web analytics
September 21, 2014 / 26 Elul, 5774
At a Glance

Posts Tagged ‘Rick Perry’

Presidential Bid coming? Rick Perry Says He’ll Visit Israel

Tuesday, July 16th, 2013

Texas Republican Gov. Rick Perry, in what observers see as a move signaling a possible White House run, said he is planning to visit Israel in October.

Perry, who has announced that he will not run for a fourth term as Texas governor, told the Washington Times in an interview last Friday, “We will be going to Israel to bring together Arabs, Christian and Jews in an educational forum.”

Political analysts believe the trip to the Jewish state shows that Perry is considering a campaign for the 2016 presidential election. He dropped his bid for the 2012 Republican nomination during the primaries.

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) — reported to be potential presidential candidates for 2016 — have made trips to Israel this year.

Turkey Condemns Rick Perry’s “Islamic terrorist” Comment

Wednesday, January 18th, 2012

Turkey condemned comments made by Republican presidential hopeful Rick Perry on Monday in which he said that the country is being ruled by “Islamic terrorists.”

“We strongly condemn the unfounded and inappropriate allegations expressed yesterday evening about our country during a debate held in South Carolina by Texas Governor Rick Perry …,” a Turkish Foreign Ministry spokesman said on Tuesday.

Perry is quoted as saying: “Obviously when you have a country that is being ruled by what many would perceive to be Islamic terrorists, when you start seeing that sort of activity against their own citizens, then yes – not only is it time for us to have a conversation about whether or not they belong in NATO, but it’s time for the United States, when we look at their foreign aid, to go to zero with it.”

Does Questioning Evolution Make One Anti-Science?

Wednesday, September 14th, 2011

New York Times columnist Paul Krugman thinks Republicans are knuckle-dragging Neanderthals. In the not-too-distant future he sees a Republican half-wit winning the presidency and dragging America back to the Stone Age. 
 
One of these years the world’s greatest nation will find itself ruled by a party that is aggressively anti-science, indeed anti-knowledge,” Krugman recently wrote. “And, in a time of severe challenges – environmental, economic, and more – that’s a terrifying prospect.” 
 
Krugman’s ire was piqued by Texas Governor and Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry’s comments that evolution is “just a theory” that has “some gaps in it,” and that global warming is not a proven fact.
 
While I cannot comment on climate-change science, I do have a great deal to say about evolution.
 
I am not a scientist. But beginning in about 1990 I started organizing an annual debate at Oxford University on science versus religion where the focus was almost always on evolution and which featured some of the world’s greatest evolutionists like Richard Dawkins, who appeared several times, and the late John Maynard-Smith of the University of Sussex, who at the time was regarded by many as the greatest living evolutionary theorist.
 
While I moderated the first few debates, I later participated in a debate against Dawkins at Oxford (which he later denied ever took place, forcing us to post the full video of the debate online where Dawkins is not only the principal proponent of the science side but actually loses the debate in a student vote at the end). I debated Dawkins again at the Idea City Convention at the University of Toronto, the video of which is likewise available online.
 
What I learned from these debates, as well as from reading extensively on evolution, is that evolutionists have a tough time defending the theory when challenged in open dialogue. Indeed, David Berlinski, author of The Devil’s Delusion, while an agnostic, was on the religion side of one of the debates against Dawkins and tore large holes in evolution that Dawkins and Maynard-Smith struggled to address.
 
This does not mean evolution is not true. But it’s a theory. Unlike, say, the laws of thermodynamics, it has never been proven beyond the shadow of a doubt. Indeed, Dawkins and the late Harvard paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould fiercely debated basic presumptions about evolution. Gould was not a theist and did not believe in creation. But he argued that the large gaps in the fossil record make a mockery of a theory of gradual evolution, which is why Gould advocated “punctuated equilibrium,” a variation on Darwinism in which evolution takes place in dramatic periods of change followed by long eons of stasis.
 
Gould maintained this position precisely because, as Perry said, the theory of evolution has “some gaps in it,” in the case of the fossil record quite literally.
 
No scientist has ever witnessed evolution directly and science itself says this is impossible given the vast amount of time needed for species to evolve. Rather, evidence for evolution is brought primarily from the fossil record and natural selection from some famous contemporary observations, like the peppered moths (Biston betularia) thatproduce offspring that can be light or dark, much like the same family can have redheads, brunettes and blonds.
 
Before the Industrial Revolution, the vast majority of peppered moths were light in coloration, which helped them blend in against lichen and trees and avoid predation by birds. Dark-colored moths stood out against this background, and so were more often eaten and killed. However, with the rise in pollution, the lichens and trees against which the light-colored moths habitually hid from predators were darkened with soot. Suddenly, the light-colored moths were conspicuous to predatory birds, and the dark-colored moths were well camouflaged. The plights of the two populations were reversed – the dark moths survived, and the light moths were eaten and killed.
 
A similar proof for natural selection is brought from the Galapagos Finch, which Darwin theorized was originally a single species but over time each population of finch changed very slowly in response to the demands of the environment in which it found itself. The signal trait Darwin seized upon to distinguish one species of finch from another was the shape of its beak. For example, the large ground-finch had a big, powerful beak that seemed well suited to cracking open seeds while the vampire finch had a long, pointed beak that allowed it to puncture the flesh of other birds and drink their blood. In each case, Darwin reasoned, beak shape evolved over time to provide its possessor with an adaptive advantage.
 
The problem with both these observations is that they are manifestations of horizontal, rather than vertical, evolution, as they describe how members of a species may change within the range of characteristics they already possess. No new traits are generated. Rather, the traits that already exist are merely distributed differently. Vertical evolution, whereby natural selection can supposedly create entirely new structures, has yet to be directly observed and is thus a theory.
 
Other questions remain regarding evolutionary theory, most notably the anthropic principle that maintains that if the physical laws and constants governing our universe were even slightly different, we would not be here to notice it because the emergence of life could not have occurred.Our universe is a delicately interconnected network of laws that is balanced and tuned for the seemingly express purpose of supporting self-aware life.
 
The English cosmologist Sir Martin Rees argues in his book Just Six Numbers that the values of six numbers determine to a great degree many of the large- and small-scale properties of our universe. If any of these numbers were changed even slightly, the universe would exist in a radically different, and quite unfriendly, form – if it existed at all.
 

Let’s look at the second number, epsilon, which is roughly .007. Epsilon describes, roughly speaking, how durable matter is, because it tells us how much energy is required to separate an atom into its constituent particles. Clearly, this is a very important number. But the remarkable thing about it is how delicately balanced it is against the other five numbers. If epsilon were .006, the universe would consist entirely of hydrogen. No other elements would form, because the process of nuclear fusion could not occur. The universe would be bland and uninteresting. There would be no planets, very little light, no nebulae, no comets and certainly no life.

Many leading scientists, like Francis Collins, former head of the Human Genome Project and described by the Endocrine Society as “one of the most accomplished scientists of our time,” therefore believe that while evolution may indeed be an accurate theory as to the rise of life and species, it still requires the guiding hand of a higher power in order to operate.
 
In the final analysis, the biblical account of creation easily accommodates an evolutionary ascent, seeing as the narrative expressly relates that God created first the mineral, then the vegetable, then the animal, and finally human life forms.
 
So before Paul Krugman attacks Republican politicians for simply questioning evolution, it would behoove him to recall that the very essence of science is to question – and that stifling doubt is a sin that religion was guilty of in the past and that science should refrain from repeating it in the present.
 

Rabbi Shmuley Boteach is in the midst of founding GIVE, the Global Institute for Values Education, and is the author of the forthcoming book “The Church of Evolution.” Follow him on Twitter @RabbiShmuley.

Newest Presidential Hopeful Sparks Debate Among Jewish Republicans

Wednesday, August 17th, 2011

WASHINGTON – To some conservative Jews, Texas Gov. Rick Perry would make an excellent presidential candidate. He’s been to Israel more than any other candidate in the field and has said he loves it. And Perry creates jobs.

But other Jewish conservatives seeking the anti-Obama candidate look at the three-term governor and see something arresting: He believes he’s on a mission from God.

Perry has nonplussed longtime Jewish supporters by claiming he has been “called” to the presidency and by hosting a prayer rally this month that appealed to Jesus to save America.

Jennifer Rubin, the Washington Post’s Right Turn columnist and a bellwether of Jewish conservatism, took liberals to task on her blog for treating the event as “a spectacle” – it was borne of deeply considered worries about the country’s parlous state, she said – but Rubin also expressed caveats about the rally.

“His words at the event were restrained but not ecumenical,” she wrote. “And his use of public office to promote the Christian event was, to me, inappropriate. The event, while scheduled last December, is still reflective of the man who would be president. Would he do this in the Oval Office? Does he not understand how many Americans might be offended? Is he lacking advice from a non-Texan perspective?”

Fred Zeidman, an influential Houston lawyer who has known Perry for decades and has hosted him at his home, said that “None of us remember him being quite as devout as he seems to be now, but we wouldn’t necessarily have known.”

Zeidman, who for eight years served as chairman of the board of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, supports Mitt Romney. But Zeidman told JTA that before endorsing Romney, he checked with Perry last December to ask whether he would be running. At the time Perry said no.

On Saturday, Perry threw his hat into the ring.

“A great country requires a better direction,” he said, declaring his candidacy. “A renewed nation needs a new president.”

Perry has been a conservative since before he switched parties in 1989 to became a Republican. A cotton farmer and former Air Force pilot, he led efforts in his first five years as a Democrat in the Texas Legislature to pare the budget.

Perry, a devout Methodist, was attracted to Israel from the launch of his career. One of his first acts after being elected agriculture commissioner in 1991 was to create the Texas-Israel Exchange, which promoted information and research sharing.

In a 2009 interview with The Jerusalem Post, when as governor he led a delegation to Israel, Perry – who at about the same time flirted with Texas secessionist rhetoric – said the alliance was a natural one.

“When I was here for the first time some 18 years ago and I was touring the country, the comparison between Masada and the Alamo was not lost on me,” he told the Post. “I mean, we’re talking about two groups of people who were willing to give up their lives for freedom and liberty.”

As much as Perry’s heartfelt love for Israel makes him attractive to Republican Jews, it is the other reason he was in Israel at the time – seeking out job creation initiatives, as he has across the globe – that has been the basis of his Jewish support.

“I became intrigued by Rick Perry when I read his book Fed Up! because it was exactly what I was feeling,” Robin Bernstein, who heads Perry’s fundraising in Florida, said in an interview.

“His economic success in Texas is a model for the entire country.”

Texas has managed to weather the recession comparatively well, and the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas has reported that half of all U.S. jobs created from June 2009 to April 2011 were in Texas.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/news/global/newest-presidential-hopeful-sparks-debate-among-jewish-republicans/2011/08/17/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: