.html Biography] at Fox News<br />
<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Hannity, Sean}}<br />
[[Category:Conservative Commentators]]<br />
[[Category:Broadcasters]]</div>Ispellcheckhttps://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Pascal%27s_wager&diff=676899Pascal's wager2009-06-21T02:07:07Z<p>Ispellcheck: </p>
<hr />
<div>'''Pascal's Wager''' is a [[philosophy|philosophical]] proposition which takes the following form:<br />
<br />
[[God]] either exists or not.<br />
<br />
#If God does not exist and you do not not believe in God, you gain nothing and lose nothing.<br />
#If God does exist and you do not believe in God, you are condemned to [[hell]] for eternity; infinite loss.<br />
#If God does not exist and you do believe in God, you gain nothing and lose nothing.<br />
#If God does exist and you do believe in God, you will receive an eternity in [[heaven]]; infinite gain.<br />
<br />
[[Blaise Pascal]] reasoned that, given the relative gains and losses for each scenario, the only sensible course for a rational human being was to believe in God since the potentially infinite gains and losses which occur if God exists outweigh any possible loss in a finite situation if God does not exist. This is true regardless of what probability one assigns to God's existence as long as some possibility is assigned. <br />
<br />
==Critical evaluation==<br />
Pascal's wager as Pascal stated it is flawed within the context of [[Christianity]], because based upon Christian theology, mere belief in God does not ensure [[salvation]].<br />
Pascal's wager is also not geared for multiple competing god scenarios where various forms or selections of gods are given that may be mutually or partially exclusive.<br />
<br />
[[Category:Philosophy]]<br />
[[Category:Theology]]<br />
[[Category: Articles with unsourced statements]]</div>Ispellcheckhttps://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Timothy_Geithner&diff=676897Timothy Geithner2009-06-21T02:01:32Z<p>Ispellcheck: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:TimothyGeithner.jpg|thumb|right|300px|Official US Treasury photo of Timothy Geithner]]<br />
'''Timothy Geithner''' (b. 1961) became the [[Secretary of the Treasury]] in the [[Obama Administration]] in January, 2009. [[Image:Geithner1.jpg|thumb|370px|Critics feared Geithner's vague plans would crash]] Geithner got off to a very bad start, as his programs from 2008 have worked poorly, he was ridiculed and humiliated during his confirmation hearings for not paying taxes (even though he has admitted to using tax software Turbo Tax, which would have clearly showed him the errors), his first major proposal as Secretary was uniformly repudiated by all sides, and the Treasury lacks (as of March 24) a single major senior official besides him. <br />
<br />
==Career==<br />
Educated at Dartmouth and Johns Hopkins, he spent many years abroad. Previously he was president of the powerful Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Geithner started as a Republican and changed his voter registration — to Independent — only in the late 1990s, when he became under secretary for international affairs in the Clinton administration.<br />
<br />
<br />
He is a nonpartisan technical expert who worked for both Republican and Democratic administrations. <br />
==President of New York Federal Reserve Bank==<br />
In 2008 he was deeply involved in the complex moves by the Federal Reserve and the Treasury to bailout banks in the [[Financial Crisis of 2008]]. That included $700 billion in money sought by president [[George W. Bush]] and passed by bipartisan majorities in Congress in October, 2008, and trillions in loan guarantees made by the Federal Reserve on its own authority. Geithner now is the person most responsible for bringing recovery to the economy. <br />
<br />
[[Image:Geithner2,jpg.jpg|thumb|290px]] <br />
<br />
Geithner was appointed to the Treasury largely on the basis of his work at the New York Fed. His most important action there was design the bailout of giant insurance firm [[American Insurance Group|AIG]], with 80% government ownership of AIG. It received $170 billion from the government. AIG scandalized the nation in March 2009 by giving out $165 million in bonuses to the very people who caused it to lose over $60 billion after the government took it over. <br />
<br />
==Treasury Secretary==<br />
<br />
In the confirmation hearings in January 2009 he was publicly humiliated by the Senate (controlled by Democrats) when it seemed he deliberately evaded over $40,000 of federal taxes. He paid the taxes and penalties and was confirmed, with most Republicans opposed. <br />
Geithner and the [[Obama Administration]] moved moved to handle the crisis on two fronts. Working with Democrats in Congress (and three moderate Republican Senators), they passed the an economic stimulus bill, the "[[American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009]]", with $500 billion of new spending and nearly $300 billion in new tax cuts. The stimulus will begin operations in mid-February, 2009, and supporters hoped it would slow the nosediving economy. Conservative critics feared it would be ineffective in the short run and add to the national debt and tax burdens in the long run.<br />
===Bailout plans===<br />
[[Image:Geithner3.jpg|thumb|390px|left|Tom Toles lampoons Geithner's March 2009 plan, which will force taxpayers to "eat" (pay for) a trillion dollars worth of toxic assets]] With banks on the verge of failure, Geithner unveiled yet another massive bailout program in mid-February. Trillions would be spent to move toxic assets out of the banks, but the unanimous reaction was negative and Geithner hung on to his job, but had to come up with a better plan. Geithner has the authority to decide what to do with the second tranche of $350 billion from the $700 billion banking bailout bill passed by Congress in October 2008. <br />
<br />
[[Image:Toxic-2-assets.jpg|thumb|290px|left]]<br />
With Geithner losing more of his credibility as a problem solver, he came back with a plan on March 23 that will not need additional funding or approval by Congress. The Treasury will use $100 billion from the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), as well as new capital from private investors, in order to generate $500 billion in purchasing power to buy toxic loans and assets. The program could potentially expand to $1 trillion over time, and initial responses by Wall Street have been favorable.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
[[Category:Obama Administration]]<br />
[[Category:Finance]]<br />
[[Category:Taxation]]<br />
[[Category:United States Secretaries of the Treasury]]<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Geithner, Timothy}}</div>Ispellcheckhttps://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Pascal%27s_wager&diff=676837Pascal's wager2009-06-20T21:42:00Z<p>Ispellcheck: </p>
<hr />
<div>'''Pascal's Wager''' is a [[philosophy|philosophical]] proposition which takes the following form:<br />
<br />
[[God]] either exists or not.<br />
<br />
#If God does not exist and you do not not believe in God, you gain nothing and lose nothing.<br />
#If God does exist and you do not believe in God, you are condemned to [[hell]] for eternity; infinite loss.<br />
#If God does not exist and you do believe in God, you gain nothing and lose nothing.<br />
#If God does exist and you do believe in God, you will receive an eternity in [[heaven]]; infinite gain.<br />
<br />
[[Blaise Pascal]] reasoned that, given the relative gains and losses for each scenario, the only sensible course for a rational human being was to believe in God since the potentially infinite gains and losses which occur if God exists outweigh any possible loss in a finite situation if God does not exist. This is true regardless of what probability one assigns to God's existence as long as some possibility is assigned<ref>Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy</ref>. <br />
<br />
==Critical evaluation==<br />
Pascal's wager as Pascal stated it is flawed within the context of [[Christianity]]; presumably, an omnipotent God would be able to detect such a deception<ref>The God Delusion</ref>.<br />
Pascal's wager is also not geared for multiple competing god scenarios where various forms or selections of gods are given that may be mutually or partially exclusive. The probability of believing in the wrong god would mitigate any perceived advantage of making the wager<ref>Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy</ref>.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Philosophy]]<br />
[[Category:Theology]]</div>Ispellcheckhttps://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Fox_News_Channel&diff=676832Fox News Channel2009-06-20T21:20:45Z<p>Ispellcheck: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:FNC logo.jpg|thumb|right|Fox News Logo]]<br />
<br />
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 [[Australia|Australian]]-born media mogul [[Rupert Murdoch]]'s [[News Corporation]]. [[Roger Ailes]] was named Chairman of the Fox Television Stations Group on August 15, 2005.<br />
<br />
==Founding==<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
==Fair and Balanced==<br />
[[Image:Fair_balanced.jpg |thumb|left|Fair And Balanced Logo]]<br />
[[Liberal]] 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 politicians and advocates have relentlessly attacked the cable network, sometimes accusing it of being a Republican [[propaganda mill]]. Former Vice-President and 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'. Some have referred to FOX News as "the propaganda arm of the Republican Party" or "Faux News." In a grandstanding gesture of political theater the group unsuccessfully petitioned the [[Federal Trade Commission]] to stop Fox's from using its slogan as "deceptive advertising". It was unanimously rejected. <ref>[http://www.showbizdata.com/news/36127/FTC-REJECTS-COMPLAINTS-AGAINST-FOX-NEWS FTC: "It's best to ignore nuts"]</ref> Fox News spokesman Rob Zimmerman told today's (Tuesday) Wall Street Journal: "If they can attack Fox News to this extreme, ''then all news organizations are at risk to be targeted by similar attacks. ... It's best to ignore nuts."'' <br />
<br />
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 liberal. <ref>[http://rcp.missouri.edu/articles/milyo_media.html]</ref> The program is a model of smart news television. <br />
<br />
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]] who sides with conservatives. He regularly charges the oil companies with [[price-gouging]] and attacks big business for quashing the little guy. [[Greta Van Susteren]]'s politics are unclear, as she mostly covers the [[crime]]-of-the-day stories. [[Geraldo Rivera]] is traditionally liberal on most issues, with the exception of being a strong supporter of the military and stiff penalties for [[sex offender]]s. <br />
<br />
Some liberal commentaors, such as host [[Alan Colmes]], news analyst [[Marvin Kalb]], and [[Eleanor Clift]], are affiliated with the channel. In general, Fox News is closer to mainstream America than [[CBS]], [[ABC]], [[NBC]] or [[CNN]], its founding mission.<br />
<br />
Conservatives have criticism for Fox. Their 'Fair and Balanced' motto allows [[liberal]] [[propaganda]], lies, deceit, and half-truths to gain an audience. In reality, Fox was judged to actually provide a more "fair and balanced" coverage in the 2008 Presidential race than all three MSM networks, who had a decidedly pro-Obama tilt, a study by the ''Center for Media and Public Affairs''. <ref>[http://www.cmpa.com/pdf/08summer.pdf Center for Media and Public Affairs: ''How TV News Has Covered McCain, Obama and Hillary'']</ref><br />
<br />
== Ratings Dominance ==<br />
Fox News Channel was the 2nd highest rated cable channel on all of television during the first quarter of 2009 in prime time Total Viewers. CNN was 17th and MSNBC 24th for the first three months of the year. FNC beat CNN and MSNBC combined and gained the most compared to the first quarter of 2008, up 24%. 2009's first quarter was FNC's 3rd highest rated quarter in prime time in the network's history — just behind Q4 '08 and Q3 '05. In prime time, ages 25-54 demo, and in total day in both categories, FNC grew more year-to-year than CNN and MSNBC combined. FNC had nine of the top 10 programs on cable news in Total Viewers. <br />
<br />
[[Bill O'Reilly|The O'Reilly Factor]] has now been #1 on cable news for 100 consecutive months, up 27% in Total Viewers year-over-year. <br />
<br />
[[Glenn Beck]] has increased the 5pmET time period 90% in Total Viewers and 115% in the demo vs. Q1 '08, ''and is the fastest growing program in cable news for March''. Special Report with Bret Baier is up 39% in Total Viewers and 41% in the demo. [[Sean Hannity|"Hannity"]] is up 36% in Total Viewers and up 35% in the demo since going solo for the hour.<br />
<br />
Those three new programs beat CNN and MSNBC ''combined'' in total viewers during their respective time slots.<br />
<br />
On the Record with [[Greta Van Susteren]] is up 55% in total viewers and 75% in the demo. Your World with Neil Cavuto is up 60% in Total Viewers and 102% in the demo. Glenn Beck, is up 212% in the demo and up 128% in total viewers. <ref>[http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/ratings/april_ratings_fnc_beats_cnn_and_msnbc_combined_115179.asp Media Bistro: April Ratings: FNC Beats CNN and MSNBC Combined]<br />
</ref><br />
<br />
== Anti-elitist ==<br />
Conservatives argue that Fox's real ethos is not Republican or conservative, but anti-[[elitist]] — a major reason it connects with so many Americans and annoys so many coastal elites. "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 politically correct "militant" to refer to 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.<br />
<br />
Another aspect of Fox's anti-elitism is the treatment of [[evangelical]] and [[fundamentalist Christian]]s with respect, far from the normal liberal media's depiction as as lunatics or extremists. "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 [[lobbyist|lobbying]] 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><br />
<br />
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><br />
<br />
== Fox Versus Fringe Views ==<br />
"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." <br />
<br />
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><br />
<br />
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><br />
<br />
== Fox Versus Obama ==<br />
[[Barack Hussein Obama]] has thin skin when it comes to criticism of his policies. The entire [[mainstream media]] has thrown its support to Obama and refuses to questions his policies. Fox News is the lone station that will criticize Obama fairly. Obama said, <ref>[http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/media_critic_fox_news/2009/06/19/227121.html Media Critic: Fox Only Press Doing Its Job] NewsMax, June 19, 2009</ref><br />
<br />
{{cquote| “I’ve got one television station that is entirely devoted to attacking my administration…That’s a pretty big megaphone. You’d be hard pressed if you watched the entire day to find a positive story about me on that front.” }}<br />
<br />
Media critic David Zurawik said “Thank goodness at least one TV outlet, Fox, is questioning Team Obama as it pushes for the kind of massive change in American life not seen since the era of Franklin Roosevelt,” and "...ABC, NBC, MSNBC, CNBC and the others allow their news operations to be used by the White House for partisan political reasons."<br />
<br />
== Roger Ailes ==<br />
[[Image:Rogerailes_1.jpg |thumb|right|300px|Roger Ailes, Fox News CEO]]<br />
[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. <br />
<br />
On November 20, 2008, [[Roger Ailes]], who now holds the titles of Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, FOX News and Chairman of FOX Television Stations, signed a new five year contract with News Corporation, it was announced by Rupert Murdoch, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. <ref>[http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/fnc/roger_ailes_signs_new_5year_deal_with_news_corp_101312.asp Ailes Inks 5 Year Deal With NewsCorp]</ref><br />
<br />
During Ailes' time with [[News Corporation|News Corp]], [[FNC]] passed [[CNN]] in ratings in all day parts in 2002 to become the number one news network in the country, nearing full distribution with more than 90 million subscribers. In 2007, he launched the [[Fox Business News]] which currently reaches more than 40 million homes and served as the biggest launch in cable television history. Throughout Mr. Ailes' tenure, FOX Television Stations has increased its market share each of the last three years with all time record shares in the last two years. In addition, Fox Television Stations has expanded its local news presence by nearly 100 hours a week in a challenging economic climate.<br />
<br />
== Tony Snow ==<br />
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><br />
<br />
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://whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/04/20060426.html</ref><br />
<br />
==Bill O'Reilly==<br />
The [[O'Reilly Factor]] has been the most watched cable news segment for eight years. [[Bill O'Reilly]] has interviewed Barack Obama and other high profile guests on his show.<br />
:"FOX News destroys NBC and CNN on cable every night. We cover the news. We don't ignore it. And we don't denigrate it." - Bill O'Reilly<br />
Bill O'Reilly is a registered independent, but sides with Republicans on most issues, excluding several Christian causes. Bill O'Reilly wrote the best seller "A Bold Fresh Piece of Humanity." Like [[Sean Hannity]] and other commentators on Fox, O'Reilly's role is that of an independent contractor, expressing his on opinions, not those of Fox News, as opposed to the networks news anchors, like Sheppard Smith.<br />
<br />
==External Links==<br />
*[http://www.foxnews.com/ Fox News]<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist|2}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Cable TV Networks]]<br />
[[Category:Conservative Media]]<br />
[[Category:Conservative news organizations]]</div>Ispellcheckhttps://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Michael_Shermer&diff=676831Michael Shermer2009-06-20T21:16:39Z<p>Ispellcheck: </p>
<hr />
<div>'''Michael Brant Shermer''', Ph.D. is the founder of [[The Skeptics Society]], Editor in Chief of the magazine [[Skeptic (magazine)|Skeptic]] and a historian of science. He and his organization investigate supernatural, pseudoscientific, pseudohistorical and extraordinary claims. He is a self-described libertarian and a Fundamentalist Christian turned Agnostic <ref>http://www.michaelshermer.com/about-michael</ref> .<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
<br />
<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Shermer, Michael}}<br />
[[Category:Agnostics]]<br />
[[Category:Authors]]<br />
[[Category:Libertarians]]</div>Ispellcheckhttps://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Michael_Shermer&diff=676792Michael Shermer2009-06-20T19:36:14Z<p>Ispellcheck: </p>
<hr />
<div>'''Michael Brant Shermer''', Ph.D. is the founder of [[The Skeptics Society]], Editor in Chief of the magazine [[Skeptic (magazine)|Skeptic]] and a historian of science. He and his organization investigate supernatural, pseudoscientific, pseudohistorical and extraordinary claims. He is a self-described libertarian and a Fundamentalist Christian turned Agnostic <ref>http://www.michaelshermer.com/about-michael</ref> .<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist}}<br />
<br />
<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Shermer, Michael}}<br />
[[Category:Agnostics]]<br />
[[Category:Authors]]</div>Ispellcheckhttps://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Michael_Shermer&diff=676791Michael Shermer2009-06-20T19:33:11Z<p>Ispellcheck: </p>
<hr />
<div>'''Michael Brant Shermer''', Ph.D. is founder of [[The Skeptics Society]], Editor in Chief of the magazine [[Skeptic (magazine)|Skeptic]] and a historian of science. He and his organization investigate supernatural, pseudoscientific, pseudohistorical and extraordinary claims. He is a self-described libertarian and a Fundamentalist Christian turned Agnostic <ref>http://www.michaelshermer.com/about-michael</ref> .<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<br />
<br />
{{DEFAULTSORT:Shermer, Michael}}<br />
[[Category:Agnostics]]<br />
[[Category:Authors]]</div>Ispellcheck