DarwinPropertyInsight.com

sooo my favorite kind of music is indieish things haha & i have run out of things to download.
i already have (it’s long i know haha but i don’t want a ton of answers of the same thing)

animal collective, arcade fire, architecture in helsinki, arctic monkeys, astronautalis, band of horses, band of skulls, beach fossils, beach house, beirut, best coast, black kids, blackbird blackbird, bombay bicycle club, bon iver, born ruffians, bright eyes, broken bells, built to spill, cajun dance party, cansei de ser sexy, caribou, cat’s eyes, chromeo, city & color, clams casino, cloud nothings, coconut records, com truise, craft spells, crystal castles, cults, cut copy, dale earnhardt jr jr, darwin deez, death from above 1979, deerhunter, delphic, discovery, dr. dog, the drums, ducktails, dum dum girls, edward sharpe & the magnetic zeros, egyptian hip hop, eisley, empire of the sun, fang island, fleet foxes, foals, foster the people, friendly fires, gardens & villa, girls, gold panda, grizzly bear, grouplove, hockey, honey claws, houses, iglu & hartly, iron & wine, islands, kisses, klaxons, la sera, late of the pier, little comets, little dragon, local natives, lykke li, math & physics club, memory tapes, memoryhouse, metric, mgmt, miike snow, millionyoung, miniature tigers, minus the bear, modest mouse, mystery jets, m83, naked & famous, neon indian, neutral milk hotel, no age, noah & the whale, panda bear, passion pit, pepper rabbit, peter bjorn & john, phantogram, phoenix, pinback, portugal. the man, ra ra riot, ratatat, real estate, sea wolf, seapony, sleigh bells, small black, smith westerns, someone still loves you boris yetslin, starfucker, sufjan stevens, sunset rubdown, surfer blood, tame impala, telekenisis, tennis, the antlers, the babies, the fratellis, the head & the heart, the horrors, the kills, the kooks, the libertines, the maccabees, the mountain goats, the national, pains of being pure at heart, postal service, the rapture, the shins, the strokes, the submarines, the teenagers, temper trap, the unicorns, the vaccines, the virgins, the war on drugs, the white stripes, the wombats, the young friends, tokyo police club, toro y moi, two door cinema club, unknown mortal orchestra, vampire weekend, vivian girls, voxtrot, warpaint, washed out, wavves, we are trees, we were promised jetpacks, wild beasts, wild nothing, wolf parade, wu lyf, yacht, young the giant, youth lagoon, & yuck

i don’t really like matt & kim, the xx, kasabian, or keane.

anything you have to offer would be dandy haha thanks.

Dinosaur Jr
Pixies
Sebadoh
Pavement

i.e. REAL indie

We will be moving to darwin early next year and I’d like to know what the good suburbs are. I haven’t been there for a long time and I don’t want to get stuck in a bad area. We can’t afford the very "upper-class" suburbs but would like to avoid the bad suburbs. Looking at the real estate sites I am finding lots of suitable houses in the palmerston area, but am reading mixed comments about living out there? Is there decent suburbs in the palmerston area if you don’t mind the drive in? And if i were to live there what sort of travelling time am I looking at to go to school in maybe the moil or leanyer area? Thanks

I used to transcribe criminal proceedings for the supreme court, so I got a fair idea about where the crime was. It really is spread out, I know there was a bit in Palmerston, however I don’t think it was too much worse than anywhere else. I’ve been to Palmerston many times, either to shop or visit friends, and they never mentioned any drama around their house.

The drive from Palmerston into Darwin 1st thing in the morning is a bit nightmarish, bumper to bumper traffic. Some of my colleagues said it can take them a hour to get into Casuarina (which is near Moil/Leanyer), but the highway has been upgraded, so it shouldn’t be as bad now.

I am in year 12 and I am doing a persuasive writing essay which involves writing in plain English about a topic which regards a social issue. My essay is meant to persuade people and grab their attention. I was wondering if there was anyone who can analyse this and tell me how to improve this would be a great help. 10 points BEST answer, no need to rush i need it done with 6 hours tho. Thx

On the way back from work to see his loving family, John Richards has his life taken away from him. John has never been a drinker and has a clean criminal record. If John did not finish early that day, if John hadn’t caught that green light, perhaps he would be alive. Or if the other driver had not been drinking John would be alive. The thing about drink driving is your not endangering just your life, your endangering the lives of everyone around you. Some people say ‘an eye for an eye’ but Peter Davis walked away from a sentence because he was only 16. Now Peter cannot go for his license for 2 more years. But Mrs. Richards will never see her husband again.
It seems we overlook the danger underage drinking until it is too late. 3000 people die a year from harmful drinking in Australia alone. And it causes nearly 4% of deaths worldwide according to WHO (World Health Organisation), more than AIDS, tuberculosis or violence.
Alcohol can be harmful, even fatal when misused. Alcohol has physical, emotional and mental effects on adolescents. When alcohol is consumed on a weekly basis, it can affect our judgment and ability to make good decisions. It is no wonder why youths who consume alcohol on a daily or weekly basis show signs of physical and physiological stress. This stress affects their schooling. When students get bad grades as a result of alcohol misuse, they tend to lose thrive for academic excellence.
Ari Novick Ph.D/therapist. Says he has seen many teen clients, who explain how being under the influence of alcohol has affected their judgement and hence they made bad decisions, such as falling pregnant. According to The Australian Bureau of Statistics, 25% of youths aged 14-19 consume alcohol on a daily or weekly basis.
Studies have shown the negative effects on the brain caused by alcohol. Memory loss, short attention span, lowered concentration etc. It is this effect of alcohol which results in poor academics.
In which direction do you think our nation is heading if one quarter of our school students resort to binge drinking?
The main reason for underage drinking is exposure to alcohol. It is this exposure to alcohol which negatively influences the use of alcohol. Alcohol is advertised nearly everywhere today, television, newspapers, catalogues, movies and more. It is this exposure to alcohol which influences the use of alcohol.
We as a society need to look into the reasons why adolescents resort to binge drinking.
On December 21st 2008, Darwin police gave out 51 DUIs. It seems adults are still not getting the message and we still feel we have the right to reprimand youths for underage drinking? It is evident that this publicity of alcohol is only encouraging the misuse of alcohol. To stand against this rising rate of alcohol abuse, we need to discourage alcohol fuelled violence in our homes and in the streets.
People will argue that raising tax on RTD alcohol does not work, and that teenagers will just turn to mixing their own drinks. This may be true, according to Bridie Smith that reports data released by the Liquor Merchants Association of Australia that shows between April and June 2008, there was a 30% fall in the sale of RTD drinks, on the other hand there was a 46% rise in the sale of full strength body spirits sold in the same period.
This does not mean we should give up. If we stop trying and leave the choices up to the teenagers, we are putting their future, and the future of our nation in peril.
In contrast to what I have said, there is no real cure for underage drinking. It spreads extremely fast and is influenced towards every genre of adolescents. Peer pressure may just be the biggest influence on the increasing rate of underage drinking. There is nothing we can do to stop this without greater law enforcement. Parents need to take responsibility for alcohol consumption at home, to become aware of the influence they have on their children. It is the responsibility of alcohol retailers, it is the responsibility of the government, and it is the responsibility of parents, to discourage teenage alcohol use. You cannot leave a gun in the hands of a child and walk away; there will nearly always be a negative outcome.

You keep on using "your" when you really should be using "you’re".

I think you need to read your essay again. You’re missing some words (e.g. It seems we overlook the "of" danger underage drinking until it is too late.).

I don’t think you should be using "etc" in a formal essay. You could say, "to name a few" or something like that.

I feel like you have something going on here but you definitely need to proofread it. Sometimes, I don’t even get what you’re trying to say. What I mentioned above only has something to do with grammar (I’m sure those aren’t everything). Just wait for other people to comment on everything else. I have homework to do…lol…

Glen Ross Vacation Property Sales employs seven salespeople as follows:
Salespeople

ID Number—Name

103—Darwin

104—Kratz

201—Shulstad

319—Fortune

367—Wickert

388—Miller

435—Vick

When a salesperson makes a sale, a record is created including the date, time, and dollar amount of the sale. The time is expressed in hours and minutes, based on a 24-hour clock. The sale amount is expressed in whole dollars. Design a Sale class that contains a sale’s data.
3 years ago Report Abuse
Additional Details
Salespeople earn a commission that differs for each sale, based on the following rate schedule:
Commission Rates

Sale Amount— Rate

$0 – 50,000—.04

$51,000 – 125,000—.04

$126,000 – 200,000—.04

$201,000 and up— .04

Design an application that produces each of the following reports:

A report listing each salesperson number, name, total sales, and total commissions
A report listing each month of the year as both a number and a word (for example, "01 January") and the total sales for the month for all salespeople
A report listing total sales as well as total commissions earned by all salespeople for each of the following time frames, based on hour of the day: 00-05, 06-12, 13-18, and 19-23.

You should do your own homework instead of asking the internet to do it for you…

I have repeatedly seen creationists here on Y!A falsely malign Darwin by saying that he was a racist and that he thought Blacks are subhuman.

Those malignings are false because Darwin was actually more enlightened about race than most others were at that time. Furthermore, he did not consider Blacks to be subhuman and he abhorred the enslavement of Blacks in contrast to many Christians of the time.

Three questions that I asked concerning those false malignings were deleted, apparently by a creationist who was tracking me. This creationist apparently did not like it that I exposed those false malignings for what they were.

So, again, do creationists think it is okay to falsely malign Darwin in their attempts to refute evolution?

For those who would like to know, the following is the information I provided to show that Darwin was not a racist and that he did not consider Blacks to be subhuman (and I’m sorry this is so long):

Here is what Darwin said about the races in his Descent of Man:

"Although the existing races of man differ in many respects, … yet if their whole organisation be taken into consideration they are found to resemble each other closely in a multitude of points. Many of these points are … unimportant or of so singular a nature, that it is extremely improbable that they should have been independently acquired by aboriginally distinct species or races. The same remark holds good with equal or greater force with respect to the numerous points of mental similarity between the most distinct races of man. …I was incessantly struck, whilst living with the Fuegians on board the Beagle, with the many little traits of character, shewing how similar their minds were to ours; and so it was with a full-blooded n e g r o with whom I happened once to be intimate."

Does that sound like someone who believed that blacks are subhuman?

Ignoring the above quote, creationists often refer to the following, which actually follows that quote:

"…At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the n e g r o or Australian and the gorilla."

The creationists frequently say that Darwin was advocating the extermination of blacks, but, in fact, he was just making an observation of what happens when the so-called "civilized" peoples meet up with the less civilized. And, considering that Darwin had said the differences in intellect between whites and other races were insignificant, his remark about the separation between the N e g r o or Australian and the gorilla was certainly referring to the primitive way they were living in the wild in contrast to that of those who lived in a "civilized state," rather than to any perceived physical or mental similarity to apes.

The fact is that many Christians at that time believed blacks to be subhuman or intellectually deficient, and they used that belief, along with the Bible, to justify their enslavement.

The following shows Darwin’s attitude towards the enslavement of blacks in contrast with the Christian norm of the time.

"While strolling about the town Darwin was disgusted at the sight of black slaves, and upon returning to the Beagle he got into a big quarrel with Capt. FitzRoy about the ethics of treating humans as property. FitzRoy [who was a devout Christian] flew into a temper and forbid Darwin to share his dinner table with him ever again. After a short cooling off period Capt. FitzRoy apologized to Darwin and his privilege to dine with him was restored."

The following is Darwin’s account of the incident.

" ‘We had several quarrels; for when out of temper he [FitzRoy] was utterly unreasonable. For instance, early in the voyage at Bahia in Brazil he defended and praised slavery, which I abominated, and told me that he just visited a great slave-owner, who had called up many of his slaves and asked them whether they were happy, and whether they wished to be free, and all answered ‘No.’ I then asked him, perhaps with a sneer, whether he thought that the answers of slaves in the presence of their master was worth anything. This made him excessively angry …’"
http://www.aboutdarwin.com/voyage/voyage04.html
@In the beginning God created evolution.: "I, for one, give Darwin full credit for his observation. I just don’t completely buy it. Too many holes to call it a scientific fact. It’s a theory, an observation, not a proven fact."

Unfortunately, you use the same false argument about the word theory that creationists use. See my answer here.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20101013170944AAT3Ann&r=w#B5BNXHbANVD4FuV46MSV

There is a massive amount of evidence for evolution. Please do some more research on the matter before repeating what you said.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20101122101832AA6QTQm

@geessewereabove, you are repeating typical creationist falsehoods about scientific theories. Please see my added comment above.

Furthermore you made this statement: "When I was in school we were taught that ALL came to be in Six billion years, now they are falsely teaching that All is trillions of years old,"

That trillions of years old claim is nothing but utter nonsense. The evidence is that the universe is approximately 13.7 billion years old. Your other statements are taken directly from some lying creationist web site.
And the earth is about 4.5 billion years old.
Also, you did not answer my question. Since you are the only creationist so far who answered, do you think that it is okay for creationists to falsely malign Darwin by saying he was a racist and that he considered Blacks to be subhuman?

Certain people seem to think that lying for jesus is ok.

1. Samuel Clemens (Mark Twain) was born on and died on days when Halley’s Comet can be seen. During his life he predicted that he would die when it could be seen.
2. US Dollar bills are made out of cotton and linen.
3. The 57 on the Heinz ketchup bottle represents the number of pickle types the company once had.
4. Americans are responsible for about 1/5 of the world’s garbage annually. On average, that’s 3 pounds a day per person.
5. Giraffes and rats can last longer without water than camels.
6. Your stomach produces a new layer of mucus every two weeks so that it doesn’t digest itself.
7. 98% of all murders and rapes are by a close family member or friend of the victim.
8. A B-25 bomber crashed into the 79th floor of the Empire State Building on July 28, 1945.
9. The Declaration of Independence was written on hemp (marijuana) paper.
10. The dot over the letter i is called a tittle.
11. A raisin dropped in a glass of fresh champagne will bounce up and down continuously from the bottom of the glass to the top.
12. Benjamin Franklin was the fifth in a series of the youngest son of the youngest son.
13. Triskaidekaphobia means fear of the number 13. Paraskevidekatriaphobia means fear of Friday the 13th (which occurs one to three times a year). In Italy, 17 is considered an unlucky number. In Japan, 4 is considered an unlucky number.
14. A female ferret will die if it goes into heat and cannot find a mate.
15. All the chemicals in a human body combined are worth about 6.25 euro (if sold separately).
16. In ancient Rome, when a man testified in court he would swear on his testicles.
17. The ZIP in ZIP code means Zoning Improvement Plan.
18. Coca-Cola contained Coca (whose active ingredient is cocaine) from 1885 to 1903.
19. A 2 by 4 is really 1 1/2 by 3 1/2.
20. It’s estimated that at any one time around 0.7% of the world’s population is drunk.
21. Each king in a deck of playing cards represents a great king from history: Spades = David ; Clubs = Alexander the Great ; Hearts = Charlemagne ; Diamonds = Caesar
22. 40% of McDonald’s profits come from the sales of Happy Meals.
23. Every person, including identical twins, has a unique eye and tongue print along with their finger print.
24. The spot on the 7-Up logo comes from its inventor who had red eyes. He was an albino.
25. 315 entries in Webster’s 1996 dictionary were misspelled.
26. The save icon in Microsoft Office programs shows a floppy disk with the shutter on backwards.
27. Albert Einstein and Charles Darwin both married their first cousins (Elsa Löwenthal and Emma Wedgewood respectively).
28. Camel’s have three eyelids.
29. On average, 12 newborns will be given to the wrong parents every day.
30. John Wilkes Booth’s brother once saved the life of Abraham Lincoln’s son.
31. Warren Beatty and Shirley McLaine are brother and sister.
32. Chocolate can kill dogs; it directly affects their heart and nervous system.
33. Daniel Boone hated coonskin caps.
34. Playing cards were issued to British pilots in WWII. If captured, they could be soaked in water and unfolded to reveal a map for escape.
35. 55.1% of all US prisoners are in prison for drug offenses.
36. Most lipstick contains fish scales.
37. Orcas (killer whales) kill sharks by torpedoing up into the shark’s stomach from underneath, causing the shark to explode.
38. Dr. Seuss pronounced his name soyce.
39. Slugs have four noses.
40. Ketchup was sold in the 1830s as medicine.
41. The Three Wise Monkeys have names: Mizaru (See no evil), Mikazaru (Hear no evil), and Mazaru (Speak no evil).
42. India has a Bill of Rights for cows.
43. If you sneeze too hard, you can fracture a rib. If you try to suppress a sneeze, you can rupture a blood vessel in your head or neck and die. If you keep your eyes open by force, they can pop out. (DON’T TRY IT, DUMBASS)
44. During the California gold rush of 1849, miners sent their laundry to Honolulu for washing and pressing. Due to the extremely high costs in California during these boom years, it was deemed more feasible to send their shirts to Hawaii for servicing.
45. American Airlines saved $40,000 in 1987 by taking out an olive from First Class salads.
46. About 200,000,000 M&Ms are sold each day in the United States.
47. Because metal was scarce, the Oscars given out during World War II were made of wood.
48. Over a course of about eleven years, the sun’s magnetic poles switch places. This cycle is called Solarmax.
49. There are 318,979,564,000 possible combinations of the first four moves in Chess.
50. Upper and lower case letters are named upper and lower because in the time when all original print had to be set in individual letters, the upper case letters were stored in the case on top of the case that stored the lower case letters.
51. There are no clocks in Las Vegas gambling casinos.
52. The numbers 172 can be found on the back of the US 5 dollar bill, in th

Wow thanks! That amused me for 10 minutes, very interesting
Lol @ #33
i only knew #45 by knowlegde and i wanna see #37 happen lol

when they attempt to refute evolution by maligning Darwin, calling him a racist and that he thought blacks were subhuman.

In fact, Darwin was more enlightened about race than many Christians of his time were.

Here is what Darwin said about the races in his Descent of Man (and I’m sorry this is so long, but the following information is necessary for an understanding of the question):

"Although the existing races of man differ in many respects, … yet if their whole organisation be taken into consideration they are found to resemble each other closely in a multitude of points. Many of these points are … unimportant or of so singular a nature, that it is extremely improbable that they should have been independently acquired by aboriginally distinct species or races. The same remark holds good with equal or greater force with respect to the numerous points of mental similarity between the most distinct races of man. …I was incessantly struck, whilst living with the Fuegians on board the Beagle, with the many little traits of character, shewing how similar their minds were to ours; and so it was with a full-blooded n e g r o with whom I happened once to be intimate."

Does that sound like someone who believed that blacks are subhuman?

Ignoring the above quote, creationists often refer to the following, which actually follows that quote:

"…At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the n e g r o or Australian and the gorilla."

The creationists frequently say that Darwin was advocating the extermination of blacks, but, in fact, he was just making an observation of what happens when the so-called "civilized" peoples meet up with the less civilized. And, considering that Darwin had said the differences in intellect between whites and other races were insignificant, his remark about the separation between the N e g r o or Australian and the gorilla was certainly referring to the primitive way they were living in the wild in contrast to that of those who lived in a "civilized state," rather than to any perceived physical or mental similarity to apes.

The fact is that many Christians at that time believed blacks to be subhuman or intellectually deficient, and they used that belief, along with the Bible, to justify their enslavement.

The following shows Darwin’s attitude towards the enslavement of blacks in contrast with the Christian norm of the time.

"While strolling about the town Darwin was disgusted at the sight of black slaves, and upon returning to the Beagle he got into a big quarrel with Capt. FitzRoy about the ethics of treating humans as property. FitzRoy [who was a devout Christian] flew into a temper and forbid Darwin to share his dinner table with him ever again. After a short cooling off period Capt. FitzRoy apologized to Darwin and his privilege to dine with him was restored."

The following is Darwin’s account of the incident.

" ‘We had several quarrels; for when out of temper he [FitzRoy] was utterly unreasonable. For instance, early in the voyage at Bahia in Brazil he defended and praised slavery, which I abominated, and told me that he just visited a great slave-owner, who had called up many of his slaves and asked them whether they were happy, and whether they wished to be free, and all answered ‘No.’ I then asked him, perhaps with a sneer, whether he thought that the answers of slaves in the presence of their master was worth anything. This made him excessively angry …’"
http://www.aboutdarwin.com/voyage/voyage04.html

So, why are creationists so despicable in their attempts to refute evolution by maligning Darwin?
@motivational_raven, I see that argument quite frequently here on Y!A.
@No Chance Without Jesus, you have been visiting too many lying creationist web sites. There is a massive amount of evidence for evolution and none that prohibits it.

If you doubt me on that, perhaps you should take a look at what CREATIONIST Todd C. Wood, a Research/Associate Professor of Science at the Christian-based Bryon College, says about evolution.

See my answer here.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110115082445AAkVXcl&cp=2
And @No Chance, I am glad you admit that you are despicable.

And you creationists have not refuted evolution. Bald-faced lies don’t count.

It’s because of their fundamentally different approach to knowledge. Creationists tend to place more weight on authority (hence believing the biblical account over the available evidence and even insisting upon using the biblical account to filter what available evidence science should accept or reject or using it to dictate how ambiguous evidence should be interpreted). Science, on the other hand, places emphasis on the facts and consistency, thus evidence is collected and facts are accumulated and models (or theories) are constructed which fit all of the assembled facts together most consistently.

This emphasis on authority is why creationists tend to malign Darwin in an attempt to discredit evolution. After all if anyone could absolutely disprove god they would absolutely disprove creationism, by this reasoning shouldn’t a creationist be able to disprove evolution by discrediting Darwin? Of course it’s specifically because of the fundamentally different approaches to knowledge that this situation is not reciprocal, but creationists, for the most part, appear to be unaware of this fact.

when they attempt to refute evolution by maligning Darwin, calling him a racist and that he thought blacks were subhuman.

In fact, Darwin was more enlightened about race than many Christians of his time were.

Here is what Darwin said about the races in his Descent of Man:

"Although the existing races of man differ in many respects, … yet if their whole organisation be taken into consideration they are found to resemble each other closely in a multitude of points. Many of these points are … unimportant or of so singular a nature, that it is extremely improbable that they should have been independently acquired by aboriginally distinct species or races. The same remark holds good with equal or greater force with respect to the numerous points of mental similarity between the most distinct races of man. …I was incessantly struck, whilst living with the Fuegians on board the Beagle, with the many little traits of character, shewing how similar their minds were to ours; and so it was with a full-blooded n e g r o with whom I happened once to be intimate."

Does that sound like someone who believed that blacks are subhuman?

Ignoring the above quote, creationists often refer to the following, which actually follows that quote:

"…At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the n e g r o or Australian and the gorilla."

The creationists frequently say that Darwin was advocating the extermination of blacks, but, in fact, he was just making an observation of what happens when the so-called "civilized" peoples meet up with the less civilized. And, considering that Darwin had said the similarities in intellect between whites and other races were insignificant, his remark about the separation between the N e g r o or Australian and the gorilla was certainly referring to the primitive way they were living in the wild in contrast to that of those who lived in a "civilized state," rather than to any perceived physical similarity to apes.

The fact is that at that time many Christians at that time believed blacks to be subhuman or intellectually deficient, and they used that belief, along with the Bible, to justify their enslavement.

The following shows Darwin’s attitude towards the enslavement of blacks in contrast with the Christian norm of the time.

"While strolling about the town Darwin was disgusted at the sight of black slaves, and upon returning to the Beagle he got into a big quarrel with Capt. FitzRoy about the ethics of treating humans as property. FitzRoy [who was a devout Christian] flew into a temper and forbid Darwin to share his dinner table with him ever again. After a short cooling off period Capt. FitzRoy apologized to Darwin and his privilege to dine with him was restored.

The following is Darwin’s account of the incident.

" ‘We had several quarrels; for when out of temper he [FitzRoy] was utterly unreasonable. For instance, early in the voyage at Bahia in Brazil he defended and praised slavery, which I abominated, and told me that he just visited a great slave-owner, who had called up many of his slaves and asked them whether they were happy, and whether they wished to be free, and all answered ‘No.’ I then asked him, perhaps with a sneer, whether he thought that the answers of slaves in the presence of their master was worth anything. This made him excessively angry …’"
— Charles Darwin [11]
http://www.aboutdarwin.com/voyage/voyage04.html

So, why are creationists so despicable in their attempts to refute evolution by maligning Darwin?

Sorry this is so long, but the above information is necessary for an understanding of the question.
@Arc: "I wonder why – if Darwin really believed all this – he repented at the end of his life and became a Christian?"

That is just another creationist fabrication! You need to stop believing what you read in lying creationist web sites and books.
@Eric Hayes, so the despicable maligning of Darwin should just be ignored so that more gullible people will be taken in by it and keep repeating it here on Y!A.

And I note that you did not condemn that tactic. Says a lot about you!

Demonizing Darwin is just the tip of the iceberg regarding their misinformation and misunderstandings of anything to do with evolution. I have yet to have a discussion with any creationist that had any knowledge about even simple biology.

As a Christian, I find their views to be more destructive than anything any atheist could possibly come up with. They make us all look hopelessly ignorant, even though evolution is taught, as science, in all Catholic and other mainstream Christian private schools. Evolution IS "the divine design". Why do they think they can convince atheists that there is a God, when they DENY the very evidence of our "Designer" (aka evolution). It’s absurd.

Case in point: "ARC" — Darwin never "recanted". This was a lie propagated by a person who claimed to be a friend and was never in fact anywhere near him. His family refuted this outright lie, but it persists b/c creationists have very little else to go on besides lies.

Does anyone have a shocking collar for cats for sale or know if they even make one? I have a cat and he’s a little sh**! He kills birds in the yard and claws my couch. A buddy gave me one he said was for both cats and dogs. We put it on my cat Darwin and it knocked the crap out of him. Knocked him to the floor and made him go nuts. The first bunch of times it was funny as hell but now he’s randomly walking into walls and doesn’t have much balance. I don’t think the one my buddy gave me was really made for cats but I need something. I looked it up on line and it doesn’t say anything about cats only dogs. http://www.sportdog.com/Gear/E-Collars/FieldTrainer/FieldTrainer-400S.aspx If anyone knows please let me know. I don’t want to do permanent damage to him with this one.

Thanks.

It seems that u hate your cat so much so why even have one. Just give it away. Imagine being a cat and you have an owners that is looking for a shock collar for u because your not exactly the best when it come to behavior. That’s not fair. Give your cat away to someone that actually wants it and doesn’t play around by shocking the cat

The Atheist Calendar

Despite its natural origins in the orbits of the earth and moon, the calendar has been commandeered by powerful religious forces. As atheists grow in power and pride, they will seek to diminish religious influences and instead develop their own celebrations.

The big number:

The big number on the calendar, 2010, supposedly reflects the number of years that have passed since Jesus’ birth. The designation A.D. stands for Anno Domini, or “in the year of our lord.” So momentous was the supposed birth of Jesus, Christians have mandated that we number the years before this “event” backwards and label them B.C. for “Before Christ,” making Jesus’ alleged birth the most important date in human history. Christians, in debate with atheists, even point to the copyright date of atheist books to “prove” that even atheists structure their world around the Jesus myth.

Some atheists have suggested a new numbering system, starting with the creation of the earth or the dawn of man (which would result in some pretty big numbers) or more recent events like Darwin’s publication of On the Origin of Species or the end or World War II.

Awaiting atheists developing enough power to renumber the calendar, a significant but subtle change has taken some of the power from the B.C./A.D. designation. Although religionists still provide the year, 2010; atheists, scientists, and non-Christians have united to make BCE and CE the generally accepted designator of the year. BCE simply stands for “Before Common Era” and CE stands for “Common Era.”

The holy days:

In recent years, “happy holidays” has been thought a more inclusive greeting during the solstice season. However, “holiday” is a contraction of the term “holy day,” so the “happy holidays” greeting includes only those who recognize holy days, like Christians, Jews and Muslims. Atheists are left out.

Christ’s Mass–Christmas, dominates the Western calendar and gets government protection as a federal holiday. The incredible religious and commercial emphasis on Christmas ignores the significant number of atheists and non-Christians for whom the day has no special meaning. Some atheists transfer seasonal traditions to the Winter Solstice. They may give solstice gifts, send solstice cards and have a solstice evergreen. Others simply use the federally and culturally enforced holiday to go for a hike, work on a project, or note the power of religion.

Easter, another Christian holiday, falls on a Sunday, so it has not been designated a federal holiday. Easter, which celebrates the myth that Jesus died and came back to life, holds no meaning for atheists and non-Christians. And, on more careful examination, closing government offices on Sundays also has a religious basis.

Although “Sunday” may have its origins in recognition of the importance of the sun, Christians have linked it to their holy son and label it the “lord’s day.” Historically, Sunday “blue laws” prohibited all businesses from operating on the “lord’s day.” Although most such laws have been ruled unconstitutional, some states still prohibit car sales on Sunday and many states limit alcohol sales on Sunday. There is no reason for treating the first day of the week differently from any other day of the week, except for its religious importance.

Thanksgiving is another holiday with a significant religious component that gets government recognition. President Lincoln first directed Americans to observe a national “day of Thanksgiving and Praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the Heavens.” Although atheists can be thankful to family, friends and neighbors and enjoy a good meal, the Thanksgiving holiday is intertwined with thanks to a deity–an antithetical gesture for atheists.

Strictly religious holidays like Good Friday and Passover remain important on the Western calendar, while Saint Valentine’s and Saint Patrick’s day have lost much of their religious meaning. Halloween is a mixture of pagan and religious myths that receives no government recognition and is such good fun that atheists have a hard time objecting to it.

Religionists have recently created the National Day of Prayer as a demonstration of their ability to influence government to endorse religion despite legal and constitutional prohibitions against doing so.

Although atheists lack the political power to remove government endorsement of religious holidays, they are free to develop their own special days.

see: http://bornatheist.com/calendarwebpage.html

Don’t be ridiculous. Are you suggesting that our use of the common calender means we secretly believe in the myths that inspired it?

Does the fact that you use the days of the week even though they were named after the Norse and Roman gods mean that YOU should stop using the same days everyone else does? Does it mean that YOU secretly believe in and/or worship THOSE god(s)?

You know…if you have an argument to make as to why you think atheists are wrong for not believing in the existence of "God", or why we’re wrong to not believe in YOUR religion, then why not come here and make an intelligent point that actually serves a purpose? The type of thing you have here is completely pointless nonsense that does not even BEGIN to suggest that atheists are mistaken to not believe in "God", or that your religious beliefs have any validity. It’s completely petty and silly and a waste of ALL of our time to use this as some sort of "attack" on atheism.