Wednesday, 13 October 2010

Anna Raccoon has gone.

Anna Raccoon has left the blogosphere.

A great loss. I hope this is merely a temporary absence and that one day she'll be back. She did a lot more than just blog, she had effects on the real world that most of us can only aspire to.

Good luck, wherever you are.


JuliaM said...

Agreed. It's a real shame.

sixtypoundsaweekcleaner said...

Is she okay? Has she been got at? Does anybody know?

Guthrum said...

She is fine

Johnnyrvf said...

Spoke to her about 7 weeks ago; I think she will be back but that is her perogative.

UnRegenerate said...

God, I'll miss her!

Indyanhat said...

Thanks for the update LI, she will be missed sorely!

sixtypoundsaweekcleaner said...

As long as she isn't being got at, by a left wing loon. God knows, there are enough of them.

Leg-iron said...

I don't think there's anything unpleasant going on, it's just that she doesn't want to do it for now.

Besides, the chance of a left wing loon having any effect on The Raccoon is very small. If they tried, they'd just make her angry.

Stewart Cowan said...

I'm genuinely shocked. I wonder why the site is down when the domain name doesn't expire for another three months.

Hope things are okay.

Stewart Cowan said...

I noticed earlier that I had one fewer friend on Facebook, but didn't know who it was. Turns out it's Anna.

I thought I'd upset someone. Well, I'm always upsetting someone!

Frank Davis said...

I'm saddened by that. Beautiful tribute on GOT. I've been a fairly regular, on-and-off reader of hers for a long time. Hers was a remarkable blog. It seemed more like a newspaper than a blog, with multiple contributors. I used to imagine that she held editorial meetings every morning to decide what was to go in the 'paper' today.

But I don't think anyone should grieve too much. We'll all be gone in the end. What has to be hoped is that, inspired by people like Anna, new writers will step up to the plate. The blogosphere is not like the MSM, with constant presences like the BBC or the Times or the Telegraph. It's much more fluid. And that's how it should be.

P.S. Stewart, if you need a new friend, look me up on Facebook as CFrankDavis or C Frank Davis. And maybe sometime you'll explain to me what you've got against the theory of evolution.

Leg-iron said...

I'm on facebook in a different skin. I'll look you both up.

Stewart Cowan said...

Gotcha, Frank. Thanks, Leggy.

What I've got against the theory of evolution is that it's a lie.

Recently, Harold Lewis (Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of California, Santa Barbara) said in his resignation letter that,

"Global warming is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life."

I reckon the TofE tops this by quite a way!

Basically, evolution is, of course, a fact. It's how we have such a diversity of animals and plants, BUT, my claim is that random gene mutations (even considering 'natural selection') do not have the capability to turn, for example, a reptile into a bird.

Just to take one organ - the lungs - into consideration - both creatures have completely different kinds of lungs. We are supposed to believe that one mutation after another changed one perfectly functioning organ into another over time.

Of course, time is the evolutionist's best friend, as it makes it seem as if 'anything is possible' given enough of it.

This makes it theoretically possible, of course, but I think, impossible in a practical sense. Thousands of different creatures, all with unfeasibly complex parts which just perfected themselves due to random mutations. I don't believe it and I don't just say this as someone of faith. I believed in the TofE until six years ago because, I suppose, "a lie told often enough becomes the truth."

Plus, the TofE was devised way before masses of relevant discoveries, like DNA. In Darwin's day, a living cell was thought to be a blob of goo, rather than something as complex as a city.

But, the TofE serves a vital political role in the war against faith.

The Council of Europe has called for Creationism to be banned in science lessons, not because of the science, but rather, they consider it endangers its 'equality' agenda.

I shall, of course, continue to blog about it from time to time, God willing.

Frank Davis said...

Basically, evolution is, of course, a fact. It's how we have such a diversity of animals and plants,

What??? I thought you didn't believe in it?

BUT, my claim is that random gene mutations (even considering 'natural selection') do not have the capability to turn, for example, a reptile into a bird.

Hmmm. Don't see why not. And anyway, haven't you just admitted that evolution happens? Do you have a different mechanism?

I must say I have my own reservations about the theory of evolution. Or, more particularly, I really don't like Darwinism (which I regard as being something different from the formal theory of evolution). And what I don't like about Darwinism is its notion of a "war of nature" and a "struggle for survival". I don't think the theory needs this. I think it dramaticises the theory. My own theory of evolution is of the Survival of the Idlest rather than the survival of the fittest. It's much nearer to what Wallace sketched out in his seminal letter to Darwin, I think.

Stewart Cowan said...

Hi Frank,

What I'm saying is that evolution, while clearly true, has been presumed to have powers which it doesn't have.

Let me think of an example...

It's like you see a plane going from London to New York and then to Paris and then on to Cape Town. Then you make the leap that it can go to the moon and Mars and travel to distant galaxies.

It can fly, but has limits.

I like the idea of Survival of the Idlest, but I'm lazy.

I think many people who aren't Creationists aren't happy with the TofE. It's one or the other!

Frank Davis said...

So what, for example, do you think evolution definitely can't do? And what do you think it can do?

Stewart Cowan said...

It can't change one 'kind' of creature into another, but it does demonstrably produce smaller changes.

Hope this explains -

robbiethered said...

I'm very sad indeed about what has happened to her. Of course if it's now affecting her health then fair enough, that's a good reason to stop.

However, those slimy cowards who upset and persecuted her are nothing, just scum. I don't know a huge amount about it, but it shouldn't have happened like that.

She is one of the most courageous, compassionate and sane people I've ever read or had contact with. She changed my life and that of my partner, much for the better, particularly with her writings on the OPG/CoP.

If I may modify a classic Watership Down quote:

"My heart has joined the Thousand, for my friend stopped writing today."

opinions powered by