I guess I shouldn’t be surprised by this WHAT? report:
AFA to rebuild Noah’s Ark; Grizzlies, other bad animals excluded
Tupelo, MS – The American Family Association’s Bryan Fischer today announced that he is going to rebuild Noah’s Ark. Citing media reports of animal attacks on humans, he says only the good animals will be allowed.
“We are going to break this curse on the land and only take in the animals which do not attack people,” said Fischer. “For instance, everyone knows that grizzly bears kill people, but did you know that over 300 people were killed by dogs over the past 20 years!? I don’t care what Noah did, there will be no dogs on Noah 2.”
Fischer added that to take the place of real animals, he would be taking stuffed dogs, bears, lions, tigers, and alligators killed by the other passengers.
Debbie Thurman# ~ Nov 11, 2010 at 12:21 pm
“And how much is also due to things beyond man’s control and is cyclical, as history also records? ”
what “things beyond man’s control” are you referring to Debbie? For the last hundred years (coinciding with the industrialization of the world) the ave. world temperatures have been increasing, and these temperatures are beyond any previous ave. temps (with the exception of Esper 2002 study) estimated for over the last 1000 years.
NOAA has an overview and references you can look at here:
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/globalwarming/paleolast.html
MB – Nice one.
Dear Warren Throckmorton:
As a Christian, I am very offended by this supposedly humorous post. The Lord will not be mocked.
Bible-believing Christians know that grizzly bears are favored instruments of the Lord and would never be left off of the ark. The Bible clearly teaches us that our Lord sent female bears to kill 42 boys who made wise cracks about the prophet Elisha’s baldness.
I have read other posts on your blog, and it distresses me to see that as a professed Christian you would waste so much time and energy weeping over 5 dead sinful children, when our Lord killed more than 8 times as many in one fell swoop. I urge you to repent, bring yourself back under the authority of our Lord and Savior, and celebrate the deaths of sinful and disobedient children.
2 Kings 2:23-25
“He went up from there to Bethel, and while he was going up on the way, some small boys came out of the city and jeered at him, saying, “Go up, you baldhead! Go up, you baldhead!” And he turned around, and when he saw them, he cursed them in the name of the LORD. And two she-bears came out of the woods and tore forty-two of the boys.”
It sounds like we share common experiences…except my contacts do not step publicly out and defend both positions. They say they are interested in it but stop short of public positions.
If he is being serious, Fischer does not understand the concept of an sustainable ecosystem. He was having a laugh, surely! Surely?
Not buying that, Jayhuck. Regardless of what egregious things the man has said or done in other realms, he has some standing in this one. Climate change theories are just that, and many respected scientists disagree over man’s role in the phenomena.
As for the curse thing, Genesis 3 is studied very seriously by Christians. Biblical prophecy offers the endpoint:
Man was directed by God to subdue the earth and its creatures. Except for a short time in the beginning, we’ve all lived under “the curse.” That’s a fairy tale to many, but it bears more study, even if allegorically. And one need only look around the world at this very moment to see mounting destructive forces in action (volcanoes, tsumanis, earthquakes). What does it mean?
Beyond that, bears can and do become man killers and destroying them becomes the only sane and humane option when they do. They are more than nuisances in some parts of the country, where they are intruding into populated areas. We can debate why this is happening, but we cannot pretend it isn’t.
The upshot is this: respect the environment and God’s creation, make wise decisions and take action when it is warranted. Was Fischer right in decrying that someone appeared to be expressing more concern for bears gone astray than for the human lives such bears take? You be the judge.
Now, look at how much space and time already have been taken up with something that never should have seen the light of day here.
Not exactly my experience. Of the psychology professors I have had through the years and the psychologists I have worked with, all have openly expressed their desire for a best-of-both-worlds approach. A willingness to discuss the traditional values that they believe are beneficial for a culture, and the non-traditional values they believe are also beneficial.
Usually, when people use the terms Right or Left they are talking about people on the political extremes of those ends – granted, not always. It tends to be the people on the extreme ends that don’t want to hear what the other has to say or dismiss things outright. I would hope that thinking individuals, people who are more moderate, compassionate and understanding in thier view of the world, would get together and discuss the benefits of both traditional and non-traditional values for the culture.
Is that because they will lose their prestige or perhaps even their careers? I have looked inside the field for a long time myself, shunning those who have asked me to become a professional, in fact. I find too much that is too disturbing.
And if the pressure is brought from the outside, will they likewise discard that as from someone unqualified to render it? I’ve faced that condescension, too.
So who, then, can do “it”? Warren’s blog can still serve as a legitimate place for an exchange of ideas along the social continuum, examining the ills of wrong-headed values and policies on either side. Is it fair to say you are seeking to balance your past positions some, Warren? Is a pendulum swinging to somewhere in the middle?
What about partitions in the ark? That should solve the problem, shouldn’t it?
OK, but why? There is enough real stuff to talk about. It doesn’t become you, Warren. These temptations are one of the downsides to blogging. You have a shotgun approach to topics that are currently being discussed right now. So much so, in fact, that I am compelled to lay off all of it.
And I guess “the Left” also includes the 31% of gay folk who told exit polls that they voted Republican this year.
Is everyone at the AFA a wack-job? Yes, I understand this story is a spoof, but if the reports of what Fischer wants to do to Grizzlies is true, then its not far off – Here’s a good report on the real story:
We Must Kill The Demon-Cursed Bears
Is conservation of natural resources, the environment and ecology a liberal or conservative value? Does making it a value of one ‘side’ mean it cannot be a value of the other? I don’t think so and I imagine a great part of America thinks the same and not as Fischer.
.
On the other hand I once stayed in West Yellowstone and the people in the cabin next to me made the mistake of leaving food in their car. A grizzly did a good job on the car getting inside. And residents there regularly have problems with bears. But if you are going to live in close proximity to nature in its rawest, you have to learn how to cope. Heck, I’ve even had a buck, hopped up on its hormones of the fall rut, go after my pickup as I drove through the meadow out back of the house. It’s not just the carnivores you have to look out for sometimes.
…
I guess it was so close to something Fischer might actually do and say that it needed a preface.
It is a spoof. Fischer does however, want to kill all grizzlies, including the Berenstain Bears (well, maybe not them, I don’t know for sure).
Yes, I saw that same thing. What gives? Correction?
If you look at the tags to this post:
“Lame attempts at humor, spoof ”
I’m pretty sure Warren made up the “quote” to point out Fischer’s extreme (and foolish) stance on the bear population in Yellowstone.
I suspect the Noah reference was to highlight the christian belief that God saved (created) the bears for a reason and that Fischer is ignoring that with his “One human being is worth more than an infinite number of grizzly bears” claim.
Warren,
I think the satire was well done and worthwhile to post. I hope you continue to do so in the future.
Greater reportage and scientific investigation. I’m sure that when a massive earthquake an tsunami hit Lisbon, Portugal, several hundred years ago the faithful were sure the second coming was at hand also. As a geologist I can tell you there has not been an uptick in either vulcanism or seismic activitity. Geoscientific researchers have, however, increased their monitoring activities which has increased information concerning either; but that does not mean that the activity itself has increased.
Ok… now I notice the comma in there. I thought you were associating terrorists with the left. Maybe in the past, Bader-Meinhof, Weathermen, and the others, but of late most have been associated with right-wing causes. Yes, I consider Islamic terrorism to be a right-wing cause as it tends to the more authoritarian side, just as most republicans test out as more authoritive (on tests like the Political Compass) and certainly not the libertarians many claim to be.
…
I would like to seriously urge us to drop this topic. Sorry I gave it the impetus I did. I thought we might salvage a useful discussion for a while. Not so, apparently. God bless the grizzlies and God help the Bryan Fischers of the world. And maybe the next time Warren is tempted to post something satirical, he’ll resist the urge.
Parody works best when it takes a position to its extreme.
Unfortunately, with Fischer it’s hard to do parody. His actual statements are so far out there that it’s hard to get more extreme.
Yes, and to the extent that he is God, I am sure he will succeed. The cream will rise to the top. Always does.
“The discussion” is not confined to this blog.
I’m sure what you say is true, David. It cuts across the ideological grain. Some people shoot themselves in the foot and others are targeted for destruction. Too many land mines and too much idiocy out there. The media attack from one end of the spectrum. Sometimes the Church (or para-church) attacks form the other.
The left do not eat their own, generally. I always found Spitzer’s targeting by the HRC (Besen, more specifically) to be interesting, given his role in the DSM makeover. Yes, it is dangerous to be in No Man’s Land, seeking to bridge the gap from either end of the spectrum.
It is none-too-comforting to be targeted by unhinged advocates.
Warren, you have to run your blog as you see fit. If that means doing what too few Evangelicals do — laser in on impropriety within the ranks — then do it. If it does not entail also calling out leftist ideologue “pimples” who muck up things in their own way, then it doesn’t. Your prerogative, even if others disagree with it.
My conversations with politically liberal psychologists on the left have several times confirmed this hypothesis: that although they believe that a wide variety of traditional values have immense benefit for the culture, it is frightening to openly express such views, or to openly challenge non-traditional values to change the culture.
Deconstructionists are repelled when their colleagues seek to rebuild tested and true social constructs.
This is not just true with SSA; but with a variety of issues which are “sacrosanct” on the left.
The job of confronting it is too big for Warren and would be rejected out of hand as being from a “Far Right” idealogue.
When it comes from the Left…the critic is quickly jettisoned.
It’s amusing how often that those who support civil equality are dismissed as “the Left.” But I guess that sitting over here on “the Left” with Ted Olson and Dick Cheney is not that bad.
PS – And David, it is worrisome that the pimple is able to garner Congressmen on his radio. I am disturbed by the far left, and the terrorists, and increasingly by the far right.
@ Debbie,
I don’t know how to make things “fair,” hopefully thoughtful and compassionate people on the left will begin to write satirical articles about some of their absurd leaders.
Although it is scarey on the left, when you attempt to bridge the gap, or fill in information: ask Spitzer or Bailey.
The Freak Out is immense, personal and complete.
Fundamentalist ideologues all, who call names and demand perfection and rigid adherence to dogma. They will destroy your hard earned career.
David B has it about right.
Good grief. Are you going to take a switch to Warren now? Fischer is exactly the type person that satire and parody were made for — he’s a complete nut.
It doesn’t become him? Lighten up.
Warren,
I think the satire was well done and worthwhile to post. I hope you continue to do so in the future.
I would like to seriously urge us to drop this topic. Sorry I gave it the impetus I did. I thought we might salvage a useful discussion for a while. Not so, apparently. God bless the grizzlies and God help the Bryan Fischers of the world. And maybe the next time Warren is tempted to post something satirical, he’ll resist the urge.
MB – Nice one.
Dear Warren Throckmorton:
As a Christian, I am very offended by this supposedly humorous post. The Lord will not be mocked.
Bible-believing Christians know that grizzly bears are favored instruments of the Lord and would never be left off of the ark. The Bible clearly teaches us that our Lord sent female bears to kill 42 boys who made wise cracks about the prophet Elisha’s baldness.
I have read other posts on your blog, and it distresses me to see that as a professed Christian you would waste so much time and energy weeping over 5 dead sinful children, when our Lord killed more than 8 times as many in one fell swoop. I urge you to repent, bring yourself back under the authority of our Lord and Savior, and celebrate the deaths of sinful and disobedient children.
2 Kings 2:23-25
“He went up from there to Bethel, and while he was going up on the way, some small boys came out of the city and jeered at him, saying, “Go up, you baldhead! Go up, you baldhead!” And he turned around, and when he saw them, he cursed them in the name of the LORD. And two she-bears came out of the woods and tore forty-two of the boys.”
Greater reportage and scientific investigation. I’m sure that when a massive earthquake an tsunami hit Lisbon, Portugal, several hundred years ago the faithful were sure the second coming was at hand also. As a geologist I can tell you there has not been an uptick in either vulcanism or seismic activitity. Geoscientific researchers have, however, increased their monitoring activities which has increased information concerning either; but that does not mean that the activity itself has increased.
Ok… now I notice the comma in there. I thought you were associating terrorists with the left. Maybe in the past, Bader-Meinhof, Weathermen, and the others, but of late most have been associated with right-wing causes. Yes, I consider Islamic terrorism to be a right-wing cause as it tends to the more authoritarian side, just as most republicans test out as more authoritive (on tests like the Political Compass) and certainly not the libertarians many claim to be.
…
Debbie Thurman# ~ Nov 11, 2010 at 12:21 pm
“And how much is also due to things beyond man’s control and is cyclical, as history also records? ”
what “things beyond man’s control” are you referring to Debbie? For the last hundred years (coinciding with the industrialization of the world) the ave. world temperatures have been increasing, and these temperatures are beyond any previous ave. temps (with the exception of Esper 2002 study) estimated for over the last 1000 years.
NOAA has an overview and references you can look at here:
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/globalwarming/paleolast.html
What about partitions in the ark? That should solve the problem, shouldn’t it?
If he is being serious, Fischer does not understand the concept of an sustainable ecosystem. He was having a laugh, surely! Surely?
Debbie Thurman# ~ Nov 11, 2010 at 12:21 pm
“Fischer never proposed “wiping out all the bears.””
No he said: “Another way to put it is that there is no number of live grizzlies worth one dead human being. If it’s a choice between grizzlies and humans, the grizzlies have to go. And it’s time.”
while you are correct he never used the phrase “wipe out all bears” the sentiment in his statements is the same.
“No, there are likewise enough documented cases of stumbling into a deadly bear encounter in God’s grand open spaces while camping, fishing or legally hunting other game.”
Which goes to my points about humans should stay out of bear habitats (esp. in the fall) or at the very least educate themselves on how to avoid bears and what do do if you encounter one. To be clear Debbie, I’m not saying there has never been a bear attack on a person who was educated about bears, I’m saying that I believe the vast majority of bear attack victims are people who were foolish enough to go into a bear habitat uneducated and unprepared. And that Fischer’s comments about bears (like most of his other arguments) are misleading and misinformed.
It sounds like we share common experiences…except my contacts do not step publicly out and defend both positions. They say they are interested in it but stop short of public positions.
Of course, definitions of both kinds of “values” can vary from person to person. Still, when we do what you say above here, we are doing a beneficial service, I think. There will always have to be a give and take.
Not exactly my experience. Of the psychology professors I have had through the years and the psychologists I have worked with, all have openly expressed their desire for a best-of-both-worlds approach. A willingness to discuss the traditional values that they believe are beneficial for a culture, and the non-traditional values they believe are also beneficial.
Usually, when people use the terms Right or Left they are talking about people on the political extremes of those ends – granted, not always. It tends to be the people on the extreme ends that don’t want to hear what the other has to say or dismiss things outright. I would hope that thinking individuals, people who are more moderate, compassionate and understanding in thier view of the world, would get together and discuss the benefits of both traditional and non-traditional values for the culture.
Is that because they will lose their prestige or perhaps even their careers? I have looked inside the field for a long time myself, shunning those who have asked me to become a professional, in fact. I find too much that is too disturbing.
And if the pressure is brought from the outside, will they likewise discard that as from someone unqualified to render it? I’ve faced that condescension, too.
So who, then, can do “it”? Warren’s blog can still serve as a legitimate place for an exchange of ideas along the social continuum, examining the ills of wrong-headed values and policies on either side. Is it fair to say you are seeking to balance your past positions some, Warren? Is a pendulum swinging to somewhere in the middle?
And I guess “the Left” also includes the 31% of gay folk who told exit polls that they voted Republican this year.
It’s amusing how often that those who support civil equality are dismissed as “the Left.” But I guess that sitting over here on “the Left” with Ted Olson and Dick Cheney is not that bad.
My conversations with politically liberal psychologists on the left have several times confirmed this hypothesis: that although they believe that a wide variety of traditional values have immense benefit for the culture, it is frightening to openly express such views, or to openly challenge non-traditional values to change the culture.
Deconstructionists are repelled when their colleagues seek to rebuild tested and true social constructs.
This is not just true with SSA; but with a variety of issues which are “sacrosanct” on the left.
The job of confronting it is too big for Warren and would be rejected out of hand as being from a “Far Right” idealogue.
When it comes from the Left…the critic is quickly jettisoned.
Parody works best when it takes a position to its extreme.
Unfortunately, with Fischer it’s hard to do parody. His actual statements are so far out there that it’s hard to get more extreme.
I’m sure what you say is true, David. It cuts across the ideological grain. Some people shoot themselves in the foot and others are targeted for destruction. Too many land mines and too much idiocy out there. The media attack from one end of the spectrum. Sometimes the Church (or para-church) attacks form the other.
The left do not eat their own, generally. I always found Spitzer’s targeting by the HRC (Besen, more specifically) to be interesting, given his role in the DSM makeover. Yes, it is dangerous to be in No Man’s Land, seeking to bridge the gap from either end of the spectrum.
It is none-too-comforting to be targeted by unhinged advocates.
Warren, you have to run your blog as you see fit. If that means doing what too few Evangelicals do — laser in on impropriety within the ranks — then do it. If it does not entail also calling out leftist ideologue “pimples” who muck up things in their own way, then it doesn’t. Your prerogative, even if others disagree with it.
@ Debbie,
I don’t know how to make things “fair,” hopefully thoughtful and compassionate people on the left will begin to write satirical articles about some of their absurd leaders.
Although it is scarey on the left, when you attempt to bridge the gap, or fill in information: ask Spitzer or Bailey.
The Freak Out is immense, personal and complete.
Fundamentalist ideologues all, who call names and demand perfection and rigid adherence to dogma. They will destroy your hard earned career.
PS – And David, it is worrisome that the pimple is able to garner Congressmen on his radio. I am disturbed by the far left, and the terrorists, and increasingly by the far right.
David B has it about right.
Yes, and to the extent that he is God, I am sure he will succeed. The cream will rise to the top. Always does.
“The discussion” is not confined to this blog.
True, but rarely are folks from the other side parodied here. Not PC.
That some of us feel the need to demean others instead of letting the drivel die off brings a different dimension to the bullying argument, doesn’t it? I’d rather see satire that pokes fun at larger ideas, and even is self-effacing at times, than slanted and individual attacks. Or balance those, if they are to be continued.
Well, I’m enjoying this no end.
There are goofy people on both sides of the isle…
Trying to determine what deserves attention in limited space on this blog is a worthy discussion.
And it is Warren’s call.
Sometime humor lessens tension, sometimes it highlights absurdity, sometimes it is just an annoying distraction from important work.
Bryan Fischer, in my opinion is a pimple on the arse of Evangelicals.
Warren is trying to develop a list of such to marginalize out of the discussion of SSA so thoughtful and compassionate Evangelicals can be better heard.
Good grief. Are you going to take a switch to Warren now? Fischer is exactly the type person that satire and parody were made for — he’s a complete nut.
It doesn’t become him? Lighten up.
Debbie Thurman# ~ Nov 11, 2010 at 12:21 pm
“Fischer never proposed “wiping out all the bears.””
No he said: “Another way to put it is that there is no number of live grizzlies worth one dead human being. If it’s a choice between grizzlies and humans, the grizzlies have to go. And it’s time.”
while you are correct he never used the phrase “wipe out all bears” the sentiment in his statements is the same.
“No, there are likewise enough documented cases of stumbling into a deadly bear encounter in God’s grand open spaces while camping, fishing or legally hunting other game.”
Which goes to my points about humans should stay out of bear habitats (esp. in the fall) or at the very least educate themselves on how to avoid bears and what do do if you encounter one. To be clear Debbie, I’m not saying there has never been a bear attack on a person who was educated about bears, I’m saying that I believe the vast majority of bear attack victims are people who were foolish enough to go into a bear habitat uneducated and unprepared. And that Fischer’s comments about bears (like most of his other arguments) are misleading and misinformed.
Just one of the problems with false satire and red herrings: Fischer never proposed “wiping out all the bears.” Warren does not get a free pass on creating that impression, or you for inferring it. Sorry.
Why not, again, stick to the subject at hand (or the many subjects Warren now has going here), rather than go outside the blog’s box, i.e., “Public Policy, Mental Health, Sexual Identity, and Religious Issues”?
Such an idiot would be deserving of the bear’s wrath. No, there are likewise enough documented cases of stumbling into a deadly bear encounter in God’s grand open spaces while camping, fishing or legally hunting other game. When they come into people’s backyards, they mostly destroy trash cans or other property.
And how much is also due to things beyond man’s control and is cyclical, as history also records? Those are questions open for debate, just like many of the subjects discussed here. But wonks on both sides demonize or satirize each other (or the unfortunate person featured in an original post) rather than civilly debate legitimate points.
Don’t drink the Kool-Aid. Think and read.
Debbie Thurman# ~ Nov 11, 2010 at 8:43 am
“he has some standing in this one. Climate change theories are just that, and many respected scientists disagree over man’s role in the phenomena. ”
What most respected climatologists disagree with is how humans have effected climate change, not if humans have effected climate change. Ex. how much of global warming is due to carbon emissions, or deforestation or ozone depletion etc?
“Beyond that, bears can and do become man killers and destroying them becomes the only sane and humane option when they do.”
You think wiping out all the bears in Yellowstone (like Fischer argues) is a “sane and humane” thing to do? And really, the only option you can think of? What about staying out of their habitats? How about educating people how to avoid them and what to do if you see them?
I suspect you’ll find that of bear attacks on humans very few are of the type where a bear attacked a person in his/her backyard and a lot more are of the type where some idiot went into a national park thinking he could pet one.
Of course, definitions of both kinds of “values” can vary from person to person. Still, when we do what you say above here, we are doing a beneficial service, I think. There will always have to be a give and take.
Debbie Thurman# ~ Nov 10, 2010 at 2:36 pm
“OK, but why? There is enough real stuff to talk about.”
Maybe to point out that Fischer’s extremism extends to more than gays. I can’t imagine what Fischer would do if they found Gay Grizzles in Yellowstone.
demagogues like Fischer need to be challenged. And I think Warren wrote a very good satirical piece that accomplished what he wanted.
Not buying that, Jayhuck. Regardless of what egregious things the man has said or done in other realms, he has some standing in this one. Climate change theories are just that, and many respected scientists disagree over man’s role in the phenomena.
As for the curse thing, Genesis 3 is studied very seriously by Christians. Biblical prophecy offers the endpoint:
Man was directed by God to subdue the earth and its creatures. Except for a short time in the beginning, we’ve all lived under “the curse.” That’s a fairy tale to many, but it bears more study, even if allegorically. And one need only look around the world at this very moment to see mounting destructive forces in action (volcanoes, tsumanis, earthquakes). What does it mean?
Beyond that, bears can and do become man killers and destroying them becomes the only sane and humane option when they do. They are more than nuisances in some parts of the country, where they are intruding into populated areas. We can debate why this is happening, but we cannot pretend it isn’t.
The upshot is this: respect the environment and God’s creation, make wise decisions and take action when it is warranted. Was Fischer right in decrying that someone appeared to be expressing more concern for bears gone astray than for the human lives such bears take? You be the judge.
Now, look at how much space and time already have been taken up with something that never should have seen the light of day here.
True, but rarely are folks from the other side parodied here. Not PC.
That some of us feel the need to demean others instead of letting the drivel die off brings a different dimension to the bullying argument, doesn’t it? I’d rather see satire that pokes fun at larger ideas, and even is self-effacing at times, than slanted and individual attacks. Or balance those, if they are to be continued.
Well, I’m enjoying this no end.
There are goofy people on both sides of the isle…
Trying to determine what deserves attention in limited space on this blog is a worthy discussion.
And it is Warren’s call.
Sometime humor lessens tension, sometimes it highlights absurdity, sometimes it is just an annoying distraction from important work.
Bryan Fischer, in my opinion is a pimple on the arse of Evangelicals.
Warren is trying to develop a list of such to marginalize out of the discussion of SSA so thoughtful and compassionate Evangelicals can be better heard.
Just one of the problems with false satire and red herrings: Fischer never proposed “wiping out all the bears.” Warren does not get a free pass on creating that impression, or you for inferring it. Sorry.
Why not, again, stick to the subject at hand (or the many subjects Warren now has going here), rather than go outside the blog’s box, i.e., “Public Policy, Mental Health, Sexual Identity, and Religious Issues”?
Such an idiot would be deserving of the bear’s wrath. No, there are likewise enough documented cases of stumbling into a deadly bear encounter in God’s grand open spaces while camping, fishing or legally hunting other game. When they come into people’s backyards, they mostly destroy trash cans or other property.
And how much is also due to things beyond man’s control and is cyclical, as history also records? Those are questions open for debate, just like many of the subjects discussed here. But wonks on both sides demonize or satirize each other (or the unfortunate person featured in an original post) rather than civilly debate legitimate points.
Don’t drink the Kool-Aid. Think and read.
Debbie Thurman# ~ Nov 11, 2010 at 8:43 am
“he has some standing in this one. Climate change theories are just that, and many respected scientists disagree over man’s role in the phenomena. ”
What most respected climatologists disagree with is how humans have effected climate change, not if humans have effected climate change. Ex. how much of global warming is due to carbon emissions, or deforestation or ozone depletion etc?
“Beyond that, bears can and do become man killers and destroying them becomes the only sane and humane option when they do.”
You think wiping out all the bears in Yellowstone (like Fischer argues) is a “sane and humane” thing to do? And really, the only option you can think of? What about staying out of their habitats? How about educating people how to avoid them and what to do if you see them?
I suspect you’ll find that of bear attacks on humans very few are of the type where a bear attacked a person in his/her backyard and a lot more are of the type where some idiot went into a national park thinking he could pet one.
Debbie Thurman# ~ Nov 10, 2010 at 2:36 pm
“OK, but why? There is enough real stuff to talk about.”
Maybe to point out that Fischer’s extremism extends to more than gays. I can’t imagine what Fischer would do if they found Gay Grizzles in Yellowstone.
demagogues like Fischer need to be challenged. And I think Warren wrote a very good satirical piece that accomplished what he wanted.
Oh C’mon Debbie – this is a direct quote from the AFA web site:
And he goes on to say this about climate change:
Two words: Nut Job!
The “reports” — if you can call them that — are inaccurate, so the spoof is the same-old, same-old, which is to say it is far off and its writer could likewise be called a wack-job.
Not in the least. Fischer wants to “kill all of the bears?” Good grief. What is the meaning of this childish drivel? Not defending Fischer across the board, but lay off the guy already. Intelligent spoofing is funny. This is neither.
We do have bear hunting season. I guess we can add to that Bryan Fischer season.
Is everyone at the AFA a wack-job? Yes, I understand this story is a spoof, but if the reports of what Fischer wants to do to Grizzlies is true, then its not far off – Here’s a good report on the real story:
We Must Kill The Demon-Cursed Bears
Is conservation of natural resources, the environment and ecology a liberal or conservative value? Does making it a value of one ‘side’ mean it cannot be a value of the other? I don’t think so and I imagine a great part of America thinks the same and not as Fischer.
.
On the other hand I once stayed in West Yellowstone and the people in the cabin next to me made the mistake of leaving food in their car. A grizzly did a good job on the car getting inside. And residents there regularly have problems with bears. But if you are going to live in close proximity to nature in its rawest, you have to learn how to cope. Heck, I’ve even had a buck, hopped up on its hormones of the fall rut, go after my pickup as I drove through the meadow out back of the house. It’s not just the carnivores you have to look out for sometimes.
…
Is Bryan Fischer channeling Stephen Colbert?
Maybe we should update the day that satire died.
OK, but why? There is enough real stuff to talk about. It doesn’t become you, Warren. These temptations are one of the downsides to blogging. You have a shotgun approach to topics that are currently being discussed right now. So much so, in fact, that I am compelled to lay off all of it.
I guess it was so close to something Fischer might actually do and say that it needed a preface.
It is a spoof. Fischer does however, want to kill all grizzlies, including the Berenstain Bears (well, maybe not them, I don’t know for sure).
Oh C’mon Debbie – this is a direct quote from the AFA web site:
And he goes on to say this about climate change:
Two words: Nut Job!
If you look at the tags to this post:
“Lame attempts at humor, spoof ”
I’m pretty sure Warren made up the “quote” to point out Fischer’s extreme (and foolish) stance on the bear population in Yellowstone.
I suspect the Noah reference was to highlight the christian belief that God saved (created) the bears for a reason and that Fischer is ignoring that with his “One human being is worth more than an infinite number of grizzly bears” claim.
Yes, I saw that same thing. What gives? Correction?
The “reports” — if you can call them that — are inaccurate, so the spoof is the same-old, same-old, which is to say it is far off and its writer could likewise be called a wack-job.
Not in the least. Fischer wants to “kill all of the bears?” Good grief. What is the meaning of this childish drivel? Not defending Fischer across the board, but lay off the guy already. Intelligent spoofing is funny. This is neither.
We do have bear hunting season. I guess we can add to that Bryan Fischer season.
What is your source for this? This seems to be a parody not a real thing. Both links in the article go to the AFA website which has a different article talking about bear maulings in yellowstone park and Fischer’s response to it, but I don’t see anything about him building Noah’s ark.
Is Bryan Fischer channeling Stephen Colbert?
Maybe we should update the day that satire died.
What is your source for this? This seems to be a parody not a real thing. Both links in the article go to the AFA website which has a different article talking about bear maulings in yellowstone park and Fischer’s response to it, but I don’t see anything about him building Noah’s ark.