Monday, November 26, 2007
“there are alternative views in relation to the age of the Giant’s Causeway..”
Mark Devenport also spotted a mischievous question from the Alliance Party MLA Trevor Lunn to the Environment Minister, the DUP’s Arlene Foster [scroll down] - “Mr T Lunn asked the Minister of the Environment what is her assessment of the age of the Giant’s Causeway.” The problem is that her answer, an official written answer as the Minister for the Environment, a) doesn’t answer the question, and b) in doing so appears to give equal weight to those alternative views.
Mrs A Foster: Geologists generally agree that the Giant’s Causeway is some 60 million years old. As you will be aware, however, there are alternative views in relation to the age of the Giant’s Causeway.
And a reminder of where the future of the Causeway Centre fits into that.
Pete Baker @ 08:00 PM
The way things are going, it may be another 60 million years before a replacement visitor’s centre is built.
Posted by on Nov 26, 2007 @ 08:44 PMjoeCaunck,
Will it have been intelligently designed?Posted by on Nov 26, 2007 @ 08:47 PMGood one, Turgon.
Posted by on Nov 26, 2007 @ 08:58 PMThe mischievous question appeared on Slugger last week but, seemingly, went unnoticed. Joe was preoccupied with fadas at the time ;)
Posted by on Nov 26, 2007 @ 09:16 PMFuck me , read the answer very carefully and it does more than give equal weight I think you can deduce that Ms Foster is one of those holding an alternative view. A fuckimng flat earther as the environment minuster responsible for the management of many government applied science services!!”!
Posted by on Nov 26, 2007 @ 09:31 PMNevin,
Off thread but how do you get that link to be just two words and not all the gobbledigook it would be if I tried to link it?
Posted by on Nov 26, 2007 @ 09:40 PMRedfellow’s twenty-third
psalmlaw of political dynamics (corollary 4c):When professional advice contradicts party dogma, recruit new advisers.
Posted by on Nov 26, 2007 @ 09:49 PMI’m not Nevin, but…
to get a link like this
you would put this into the comment box:
Posted by on Nov 26, 2007 @ 10:01 PMGRR, that didn’t work right. If you do “view source” of the page, you can see how the link should work.
Posted by on Nov 26, 2007 @ 10:02 PMAn alternative to the visitors centre could be an anchored offshore ‘Noah’s Ark’, would this need planning permission and would it qualify for a grant???
Posted by on Nov 26, 2007 @ 10:26 PMTurgon, I use Microsoft Front Page to help produce the desired result
Substitute <> for [] in the following:
Put [a href="URL"] in front of the chosen word or phrase and [/a] afterwards. Just copy the actual URL from the box above the relevant webpage and paste between the quotation marks
Try [a href="http://sluggerotoole.com"] immediately in front of Slugger and [/a] immediately after O’Toole - no spaces except in the word/phrase being hyperlinked.
Posted by on Nov 26, 2007 @ 10:27 PMNevin,
Thank you, that is great. Unfortunately I cannot think of anything terribly constructive to say at the moment. I will carry on playing with this great new skill I have learnt on the preview page. Sorry Mick for wasting bandwidth, I will only do it a couple of times.
Kevin I tried your system but it did not work as well for me. Still thank you anyhow
Posted by on Nov 26, 2007 @ 10:43 PMSure the giants causeway has been around 6,000 years why not wait a few more for a new visitor centre!
Posted by on Nov 26, 2007 @ 11:35 PMIs that irony or do you really think 6000 years is a relevant figure?
Posted by on Nov 27, 2007 @ 12:00 AMSnakebrain
That was me taking the piss out of those that really do! lolThough I wish i was the one that threw out that rather pithy inteligent design remark
Posted by on Nov 27, 2007 @ 12:10 AMWasn’t it built in the C18th just to annoy Samuel Johnson?
Posted by on Nov 27, 2007 @ 12:10 AMDamn this so annoys me! ALL the scientific evidence, geological expertise and cartesian logic can be cast aside in favour of dogma. Then again there are those that can say that my history degree and the techniques I learned at QUB(not to mention all my reading of science journals etc) were a waste of time...if I just had faith in the scriptures I’d be ok…
Posted by on Nov 27, 2007 @ 12:16 AMI visited the Museum of Natural History in New York a few years ago.
The guide said that the dinosaur bones were 79 million and twenty three years old.
I asked him how he could be so exact.
He replied that when he started work there twenty three years ago, they told him the bones were 79 million years old.Posted by on Nov 27, 2007 @ 12:18 AMrapunsel‘s right, the answer really is quite alarming.
The real underlying point is whether the Minister has any plans to re-sign the trail down to the Causeway to take account of this creationist claptrap.
“There are alternative views, but they’re wrong.” was, in fact, the answer we were looking for.
Posted by on Nov 27, 2007 @ 12:31 AMThen again there are those that can say that my history degree and the techniques I learned at QUB(not to mention all my reading of science journals etc) were a waste of time...if I just had faith in the scriptures I’d be ok…
Jonny, perhaps without knowing it you have told it exactly as they see it. They aren’t bullish enough to say “science is wrong”, but they try to use misdirection to suggest that there is a credible alternative gleaned from a specific and rather selective interpretation of the Bible.
Posted by on Nov 27, 2007 @ 12:41 AMThis place is turning into a real den of blasphemers..
Posted by on Nov 27, 2007 @ 01:57 AMnot one of you has any real evidence to suggest that creationists are wrong.just because things are doesn’t mean that they always have been so.there was an ice age when ?where are the missing links -billions of fossils-no evidence for evolution-"social darwinism” as used by the nazis to show that blacks,mongolls,aborigines etc..are sub-human that in the origin of species these people were not developed to the same level as caucasians was used by the pro-slavery anglican church at the time ,and despite the lack of evidence was used to justify slavery,-as late as the 1930’s an african pygmy was kept in a zoo in new york.If you are truly interested in truth at least have the integrity to examine all the arguments.It may suit myour agenda to believe in all these millions of years-but you cannot prove it-dna ensures that each thing produces it’s own kind.rna ensures that dna cannot be corrupted.
Posted by on Nov 27, 2007 @ 01:58 AMC’mon, everybody knows that when the stones were designed and built, the Suà Nà sept were put in charge of the gateway. They were appointed by the king of the region, and his son, in perpetuity.
Posted by on Nov 27, 2007 @ 02:17 AMDanny, why don’t you stroll out round the cliffs in Larne and check out the fossil beds that show you history in action?
Posted by on Nov 27, 2007 @ 03:04 AMis it just me, or do most of these creationists, who dont believe in evolution, look (and sound) like they could have benifited from it.
Posted by on Nov 27, 2007 @ 08:42 AM
