When Did Liberalism Become Fascism?

[PoliticalChic]

Progressivism has ALWAYS been fascist. Liberalism isn't.

P and L have ALWAYS been lefty, Fascism always RW. Welcome to reality- Not bs GOP propaganda of the last 15 years....

Wrong again little hater dupe. There is no RW/LW. There is collectivist vs individualist. If you are for authoritarian government you are left wing. Period. The ultimate form of right wing government is NO GOVERNMENT. In other words anarchy. But hater dupes like you have no clue. You just parrot the crap your progressive asshats shove up your keester.

I have a Masters in History 1990- before all your new GOP BS was even made up. The true political spectrum also includes an economic part, LW being communist (not capitalist), RW being fascist (allied with corporations, capitalist) like Naziism. You have a masters in RW GOP BS, dupes. Popularized by "Liberal Fascism" ("Absolute drivel"- the Economist) and the New BS GOP propaganda machine...a disgrace.

Nazi Germany was Socialist, though.

The German Labour Front, and Council of Trust prove it.

German Labour Front - Wikipedia

Council of Trust - Wikipedia

Well at least Hitler and his gang took over a party with Socialist in its name. But when he took over Germany and turned it into a fascist dictatorship, it was anything but socialist.

What made you imagine you needed to document your ignorance?

It was well proven before this post.



"Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian
Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian


1. ".... Nazi Germany was a socialist state, not a capitalist one. And ... socialism, understood as an economic system based on government ownership of the means of production, positively requires a totalitarian dictatorship.


2. ... the word "Nazi" was an abbreviation for "der Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiters Partei — in English translation: the National Socialist German Workers' Party ... what should one expect the economic system of a country ruled by a party with "socialist" in its name to be but socialism?


3. It is far more common to believe that it represented a form of capitalism, which is what the Communists and all other Marxists have claimed. The basis of the claim that Nazi Germany was capitalist was the fact that most industries in Nazi Germany appeared to be left in private hands.


4. . What Mises identified was that private ownership of the means of production existed in name only under the Nazis and that the actual substance of ownership of the means of production resided in the German government. For it was the German government and not the nominal private owners that exercised all of the substantive powers of ownership: it, not the nominal private owners, decided what was to be produced, in what quantity, by what methods, and to whom it was to be distributed, as well as what prices would be charged and what wages would be paid, and what dividends or other income the nominal private owners would be permitted to receive. The position of the alleged private owners, Mises showed, was reduced essentially to that of government pensioners."

 

[PoliticalChic]

Progressivism has ALWAYS been fascist. Liberalism isn't.

P and L have ALWAYS been lefty, Fascism always RW. Welcome to reality- Not bs GOP propaganda of the last 15 years....

Wrong again little hater dupe. There is no RW/LW. There is collectivist vs individualist. If you are for authoritarian government you are left wing. Period. The ultimate form of right wing government is NO GOVERNMENT. In other words anarchy. But hater dupes like you have no clue. You just parrot the crap your progressive asshats shove up your keester.

I have a Masters in History 1990- before all your new GOP BS was even made up. The true political spectrum also includes an economic part, LW being communist (not capitalist), RW being fascist (allied with corporations, capitalist) like Naziism. You have a masters in RW GOP BS, dupes. Popularized by "Liberal Fascism" ("Absolute drivel"- the Economist) and the New BS GOP propaganda machine...a disgrace.

Nazi Germany was Socialist, though.

The German Labour Front, and Council of Trust prove it.

German Labour Front - Wikipedia

Council of Trust - Wikipedia

The Nazis may have had some quasi-socialist policies, but they were not socialists. In fact Hitler HATED socialists. The first groups of people Hitler had arrested were socialists and liberals.

In fact, the Nazis had no real economic ideology. They were extreme nationalists hellbent on avenging WWI and persecuted anyone that they felt supported the overthrow of the Kaiser and the first two post WWI governments - which were mainly socialists and liberals.

The Nazis simply didn't have a strong economic ideology, in some ways they weren't even true fascists - in the sense of Mussolini Fascism.

They were absolutely dictatorial, but capitalism thrived under the Nazis.

"The Nazis may have had some quasi-socialist policies, but they were not socialists."

Need I mention that you're a moron?

 

[PoliticalChic]

"Socialists like Bernie Sanders rarely call for full-blown government ownership of the means of production. They call for policies that amount to government management of the means of production. Such policies calling for extensive federal intervention into local affairs stand in direct violation of the limits placed on federal power by the U.S. Constitution.
Yet, when people express concern about the dangers of a centrally planned economy, Sanders tries to assuage such fears by saying, “The government, in a democratic society, is the people.”
Falling in Love With Socialism

 

[Richard-H]

P and L have ALWAYS been lefty, Fascism always RW. Welcome to reality- Not bs GOP propaganda of the last 15 years....

Wrong again little hater dupe. There is no RW/LW. There is collectivist vs individualist. If you are for authoritarian government you are left wing. Period. The ultimate form of right wing government is NO GOVERNMENT. In other words anarchy. But hater dupes like you have no clue. You just parrot the crap your progressive asshats shove up your keester.

I have a Masters in History 1990- before all your new GOP BS was even made up. The true political spectrum also includes an economic part, LW being communist (not capitalist), RW being fascist (allied with corporations, capitalist) like Naziism. You have a masters in RW GOP BS, dupes. Popularized by "Liberal Fascism" ("Absolute drivel"- the Economist) and the New BS GOP propaganda machine...a disgrace.

Nazi Germany was Socialist, though.

The German Labour Front, and Council of Trust prove it.

German Labour Front - Wikipedia

Council of Trust - Wikipedia

The Nazis may have had some quasi-socialist policies, but they were not socialists. In fact Hitler HATED socialists. The first groups of people Hitler had arrested were socialists and liberals.

In fact, the Nazis had no real economic ideology. They were extreme nationalists hellbent on avenging WWI and persecuted anyone that they felt supported the overthrow of the Kaiser and the first two post WWI governments - which were mainly socialists and liberals.

The Nazis simply didn't have a strong economic ideology, in some ways they weren't even true fascists - in the sense of Mussolini Fascism.

They were absolutely dictatorial, but capitalism thrived under the Nazis.

"The Nazis may have had some quasi-socialist policies, but they were not socialists."

Need I mention that you're a moron?

Your definition of a 'moron' is apparently anyone who says anything you do not like. Apparently you are keenly uninformed as to the economic policies of the Nazis as you are about most of the topics you post.

While it's well known that immediately upon becoming chancellor, Hitler started a massive 'socialist' public works program, it's also a fact that private companies like BMW, Messerschmitt, Bayer and many more thrived. While Hitler did call his party 'socialist' he also said:

"'his interpretation of socialism "has nothing to do with Marxian Socialism'"

Perhaps you should actually do some research into a subject before you start mouthing off:

 

[xyz]

While you are an abject fool....you are a sterling example of government schooling.


"Venezuela Reminds Us That Socialism Frequently Leads to Dictatorship"
Venezuela Reminds Us That Socialism Frequently Leads to Dictatorship

Of course Venezuela is socialist dictatorship, and:
Venezuela, Russia cement ties during high-profile Moscow meetings

 

[PoliticalChic]

Wrong again little hater dupe. There is no RW/LW. There is collectivist vs individualist. If you are for authoritarian government you are left wing. Period. The ultimate form of right wing government is NO GOVERNMENT. In other words anarchy. But hater dupes like you have no clue. You just parrot the crap your progressive asshats shove up your keester.

I have a Masters in History 1990- before all your new GOP BS was even made up. The true political spectrum also includes an economic part, LW being communist (not capitalist), RW being fascist (allied with corporations, capitalist) like Naziism. You have a masters in RW GOP BS, dupes. Popularized by "Liberal Fascism" ("Absolute drivel"- the Economist) and the New BS GOP propaganda machine...a disgrace.

Nazi Germany was Socialist, though.

The German Labour Front, and Council of Trust prove it.

German Labour Front - Wikipedia

Council of Trust - Wikipedia

The Nazis may have had some quasi-socialist policies, but they were not socialists. In fact Hitler HATED socialists. The first groups of people Hitler had arrested were socialists and liberals.

In fact, the Nazis had no real economic ideology. They were extreme nationalists hellbent on avenging WWI and persecuted anyone that they felt supported the overthrow of the Kaiser and the first two post WWI governments - which were mainly socialists and liberals.

The Nazis simply didn't have a strong economic ideology, in some ways they weren't even true fascists - in the sense of Mussolini Fascism.

They were absolutely dictatorial, but capitalism thrived under the Nazis.

"The Nazis may have had some quasi-socialist policies, but they were not socialists."

Need I mention that you're a moron?

Your definition of a 'moron' is apparently anyone who says anything you do not like. Apparently you are keenly uninformed as to the economic policies of the Nazis as you are about most of the topics you post.

While it's well known that immediately upon becoming chancellor, Hitler started a massive 'socialist' public works program, it's also a fact that private companies like BMW, Messerschmitt, Bayer and many more thrived. While Hitler did call his party 'socialist' he also said:

"'his interpretation of socialism "has nothing to do with Marxian Socialism'"

Perhaps you should actually do some research into a subject before you start mouthing off:

"Your definition of a 'moron' is apparently anyone who says anything you do not like."

Sometimes....but in your case, I'd have to turn in my Arbiter-of-Intelligence badge if I didn't immediately assign the appellation 'MORON' to anyone who wrote this:

"The Nazis may have had some quasi-socialist policies, but they were not socialists."


OMG!!!!

Moron may be too kind.


Soviet Communism and German Nazism (socialism) both started from and represented the same source: Karl Marx.

1. The birth of "The New Soviet Man" was the stated aim of Marxism, breeding a new evolutionary form of human being who will think, look, and act differently. The next footage was the Nazi attempt to do exactly the same thing: in German, "We must create a new man! A new life form should appear!"

a. "In both systems we have the ideology of creating a new man. Both systems don't agree with human nature as it is...they are at war with human nature. Both are based on false biology, and false sociology."
Françoise Thom, professor of Soviet history, Sorbonne, Paris


2. "Early socialists publically advocated genocide, in the 19th and 20th centuries. It first appeared in Marx's journal, Rheinishe Zeitung, in January of 1849. When the socialist class war happens, there will be primitive societies in Europe, two stages behind- not even capitalist yet- the Basques, the Bretons, the Scottish Highlanders, the Serbs, and others he calls 'racial trash,' and they will have to be destroyed because, being two stages behind in the class struggle, it will be impossible to bring them up to being revolutionary." George Watson, Historian, Cambridge University.

a. "The classes and races, too weak to master the new conditions of life, must give way...they must perish in the revolutionary holocaust." Karl Marx, People's Paper, April 16, 1856, Journal of the History of Idea, 1981

b. "Before Marx, no other European thinker publically advocated racial extermination. He was the first." George Watson.



3. A year after Lenin's death, 1924, the NYTimes published a small article about a newly established party in Germany, the National Socialist Labor Party, which "...persists in believing that Lenin and Hitler can be compared or contrasted...Dr. Goebell's....assertion that Lenin was the greatest man second only to Hitler....and that the difference between communism and the Hitler faith was very slight...." November 27, 1925.(Article provided in the film)



4. Shortly thereafter the Nazis found it more useful to stress differences, and the earlier campaign posters showing similarities disappeared, posters with both the hammer and sickle and the swastika.

a. "Hitler often stated that he learned much from reading Marx, and the whole of National Socialism is doctrinally based on Marxism." George Watson, Historian, Cambridge.

b. "Socialists in Germany were national socialists, communists were international socialists." Vladimir Bukovsky.



Only after the horrors of Nazism were revealed did Leftists intellectuals pretend that Nazism was not Leftist.....is was and is......
The new mantra is that communism is Leftwing, Nazism is Rightwing.
It isn't.....except to morons....
Raise your paw.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Progressivism has ALWAYS been fascist. Liberalism isn't.

P and L have ALWAYS been lefty, Fascism always RW. Welcome to reality- Not bs GOP propaganda of the last 15 years....

Wrong again little hater dupe. There is no RW/LW. There is collectivist vs individualist. If you are for authoritarian government you are left wing. Period. The ultimate form of right wing government is NO GOVERNMENT. In other words anarchy. But hater dupes like you have no clue. You just parrot the crap your progressive asshats shove up your keester.

I have a Masters in History 1990- before all your new GOP BS was even made up. The true political spectrum also includes an economic part, LW being communist (not capitalist), RW being fascist (allied with corporations, capitalist) like Naziism. You have a masters in RW GOP BS, dupes. Popularized by "Liberal Fascism" ("Absolute drivel"- the Economist) and the New BS GOP propaganda machine...a disgrace.

Nazi Germany was Socialist, though.

The German Labour Front, and Council of Trust prove it.

German Labour Front - Wikipedia

Council of Trust - Wikipedia

The Nazis may have had some quasi-socialist policies, but they were not socialists. In fact Hitler HATED socialists. The first groups of people Hitler had arrested were socialists and liberals.

In fact, the Nazis had no real economic ideology. They were extreme nationalists hellbent on avenging WWI and persecuted anyone that they felt supported the overthrow of the Kaiser and the first two post WWI governments - which were mainly socialists and liberals.

The Nazis simply didn't have a strong economic ideology, in some ways they weren't even true fascists - in the sense of Mussolini Fascism.

They were absolutely dictatorial, but capitalism thrived under the Nazis.

Nazis were anti-Egalitarian Socially Conservative Socialists.

As opposed to Communists which were Egalitarian Socialists, and often Socially Liberal, although not always.

The Nazis were most certainly anti-Capitalism, apart from saying that fact, they managed corporations through Cartels, and the Council of Trust, as well as a German Labour Front which set wages which weren't too high, or low, and dictated workers rights, such as breaks, canteens, cheap, or even free vacation time etc.

Businesses thrived under Nazis, but not Capitalism, Capitalism was micro-managed, there were no free markets.

The Nazis made sure that all businesses were managed for national interest.

The difference is Nazis controlled businesses but allowed them to exist, as opposed to Communists who replaced businesses by government, and which ran the show.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

View attachment 125976

So instead of the believing some supernatural being might be controlling your destiny in some way you'd prefer the mortal with all of it's MacBeth intrigues, deceit, and frailties.

******CHUCKLE*****

First of all I said beings, not just one. Like the devil. Satan is a supernatural being. If I believed in it, disliking that one is okay right?

Christian mythology is full of them. History is full of them too.

Nice Kansas however.

I feel a part of something that is greater than myself. What that something is, is as of yet indescribable in words. But that doesn't mean I believe in the immaculate reception (fuching Pittsburgh!!!), Jesus's divinity, or the resurrection. Doesn't make me hate my mother or devalue humanity.

Yet you apparently devalue beliefs that many people hold.

*****SMILE*****

How does my rejection of those beliefs devalue anyone's belief? You're the one who said I dislike God. How can I dislike something that I don't believe exists?



That's okay though, I don't believe in Zeus or any other man made mythology.

View attachment 126097

The way you present your argument suggests a devaluation of others beliefs in God.

I never stated that you dislike God. Best to keep you facts straight.

Do you subscribe to the creation beliefs most atheists follow called the Big Bang?

*****SMILE*****

Jethro Tull - One Brown Mouse (subtitulado al español)

I completely disagree. It does tend to piss off certain types of Religionist however. Calling their one true god part of a mythological superstition that includes a whole host of supernatural creatures, while true, sends them off in to more incoherent and illogical rants than you can imagine.

I stand corrected. It was not you who said it but you did quote it and question me about it.

I understand the theory. Scientist observed that the Universe is expanding as time goes on. Where did it expand from?

Which tells me you're baiting.

Which is neither here nor there. I didn't post it. I was responding to your post.

Since you don't believe in God does this mean you subscribe to the Big Bang creation mythology where the universe magically appeared from nothing?

******CHUCKLE*****

STEPPENWOLF - BORN TO BE WILD (LYRICS)

 

[Damaged Eagle]

"When did Liberalism become Fascism?"

Just about the same time you found the bottom of your Vodka bottle.

So....you can't find a single error to point to in my posts?

That's because there are none.

Your primary error is that you've apparently started another bottle of Vodka.

1. "Your primary error...."
I never make any errors.
I'm never wrong.....I thought I was once, but I was mistaken.

2. You've inadvertently helped prove that I'm never wrong.

Let's review the fact that your post reveals:

Liberals are first and foremost liars, and lying is a necessity because, in debate, conservatives eat your lunch. Your most common fabrication: ["Your primary error...."] fails a simple test:
in not being able to demonstrate/prove any errors, you prove to be the one making the error.
That's called logic.

What you've done, quite clearly, is prove that you're an idiot.

Responding so seriously to my OBVIOUSLY HUMOROUS post shows what a total moron you are.

If you had a brain, you would have either ignored my post or marked it as funny.

Today, I'm not in the mood for any serious debate, so I'm taking some humorous jabs here and there. Any intelligent person could tell the difference. Obviously you can not.

Or perhaps you should keep your idiotic flaming to the Taunting Areana where it belongs instead.

*****SMILE*****

 

[bripat9643]

It didn't. You're an imbecile.

Liberalism and fascism have always been the same thing

Sent from my SM-G935P using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

 

[NYcarbineer]

It didn't. You're an imbecile.

Liberalism and fascism have always been the same thing

Sent from my SM-G935P using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

Your post should be wearing a hockey helmet.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Okay. What makes Liberal Bernie Sanders a Fascist?

 

[BlindBoo]

First of all I said beings, not just one. Like the devil. Satan is a supernatural being. If I believed in it, disliking that one is okay right?

Christian mythology is full of them. History is full of them too.

Nice Kansas however.

I feel a part of something that is greater than myself. What that something is, is as of yet indescribable in words. But that doesn't mean I believe in the immaculate reception (fuching Pittsburgh!!!), Jesus's divinity, or the resurrection. Doesn't make me hate my mother or devalue humanity.

Yet you apparently devalue beliefs that many people hold.

*****SMILE*****

How does my rejection of those beliefs devalue anyone's belief? You're the one who said I dislike God. How can I dislike something that I don't believe exists?



That's okay though, I don't believe in Zeus or any other man made mythology.

View attachment 126097

The way you present your argument suggests a devaluation of others beliefs in God.

I never stated that you dislike God. Best to keep you facts straight.

Do you subscribe to the creation beliefs most atheists follow called the Big Bang?

*****SMILE*****

Jethro Tull - One Brown Mouse (subtitulado al español)

I completely disagree. It does tend to piss off certain types of Religionist however. Calling their one true god part of a mythological superstition that includes a whole host of supernatural creatures, while true, sends them off in to more incoherent and illogical rants than you can imagine.

I stand corrected. It was not you who said it but you did quote it and question me about it.

I understand the theory. Scientist observed that the Universe is expanding as time goes on. Where did it expand from?

View attachment 126209

Which tells me you're baiting.

Which is neither here nor there. I didn't post it. I was responding to your post.

Since you don't believe in God does this mean you subscribe to the Big Bang creation mythology where the universe magically appeared from nothing?

******CHUCKLE*****

STEPPENWOLF - BORN TO BE WILD (LYRICS)

LOL "the Big Bang creation mythology". Now who's baiting?

The theory is that it exploded into existence from an infinitesimal point that was unimaginably hot.

My personal belief is that the Big Band didn't just happen. It is still happening. Which is why the expansion is accelerating.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

Yet you apparently devalue beliefs that many people hold.

*****SMILE*****

How does my rejection of those beliefs devalue anyone's belief? You're the one who said I dislike God. How can I dislike something that I don't believe exists?



That's okay though, I don't believe in Zeus or any other man made mythology.

View attachment 126097

The way you present your argument suggests a devaluation of others beliefs in God.

I never stated that you dislike God. Best to keep you facts straight.

Do you subscribe to the creation beliefs most atheists follow called the Big Bang?

*****SMILE*****

Jethro Tull - One Brown Mouse (subtitulado al español)

I completely disagree. It does tend to piss off certain types of Religionist however. Calling their one true god part of a mythological superstition that includes a whole host of supernatural creatures, while true, sends them off in to more incoherent and illogical rants than you can imagine.

I stand corrected. It was not you who said it but you did quote it and question me about it.

I understand the theory. Scientist observed that the Universe is expanding as time goes on. Where did it expand from?

View attachment 126209

Which tells me you're baiting.

Which is neither here nor there. I didn't post it. I was responding to your post.

Since you don't believe in God does this mean you subscribe to the Big Bang creation mythology where the universe magically appeared from nothing?

******CHUCKLE*****

STEPPENWOLF - BORN TO BE WILD (LYRICS)

LOL "the Big Bang creation mythology". Now who's baiting?

The theory is that it exploded into existence from an infinitesimal point that was unimaginably hot.

My personal belief is that the Big Band didn't just happen. It is still happening. Which is why the
expansion is accelerating.

I see... So in your Creationist mythology the whole universe magically appeared from essentially nowhere.

Looks like you believe in the supernatural to me.

What set off this glorious chain of events? After all for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Surely a body at rest will remain at rest until acted upon by a force.

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[Moonglow]

Have you seen that fascist piece of legislation from the House of Representatives? Now, talk about liberal/Marxism with a dose of socialism/communism, don't forget the progressive/democrat satanic leaning it has...All praise Reagan...

 

[Moonglow]

Polislick says it's da joos....

 

[regent]

A few people are given the gift or power to define labels, ideologies, history and numerous
other things that people have defined incorrectly over the years, Chic is one person so gifted.

 

[BlindBoo]

How does my rejection of those beliefs devalue anyone's belief? You're the one who said I dislike God. How can I dislike something that I don't believe exists?



That's okay though, I don't believe in Zeus or any other man made mythology.

View attachment 126097

The way you present your argument suggests a devaluation of others beliefs in God.

I never stated that you dislike God. Best to keep you facts straight.

Do you subscribe to the creation beliefs most atheists follow called the Big Bang?

*****SMILE*****

Jethro Tull - One Brown Mouse (subtitulado al español)

I completely disagree. It does tend to piss off certain types of Religionist however. Calling their one true god part of a mythological superstition that includes a whole host of supernatural creatures, while true, sends them off in to more incoherent and illogical rants than you can imagine.

I stand corrected. It was not you who said it but you did quote it and question me about it.

I understand the theory. Scientist observed that the Universe is expanding as time goes on. Where did it expand from?

View attachment 126209

Which tells me you're baiting.

Which is neither here nor there. I didn't post it. I was responding to your post.

Since you don't believe in God does this mean you subscribe to the Big Bang creation mythology where the universe magically appeared from nothing?

******CHUCKLE*****

STEPPENWOLF - BORN TO BE WILD (LYRICS)

LOL "the Big Bang creation mythology". Now who's baiting?

The theory is that it exploded into existence from an infinitesimal point that was unimaginably hot.

My personal belief is that the Big Band didn't just happen. It is still happening. Which is why the
expansion is accelerating.

View attachment 126283

I see... So in your Creationist mythology the whole universe magically appeared from essentially nowhere.

Looks like you believe in the supernatural to me.

What set off this glorious chain of events? After all for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Surely a body at rest will remain at rest until acted upon by a force.

*****CHUCKLE*****

Nope. In my personal belief, the continuous explosion theory, the source and cause of the explosion/expansion are unknowable. Furthermore I acknowledge that however the universe came to it's present state, it does not affect the course of my life.

 

[PoliticalChic]

A few people are given the gift or power to define labels, ideologies, history and numerous
other things that people have defined incorrectly over the years, Chic is one person so gifted.

“Many a true word hath been spoken in jest.”
Shakespeare

 

[PoliticalChic]

View attachment 126097

The way you present your argument suggests a devaluation of others beliefs in God.

I never stated that you dislike God. Best to keep you facts straight.

Do you subscribe to the creation beliefs most atheists follow called the Big Bang?

*****SMILE*****

Jethro Tull - One Brown Mouse (subtitulado al español)

I completely disagree. It does tend to piss off certain types of Religionist however. Calling their one true god part of a mythological superstition that includes a whole host of supernatural creatures, while true, sends them off in to more incoherent and illogical rants than you can imagine.

I stand corrected. It was not you who said it but you did quote it and question me about it.

I understand the theory. Scientist observed that the Universe is expanding as time goes on. Where did it expand from?

View attachment 126209

Which tells me you're baiting.

Which is neither here nor there. I didn't post it. I was responding to your post.

Since you don't believe in God does this mean you subscribe to the Big Bang creation mythology where the universe magically appeared from nothing?

******CHUCKLE*****

STEPPENWOLF - BORN TO BE WILD (LYRICS)

LOL "the Big Bang creation mythology". Now who's baiting?

The theory is that it exploded into existence from an infinitesimal point that was unimaginably hot.

My personal belief is that the Big Band didn't just happen. It is still happening. Which is why the
expansion is accelerating.

View attachment 126283

I see... So in your Creationist mythology the whole universe magically appeared from essentially nowhere.

Looks like you believe in the supernatural to me.

What set off this glorious chain of events? After all for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Surely a body at rest will remain at rest until acted upon by a force.

*****CHUCKLE*****

Nope. In my personal belief, the continuous explosion theory, the source and cause of the explosion/expansion are unknowable. Furthermore I acknowledge that however the universe came to it's present state, it does not affect the course of my life.

".... are unknowable."

What a weak excuse.


You echo the Marxist 'scientist,' Professor Richard Lewontin, a geneticist (and self-proclaimed Marxist), is certainly one of the world’s leaders in evolutionary biology. He wrote this very revealing comment:
“‘We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.” Lewontin explains why one must accept absurdities: “…we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.”