Ron Paul Smear Top Story on Digg

for any1 who doesnt already know about the "digg bury brigade" ill tell you that digg is full of trolls and so-called gatekeepers. i know its a news site that gets alot of visitors but wasting your time defending paul against trolls isnt productive. Not all of them are trolls but come on i bet you could find the same negative comments about paul by the same people over and over and over again......i suggest posting a positive article we can all digg up intsead of defending a negative one. *I do not fear death, I fear life without liberty*

I believe that on that video, Dr. Paul simply misspoke.

Several seconds before he makes the quoted comment to the students, he says:

"I think this is a SCIENTIFIC MATTER and should not be an issue for the Presidency" (not the exact quote).

Then he says:

"It's a theory. I can't accept it (as fact) - as (it's) a theory.

He just left out the "as fact".

The whole thing does not make sense otherwise. Even an opponent of evolution, which Dr. Paul is not (he did not raise his hand in the debate) would still accept it as a theory.

Dr. Paul trained at Duke University medical school, one of the best in the country. He is not anti-science. In fact, HE IS A SCIENTIST. Shortly after his fellowship in Obstetrics and Gynecology at the University of Pittsburgh, another top-tier institution, he published a scientific paper in a journal ("Obstetrics and Gynecology"), which is a highly respected scientific journal, and he was the first author:

http://www.greenjournal.org/cgi/content/abstract/34/2/235

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Obstetrics & Gynecology 1969;34:235-241
Evaluation of Renal Biopsy in Pregnancy Toxemia
RONALD E. PAUL, MD, T TERRY HAYASHI, MD, FACOG, VICTORIANO PARDO, MD and EDWIN R. FISHER, MD

From the Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology, and of Pathology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pa.

Abstract

Percutaneous renal biopsies obtained during the immediate postpartum period from 57 subjects who had been hypertensive during pregnancy were studied by pathologists who had no knowledge of the clinical data. Although the degree of glomerular endotheliosis, mesangiosis, and basement membrane deposits showed some correlation with the clinical severity of the hypertension and toxemia, there was a wide range of observed tissue changes. It is concluded that such renal alterations are suggestive but not pathognomonic of preeclampsia-eclampsia.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Many scientists are devoutly religious. If you go to a scientific meeting, for example you will see many molecular biologists wearing skullcaps and some in Hassidic garb. Devout scientists of many religions, who presumably believe in the Bible and other Holy Books, still have to somehow reconcile their beliefs with what science tells us about time scales of evolution and cosmology.

So Dr. Paul is not someone who is out in left field on this. Macroevolution and cosmology remain theories. They are not facts. That's all that Dr. Paul has said.
But to tar him as somehow "anti-science" or ignorant is totally unfair.

he was saying that he wasn't buying the theory as fact, not that there isn't some scientific explanation, but that perhaps the theory of evolution hasn't been proven to be true.

But what exactly are Ron Paul's views on the origin of the species?

sleep.

digg has many more readers then NYT...it is a great place to spread the message.

RP08 to restore the Constitution