Palin considers herself intellectual

Yes, but is she smarte than a fifth grader? Jeff Foxworthy where are you?

Divine stearlization. I will steal that one. Too funny.

Im not for sure what you mean by your statement.
Saying that someone who doesnt believe as you
cant be a intellectual person.

Actually seeker, I though it was a brilliant post! You can think someone is stupid for their beliefs, it is as human as any other thought. For instance, if someone thinks that being a racist is right, and can back up his conviction with intelligent thoughts, words, and "facts", he may consider himself an intellectual.

I will consider him an idiot, no matter how "intelligent" he can make himself sound.

Creationism cannot be rationalized with science. So no matter how intelligent a creationist sounds when making her point, I will still call her an idiot when she is done. And I have as much right to that sentiment and thought as she does to her idea that man and dinosaurs walked side by side.

To: ninepounds6
Yes you have a right to call her an idiot. If believing in God makes me a Creationist then you my friend don’t have the right to call me an Idiot. Creationism can be rationalized with science. If you have as much intellect as you think you do then follow the link I have provided here to understand how I have come to understand the creation of the earth. http://www.heart4god.ws/id313.htm I struggled with this same thing when I was a child. I don’t know if she said that man walked with dinosaurs or if that is what a creationist thinks. Man did not walk with dinosaurs.

There are many who teach today that the earth is only about 6,000 years old, and they cite many evidences for a young earth. Yet when the scriptures are correctly understood we find that the earth existed prior to Genesis 1:3 when God began to remake it. Many scientists are also pointing to signs of the earth being very ancient. In truth, both groups are correct. The original earth is quite ancient, yet the re-created earth is relatively young. We should anticipate that there would be evidences of both a young earth, and a very old earth. Sadly, these two groups often find themselves pitted against one another even when the Scriptures reveal a harmony to this evidence.
Please follow the link. http://www.heart4god.ws/id313.htm If you can’t spend the time to read this and just blow it off as another stupid Creationist then you my friend are the Oxymoron.

"Im not for sure what you mean by your statement. "

intellect - the capacity for rational thought or inference or discrimination

For several hundred years we have relied on the "scientific method" to advance our understanding of the natural world. The scientific method requires a testable hypothesis supported by evidence before a conclusion can be reached. This is the very essence of "rational thought".

Rejecting out of hand an accepted scientific proceedure, supported by evidence, such as carbon dating because it does not support your prefered world view is anti-intellectual and an outright rejection of rational thought.

I’ve checked 3 different sources Webster, wikipedia, Dictionary.com and none had the same definition as you.
Dictionary.com

Intellect
–Noun
1.The power or faculty of the mind by which one knows or understands, as distinguished from that by which one feels and that by which one wills; the understanding; the faculty of thinking and acquiring knowledge.
2.Capacity for thinking and acquiring knowledge, esp. of a high or complex order; mental capacity.
3.A particular mind or intelligence, esp. of a high order.
4.A person possessing a great capacity for thought and knowledge.
5.Minds collectively, as of a number of persons or the persons themselves.

What I meant was if I Believe in God does that mean I’m not an intellect. According to the definition of intellect above my belief in God doesn’t have anything to do with being an intellectual?

Your definition of intellect:

The capacity for rational thought or inference or discrimination

Rationalism, having reason or understanding

Inference is the act or process of deriving a conclusion based solely on what one already knows.

Discrimination toward or against a person or group is the prejudicial treatment of them based on certain characteristics. It can be positive behavior directed towards a certain group, or negative behavior directed against a certain group. The latter is the most common meaning, i.e. negative discrimination. Discrimination on grounds such as race or religion is generally illegal in most Western societies, while discriminating between people on the grounds of merit is usually lawful.

Webster did have Rationalism in part of it's definition: the capacity for rational thought plus the same as definition 1 above The power or faculty ……..

The other two weren’t found.

If you read the post above you would have seen where I agree to where dinosaurs were on earth. If you followed the link it would help you understand the reason I believe that. I’m not arguing about science.

If you need futher explanation of my statement please ask?