Reply With Quote
Really, you don't believe anything when it comes to the development of life on earth.
Entertaining.
I don't have one it's a mystery to me, and mysterys don't make me uncomfortable. I am really intigued by what people who've studied it, and continue to study it come up with.Please explain your personal theory of the development of life on earth.
Really, you don't believe anything when it comes to the development of life on earth.
Entertaining.
It is a ing dead end. There's nothing scientific about intelligent design garbage. It's conjecture that has not a thing supporting it. Give me a ing break. It has no place being taught as science, and is nothing but a power grab by bible-beater bag anti-intellectuals.
That's not the issue. the issue is whether or not scientist will have the freedom to pursue science or whether bigots and brown shirts are going to decide what thoughts are verboten. There are many scientists that want to pursue this were every it leads, even if it leads back to evolution fine who cares, but they must live in fear of nit wits who work at home depot calling them bible beating bags.
Scientists who live in fear of the opinion of Home Depot employees should never be listened to under any cir stances.
And how is that the issue? We're talking about grade school here.
This made me laugh.
Many creationist "scientists" claim that they are being "discriminated" against by mainstream science, when even the smallest amount of honest skepticism is leveled at their badly written and/or logically fallacious theories.
There is a VAST gulf between "keeping an idea down" and asking honest and appropriately critical questions.
If your idea holds up to the principles of good logic and sufficiency of evidence to support conclusions, great. Just don't go ing about "brownshirts" when someone points out the flaws in your work, just like they are supposed to do.
THAT is how real science works.
You're ing re ed, bible-beating bag.
tin foil hat thread
Putting your bible-beater creationism in science classes is wholly equivalent to having Richard Dawkins come to your church and argue why there is almost certainly no god.
Science setback for Texas schools
March 31st, 2009 in Other Sciences / Other
After three all-day meetings and a blizzard of amendments and counter-amendments, the Texas Board of Education cast its final vote Friday on state science standards. The results weren't pretty.
The board majority amended the Earth and Space Science, and Biology standards (TEKS) with loopholes and language that make it even easier for creationists to attack science textbooks.
"The final vote was a triumph of ideology and politics over science," says Dr. Eugenie Scott, Executive Director of the National Center for Science Education (NCSE). "The board majority chose to satisfy creationist cons uents and ignore the expertise of highly qualified Texas scientists and scientists across the country." NCSE presented the board with a pe ion from 54 scientific and educational societies, urging the board to reject language that misrepresents or undermines the teaching of evolution, which the board likewise ignored.
Although the "strengths and weaknesses" wording that has been part of the standards for over a decade was finally excised--wording that has been used to pressure science textbook publishers to include creationist arguments--a number of amendments put the creationist-inspired wording back in.
"What we now have is Son of Strengths and Weaknesses," says Josh
Rosenau, a project director for NCSE. "Having students 'analyze and evaluate all sides of scientific evidence' is code that gives creationists a green light to attack biology textbooks."
For example, the revised biology standard (7B) reflects two discredited creationist ideas--that "sudden appearance" and "stasis" in the fossil record somehow disprove evolution. The new standard directs students to "analyze and evaluate the sufficiency of scientific explanations concerning any data of sudden appearance, stasis and the sequential nature of groups in the fossil records." Other new standards include language such as "is thought to", or "proposed transitional fossils" to make evolutionary concepts seem tentative when, in fact, such concepts are well-do ented and accepted by the scientific community.
The changes will not immediately affect curricula in Texas high schools, but "the standards will affect standardized tests and textbooks," says Rosenau. Thanks to such laws as No Child Left Behind, ubiquitous standardized tests are central to measuring student progress and proficiency. Teachers teach to the test, notes Rosenau, and textbooks have to reflect this.
"Will publishers cave in to pressure from the Texas board to include junk science in their textbooks? It has happened before," says Scott. "But textbooks that please the Texas board will be rejected in other states.
Publishers will have to choose between junk science and real science."
"Let's be clear about this," cautioned Dr. Scott. "This is a setback for science education in Texas, not a draw, not a victory. The revised wording opens the door to creationism in the classroom and in the textbooks. The decisions will not only affect Texas students for the next ten years, but could result in watered-down science textbooks across the U.S. There's a reason creationists are claiming victory."
NCSE's Josh Rosenau summed up the frustration of scientists and educators alike: "This is a of a way to make education policy."
Source: American Ins ute of Physics
========
"Religious" assholes, GFY
http://www.physorg.com/news157728177.html
holy
the Christian Taliban.
^^^You should start fire bombing churches all over town^^^
Videotape it too.
So I take it you think the Christian Taliban is a good thing for this nation?
^^nope, just think you should start your crime spree. I think you're ready for it.
This is just ing bull . People wonder why our educational system sucks and why we're not compe ive with China and India in producing engineers and scientists, and then push for this creationist garbage to be used to pollute young minds. You can't have it both ways.
My personal opinion on like this is that it's no different then any other problem in America: Apathy.
You're mad about it right now, you'll be mad about it tomorrow, but once this thread goes away, you won't think about it and you sure as won't do anything about it either.
That's what we are, a bunch of apathetic, lazy folks, who like to sit on internet forums and complain without actually being a part of anything bigger then a semi-anonymous group of individiuals residing in the same general vicinity while doing nothing beneficial for anyone in particular.
I agree with you whole heartedly about this subject, but it's almost five and I have to do................................................ ...............see, apathy.
, cant argue with this at all. Good post.
Of course, I feel for the TX residents who have to tolerate this madness (and its influence on curriculum nationwide, supposedly), if I had children, I wouldnt be too worried about it.
Youre still the parent. Act like one if this means something to you. So what if Johnny Creationist Jr spews his nonsense? As long as your kid can recognize it for the BS it is, youre good to go.
Now, I am not blind to the implications this has on future generations of American mental-midgets who now have the right to vote after having been indoctrinated by religious babble. Things change, though.
The kids who'd be influenced by this...stuff are 18 years away from voting. 18 years, thats a long time. 18 years ago, I wasnt on the internet. 18 years ago, a GUT was the laughing stock of the science community and anyone who researched into it were basically outcasts.
Things change, is my point. The Dark Ages end at some point.
Fail.
Evolution happens; Darwin's concept of HOW it happens (random mutation - with beneficial ones succeeding while less beneficial ones do not - your temporal lobe, for instance) is what makes it a "theory".
Evolution is just about the strongest theory in modern mainstream science. If it didn't blow a huge freaking hole in the fundamentalist reading of the Old Testament, it would not be controversial in the least.
I don't like it, but I have to feed the family and have to choose which battles to fight on my free time. I'm no scientist so this is one of those battles that really is not important enough for me to spend time fighting.
I'm not sure if that's really apathy......... meh.......
I'll probably get mad about it again when it's my daughter's turn to take earth science in school and then forget about it after she has graduated.
in so many words, that's the bottom line
why do people that hate intelligence call it intelligent design?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
