LGF

 RetweetCreationist Bill Signed by Jindal

Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 12:08:53 pm PDT

Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal has signed a stealth creationist bill into law, and American educational standards take a huge step backward: Science law could set tone for Jindal.

The creationist front group called the Discovery Institute is quietly crowing, and maintaining the fiction that the bill is not religiously-based.

At the Discovery Institute, a Seattle-based think tank that promotes intelligent design and backed the new education act, senior fellow John West said he and his colleagues did not directly lobby Jindal. The group did notify its supporters that groups such as the ACLU and the science organizations were pushing for a veto.

West said critics misunderstand the bill, which he said is not about creationism or intelligent design. Rather, he said, it’s about clarifying that teachers are free to expose their students to the debates that Darwinian scientists have among themselves.

Instead, too many public school students get a “watered-down” discussion of evolutionary theory or nothing at all from teachers, and administrators are too concerned with not angering parents.

“This bill is not a license to propagandize against something they don’t like in science,” West said. “Someone who uses materials to inject religion into the classroom is not only violating the Constitution, they are violating the bill.”

For some reason, though, religious advocacy groups seemed to receive a very different message.

The bill enjoyed support from the Louisiana Family Forum, a group that is upfront in its push for more religious expressions in the public sphere.

Advertisement

1423 comments

  • Comments are open and unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Little Green Footballs.
  • Obscene, abusive, silly, or annoying remarks may be deleted, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their views by Little Green Footballs.
  • Posts that contain phone numbers, street addresses, email addresses or other personal information will also be deleted, as will posts that consist only of a variation on the word, "First!"
  • Comments that advocate violence will be cause for immediate banning with no appeal.
  • Disagreement and debate are welcome, but insults and abuse are not, and may cause your account to be blocked.
  • REMEMBER: posting comments at LGF is a privilege, not a right. Abuse that privilege, and your account will be blocked.

Hide comments | Jump to bottom

1 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:09:27pm

No VP slot for you.

2 debutaunt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:10:15pm

We know what could go wrong.

3 pegcity  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:11:25pm

i thought America was done with this nonsense

4 Salem  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:11:56pm

POS

5 The Shadow Do  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:12:03pm

Republican. The stupid party.

6 Salamantis  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:12:15pm

When the camel's nose gets into the tent, usually the rest of the camel follows.

7 HelloDare  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:12:22pm

This is depressing.

8 zombie  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:12:49pm

I don't know much about Bobby Jindal -- only read VP speculation here -- but it seems to me he just squandered whatever national political capital he might have had.

Oh well.

Next.

9 Killgore Trout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:13:27pm

He's going to double the salary of the legislature and incur needless legal fees for the inevitable lawsuit on the creationist bill. He's a dud.

10 bj1126  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:13:33pm

I don't see what the big deal is. /shrug

Lots worse problems with our education system than potentially teaching ID.

11 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:14:46pm

re: #10 bj1126

I don't see what the big deal is. /shrug

Lots worse problems with our education system than potentially teaching ID.

Does that mean it's okay to make it worse?

12 zombie  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:14:52pm

If Louisiana wants to continue their downward spiral into third-world status, than I guess that's their choice.

13 Salamantis  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:15:52pm

Yeah, right, shure; since we have other educational problems in our schools, why should we be concerned about bastardizing our science education with religious dogma?

14 NJDhockeyfan  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:16:03pm

Yesterday he signed the “The Sex Offender Chemical Castration Bill."

15 zombie  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:16:10pm

re: #10 bj1126

I don't see what the big deal is. /shrug

Lots worse problems with our education system than potentially teaching ID.

No, actually, I'd place it in the top three problems.

ID opens the door to political influence of heretofore impartial science instruction. It' s very dangerous road.

16 Pigtown Water Dog  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:17:10pm

Oh, phooey.

Sooo close, yet sooo far away.

17 CyanSnowHawk  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:17:21pm

re: #3 pegcity

i thought America was done with this nonsense

Not sure where you've been lately, but this is far from over. As long as large groups of people believe in their religious explanations for how the world works, they will try to get them taught in our government run schools. It's expected and will have to be fought forever.

18 scottishbuzzsaw  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:17:49pm

'Squandered' is the perfect word. There seems to be an epidemic of it on the right.

19 redc1c4  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:18:06pm

re: #8 zombie

I don't know much about Bobby Jindal -- only read VP speculation here -- but it seems to me he just squandered whatever national political capital he might have had.

Oh well.

Next.

he's certainly off my list. as they say down in Nawlins "It's not the heat, it's the stupidity."

what a twit.

20 Boondock St. Bender  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:18:30pm

Well,...it is the south and louisiana...
(ducks and runs)

21 Picayune  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:18:31pm

Charles: sent you a Times Picayune article on this topic a few minutes ago. Did you receive, cause I received a mail return error from Cox.net? If no, I will resend.

22 MandyManners  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:18:50pm

re: #10 bj1126

I don't see what the big deal is. /shrug

Lots worse problems with our education system than potentially teaching ID.

Do you want the Islamic creation myth taught?

23 SusanL  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:18:51pm

So much for Bobby Jindal. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

24 HelloDare  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:19:04pm

Jindal was so good on every other issue. And he's a good speaker. Damn. Hope Sarah Palin doesn't have any skeletons in her walk-in closet.

25 redc1c4  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:19:21pm

re: #12 zombie

If Louisiana wants to continue their downward spiral into third-world status, than I guess that's their choice.

i thought they were pretty much there already. this is just icing on the cake.

26 coquimbojoe  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:20:18pm

re: #8 zombie

I don't know much about Bobby Jindal -- only read VP speculation here -- but it seems to me he just squandered whatever national political capital he might have had.

Oh well.

Next.

I agree I am very disappointed. The problem with teaching creationism in schools is the same on as teaching values when dealing with sex education. I say stick to the science. Is evolutionary science perfect? No, but the fossils are there in front of us, we need to interpret them the best we can, and just because scientific understanding changes, the attempt to teach to the best level we can isn't invalidated. The problem with the creation (I AM A BELIEVER) is it is based on faith and intangibles. I don't want others of another faith teaching their dogmas to my children, nor do they want me teaching mine to theirs.

Stick with the science, the rest we can figure out in Sunday School.

27 Salamantis  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:20:32pm

I see Bobby Jindal becoming Huey Long before my eyes. How sad.

28 coquimbojoe  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:20:34pm

re: #12 zombie

If Louisiana wants to continue their downward spiral into third-world status, than I guess that's their choice.

You mean they can sink further?

29 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:20:43pm

"will allow local school boards to approve supplemental materials for public school science classes as they discuss evolution, cloning and global warming."

How about they spend a little more time on reading, writing, and basic thinking skills and less on indoctrination and activism?

30 zombie  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:20:49pm

To me, the top three educational problems in this country are:

1. Marxist indoctrination of students by leftist teachers, textbook companies, unions and pressure groups.

2. Affirmative action (and just as importantly, stealth affirmative action) watering down the overall standards for college admission, and giving an official imprimatur to institutionalized racist policies.

3. Political influence on scientific education, whether it be the man-made-global-warming fad or the "intelligent design" hoax.

31 Charles  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:21:11pm

re: #21 Picayune

Charles: sent you a Times Picayune article on this topic a few minutes ago. Did you receive, cause I received a mail return error from Cox.net? If no, I will resend.

I think it's the same article -- I just checked the site to see what the status of the bill was. This got almost no national coverage.

32 kojirovance  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:21:19pm

re: #15 zombie
ID opens the door to political influence of heretofore impartial science instruction. It' s very dangerous road.

That door is already open. Look at any school science textbook and see what they have to say about anthropogenic global warming.

33 lawhawk  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:21:21pm

And this will surely solve Louisiana's problems that have it ranking near the bottom of various education surveys. Seriously, how exactly does watering down science with this stuff help anyone?

The luster is clearly off Jindal, especially in light of the pay raise mess, which continues to see recall petitions filed.

This is also a self-inflicted mess, and he gets what he deserves in scorn and derision.

34 Killgore Trout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:21:29pm

From the Disco Institute...
Victory in Louisiana: Governor Jindal Signs Historic Science Education Act On Evolution and Education

The law is needed for two reasons. First, around the country, science teachers are being harassed, intimidated, and sometimes fired for trying to present scientific evidence critical of Darwinian theory along with the evidence that supports it. Second, many school administrators and teachers are fearful or confused about what is legally allowed when teaching about controversial scientific issues like evolution.
35 MJ  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:22:19pm

Jindal is living proof that there is no intelligence in Intelligent Design.
He's what Mencken called a "yahoo".

36 Boondock St. Bender  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:22:34pm

The govt. corruption in la.is already a national embarressment.(it makes me shake my head,and i'm from dirty jersey)why not their education system.

37 HelloDare  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:22:43pm

Jindal's head is below water. Quick, check the levees.

38 sadhu  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:22:45pm

re: #30 zombie

To me, the top three educational problems in this country are:

1. Marxist indoctrination of students by leftist teachers, textbook companies, unions and pressure groups.

2. Affirmative action (and just as importantly, stealth affirmative action) watering down the overall standards for college admission, and giving an official imprimatur to institutionalized racist policies.

3. Political influence on scientific education, whether it be the man-made-global-warming fad or the "intelligent design" hoax.


4. Parental involvement. #1 in my book.

39 karmic_inquisitor  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:23:05pm

Idiocy.

I have long advocated the return of Louisiana to the French or Spanish (just the state - not the states that make up the rest of the purchase) since the state is basically a welfare case, with federal money pouring in (even before Katrina) with said money disappearing followed by an appeal for more so that "the problems can be fixed".

At this point, they would not take them.

40 Catttt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:23:07pm

Based on my reading about the law, this is not a "creationist bill."

... the law that will allow local school boards to approve supplemental materials for public school science classes as they discuss evolution, cloning and global warming.

41 zombie  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:23:35pm

re: #29 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

"will allow local school boards to approve supplemental materials for public school science classes as they discuss evolution, cloning and global warming."

How about they spend a little more time on reading, writing, and basic thinking skills and less on indoctrination and activism?

BINGO!

42 coquimbojoe  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:23:46pm

re: #34 Killgore Trout

From the Disco Institute...
Victory in Louisiana: Governor Jindal Signs Historic Science Education Act On Evolution and Education

I think theory critical of Darwinian evolution is probably fine. Teaching things that can only be 'proven' by one's spiritual experience is another thing entirely.

43 snowcrash  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:25:44pm

I think he is positioning himself as a VERY conservative Republican, who will be guaranteed the GOP nomination if we survive 8 years of a liberal Obama nightmare. Just my pet theory.

44 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:26:22pm

re: #42 coquimbojoe

I think theory critical of Darwinian evolution is probably fine. Teaching things that can only be 'proven' by one's spiritual experience is another thing entirely.

Bingo. One can debate the merits and deficiencies in evolution theory without bringing the supernatural into the equation.

45 zombie  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:26:38pm

re: #32 kojirovance

ID opens the door to political influence of heretofore impartial science instruction. It' s very dangerous road.

That door is already open. Look at any school science textbook and see what they have to say about anthropogenic global warming.

I agree. But two wrongs don't make a right.

We need to get rid of ALL political hoaxery disguised as science. If we just end up with two opposing sides each jousting to foist their particular lie on our kids, then it's a lose-lose situation.

I fight against leftist influence on schools just as much I do against creationism in the schools.

46 Dianna  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:26:40pm

re: #9 Killgore Trout

It's looking that way, yes.

47 zombie  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:27:50pm

re: #38 sadhu

4. Parental involvement. #1 in my book.

Or lack thereof, I assume you mean.

48 FloatingRock  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:27:51pm

If Jindal is McCain's VP pick I'm voting for Obama.

49 Iron Fist[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:28:29pm
50 Beobachter  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:28:39pm

re: #15 zombie

No, actually, I'd place it in the top three problems.

ID opens the door to political influence of heretofore impartial science instruction. It' s very dangerous road.

I would call it a slippery slope.

51 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:29:08pm

re: #48 FloatingRock

If Jindal is McCain's VP pick I'm voting for Obama.

Well, you're an idiot.

52 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:29:18pm

re: #48 FloatingRock

If Jindal is McCain's VP pick I'm voting for Obama.

I'll still vote McCain. I'll just hope extra-hard that he doesn't croak in office.

53 zombie  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:29:23pm
#40 Cattt
Based on my reading about the law, this is not a "creationist bill."

... the law that will allow local school boards to approve supplemental materials for public school science classes as they discuss evolution, cloning and global warming.

See? as I suspected, it opens the door to ALL political-scientific hoaxery.

A complete disaster.

Thanks for pointing that out.

54 jaunte  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:29:25pm

re: #48 FloatingRock

"Don't vote idiotic."

55 MandyManners  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:29:31pm

re: #49 Iron Fist

,

If you are serious, then you, sir, are a fucking moron.

56 loppyd  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:29:44pm

re: #48 FloatingRock

If Jindal is McCain's VP pick I'm voting for Obama.

Good luck with that.

57 Shug  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:29:45pm
a Seattle-based think tank

Not nearly enough thinking going on

58 Iron Fist[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:30:16pm
59 MJ  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:30:21pm

Jindal also wants to chemically castrate rapists.

Who knows, perhaps he'll want to cut of the hands of thieves next.

[Link: talkingpointsmemo.com...]

60 Dianna  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:30:39pm

re: #30 zombie

A friend of mine told me yesterday that her niece came home from class and told my friend and her sister that they shouldn't have children, but adopt from other countries.

That's outrageous.

61 Salamantis  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:30:50pm

re: #42 coquimbojoe

I think theory critical of Darwinian evolution is probably fine. Teaching things that can only be 'proven' by one's spiritual experience is another thing entirely.

There is no credible science that reasonably criticizes evolutionary theory; there are only internecine disputes about which particular evolutionary mechanisms accomplish it, and by which particular means - and these differences are tertiary, not fundamental.

62 lawhawk  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:31:05pm

Folks, here's a copy of the law in question. Also posted to the spinoffs.

63 Catttt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:31:08pm

Too bad biology isn't more like chemistry. If you mix subjectivity into chemistry, it can blow up in your face.

64 karmic_inquisitor  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:31:37pm

I really do think it is time to start a movement within political ranks to form a "Rationalist Coalition" that actually advocates policy based on a demonstrated, reasoned understanding of what problem is supposedly being "solved" with a piece of legislation.

First 3 targets -

(1) Intelligent design.

(2) Climate research funding that can't produce predictive outcomes, and back tested outcomes that conform to prior (and unadjusted) climate and geological records.

(3) Sarbanes Oxley (which has killed the competitiveness of public companies in this country that gross less than $100M a year). As a friend of mine who argues cases before the SEC said "bad facts lead to bad laws")

/feel free to add more.

65 hermeneutics  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:31:41pm

OT -- I gotta run and thought you'd enjoy reading this. Sorry for not waiting until 100:

19 out of the top 50 newspapers are in the red. By my calculations, 17 of them are liberal-left. So how many of these propagandists will be around to fluff up Obama in November?

[Link: www.thestandard.com...]

66 dgax65  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:31:51pm

re: #15 zombie

ID opens the door to political influence of heretofore impartial science instruction. It' s very dangerous road.

Heretofore impartial science instruction? Does that include global warming indoctrination? Junk science has been pushed on school children for quite a while now. I don't agree with ID, but I doubt it will cost us as much as all the global warming hysteria-driven legislation that is out there.

67 Iron Fist[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:32:12pm
68 Ben Hur  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:32:18pm

Ray Nagin for VP!

69 Taqiyyotomist  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:32:25pm

#0

GAZE

-Taq

70 zombie  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:32:48pm

re: #48 FloatingRock

If Jindal is McCain's VP pick I'm voting for Obama.

Whoa whoa whoa, let's not go nuts.

The federal government does not set science curriculum standards. That is exclusively a state-level decision. So Jindal's position on this would be irrelevant, as VP.

I wouldn't be happy if he got the nomination, but I'm quite certain he's a damn sight better than Obama, fer cryin' out loud. Every leftist propaganda lie in the playbook would be shoved down our kids' throats if Obama got elected.

71 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:32:55pm
72 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:32:59pm

re: #60 Dianna

A friend of mine told me yesterday that her niece came home from class and told my friend and her sister that they shouldn't have children, but adopt from other countries.

That's outrageous.

Viva "The Screwfly Solution"... this pretty much proves that our current public education establishment has been infiltrated by space aliens.

73 lawhawk  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:33:38pm

Also from the legislative history of SB 733:

It passed both the house and senate nearly unanimously:
The House passed the final version 94-3. The Senate passed this bill 35-0.

74 Step on a Bug  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:33:45pm

Jees. Big Deal. what's wrong with ID Charles? Lighen up.

75 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:34:07pm

re: #63 Cattt

Too bad biology isn't more like chemistry. If you mix subjectivity into chemistry, it can blow up in your face.

Exothermic reactions are a social construct!

76 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:34:18pm

re: #70 zombie

Guy had 85 posts while being registered for over a year. Drive by trolling.

77 JohnnyReb  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:34:52pm

Moonbats to the left of me and moonbats to the right of me. How do I get away?

Leave religion out of public schools!

78 snowcrash  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:35:00pm

re: #74 Step on a Bug
Did you lurk much before posting here?

79 zombie  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:35:15pm

re: #60 Dianna

A friend of mine told me yesterday that her niece came home from class and told my friend and her sister that they shouldn't have children, but adopt from other countries.

That's outrageous.

That's beyond outrageous -- it's completely insane!

Tell your friend to follow up on the situation -- find out which teach taught them that, and pursue her.

80 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:35:42pm

re: #64 karmic_inquisitor

/feel free to add more.

McCain-Feingold.

81 Dianna  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:36:13pm

re: #71 buzzsawmonkey

re: #72 Occasional Reader

Yep. I'm really outraged; the school has no business propagandizing 9 year olds this way.

I miss Tiptree/Sheldon.

82 Shug  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:36:27pm

re: #74 Step on a Bug

Jees. Big Deal. what's wrong with ID Charles? Lighen up.


2 posts in 3 months.

curious

83 Beobachter  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:36:36pm

re: #60 Dianna

A friend of mine told me yesterday that her niece came home from class and told my friend and her sister that they shouldn't have children, but adopt from other countries.

That's outrageous.

We need school vouchers. Paying school taxes plus private school is not cheap.

84 MandyManners  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:36:49pm

re: #74 Step on a Bug

Jees. Big Deal. what's wrong with ID Charles? Lighen up.

Do you want the Muslim creation myth taught to kids?

85 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:36:52pm

If Jindal is Obama's VP pick, I'm voting for McCain.

/what?

86 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:37:08pm

re: #59 MJ

Jindal also wants to chemically castrate rapists.

Who knows, perhaps he'll want to cut of the hands of thieves next.

[Link: talkingpointsmemo.com...]

Intemperate un-PC thought coming...

When will he legalize immolation as a legal form of divorce?

Okay, I'm done.

87 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:37:19pm
In signing the bill, Jindal issued a brief statement that read in part: "I will continue to consistently support the ability of school boards and BESE to make the best decisions to ensure a quality education for our children."

Governor- you did just the opposite.

88 dgax65  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:37:26pm

So Bobby Jindal gets tossed under the GOP bus for one misstep? I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. He is still early in his political career and, so far, he has much more conservative credibility than most members of the GOP.

89 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:37:36pm

re: #81 Dianna

I miss Tiptree/Sheldon.

But probably not enough to name your daughter "Raccoona"!

90 Ben Hur  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:37:40pm

re: #79 zombie

That's beyond outrageous -- it's completely insane!

Tell your friend to follow up on the situation -- find out which teach taught them that, and pursue her.


Of course they left will be oblivious to the innate paternal racism of their stance.

They assume that the peoples of the third world aren't capable of raising their own children, with or without the whole village.

The third world is now a puppy shop for celebs.

Madonna "adopted" a child whose parents are alive and well.

91 Catttt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:37:59pm

re: #62 lawhawk

Folks, here's a copy of the law in question. Also posted to the spinoffs.

Excellent. Thank you for that.

92 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:38:17pm

re: #84 MandyManners

Do you want the Muslim creation myth taught to kids?

I assume it begins with a Big Bang.

93 debutaunt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:38:51pm

re: #71 buzzsawmonkey

I bet the next thing they'll tell the kids is that, having adopted someone from another country, it is the adoptive parents' task to raise the child in full awareness of its own proud ethnic heritage/tradition, rather than the parents' own.

Rosie must have some problem with our melting pot.

94 Dianna  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:38:52pm

re: #79 zombie

Her sister - the child's mother - won't do any such thing. Fortunately, my friend told her niece that it's a good thing that no one told her mom that, or the child wouldn't exist. My friend further told her niece that she should have as many children as she wants.

95 Catttt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:39:17pm

re: #75 Occasional Reader

Exothermic reactions are a social construct!

My daddy was a chemistry teacher (and football coach). He loved chemistry (and football).

96 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:39:37pm
97 zombie  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:39:38pm

re: #66 dgax65

ID opens the door to political influence of heretofore impartial science instruction. It' s very dangerous road.

Heretofore impartial science instruction? Does that include global warming indoctrination? Junk science has been pushed on school children for quite a while now. I don't agree with ID, but I doubt it will cost us as much as all the global warming hysteria-driven legislation that is out there.

Like I said, both hoaxes are bad. Two wrings don't make a right.

The global warming thing is actually a passing fad that will be forgotten in 5 years. The creationist movement, however, has been around since the very week after Darwin published The Origin of Species in 1859, and shows no sign of letting up.
Because of this, I worry a bit more about ID than I do global warming.

98 wolfie  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:39:47pm

re: #92 Occasional Reader

I assume it begins with a Big Bang.

I believe they called it the Big Bomb, though.

99 schultzw  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:40:04pm

I don't see the big deal about teaching ID. It doesn't promote any one religion, and it seeks to explain a lot of what science can't. Can we at LGF get off of talking about ID vs. Evolution and focus on what really matters: keeping America safe from moonbats and terrorists!

100 Dianna  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:40:16pm

re: #89 Occasional Reader

No. I'm not cruel!

It's bad enough that my mom saddled me with two 'n's.

101 Richard Romano  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:40:20pm

The LGF headline is hysterical -- I'm disappointed in Charles, a man I respect deeply for the way he handles the important issues we face.

Tell me ONE medical discovery linked to evolution -- just one. I can tell you many medical discoveries linked to scientific experimentation and observation (operational science), and nothing at all to do with origins science (evolution or creation). You could be a snake handler or astrologer and still come up with a medical breakthrough.

The vote for support was 93-4, so it's not as if it was a "stealth" move by quasi-scientists.

102 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:40:29pm

re: #90 Ben Hur

The third world is now a puppy shop for celebs.

Heh.

103 MandyManners  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:40:30pm

re: #92 Occasional Reader

I assume it begins with a Big Bang.

Yep.

104 karmic_inquisitor  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:40:32pm

re: #74 Step on a Bug

Jees. Big Deal. what's wrong with ID Charles? Lighen up.

I won't speak for the man, but this country had some great innovations that ushered in the era of prosperity and health you now enjoy.

One of the cornerstones was a free public education.

If that education becomes indoctrination into a model of the world that is incorrect and cannot produce repeatable, testable methods for further discovery, then kiss prosperity and job creation here goodbye.

Say goodbye to biomedical science here in the US, because we won't be capable of producing treatments other than what Christian Scientists currently offer.

What would the Discovery Institute then offer us? Divine Physics? Say goodbye to structures that can survive the first wind storm ...

I believe in God. I don't have to think every phenomena around me is exclusively being carried out by God's Hand to keep my faith.

105 HelloDare  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:40:44pm

We could ask Jesus how he feels about teaching ID in schools.

The Jesus Christ Show is a radio program that airs every Sunday from 6 to 9 a.m. on KFI in Los Angeles, California. The show is billed as "Hosted by Jesus Christ". Jesus is played by its producer Neil Saavedra. The show will become a part of Premiere Radio Networks starting on June 1, 2008, and will be syndicated to several stations in the US.

"The Jesus Christ Show" began as a short segment on KFI’s The Bill Handel Show, when Saavedra was invited to play the role of Jesus as a serious guest for an Easter program segment.[1]

A podcast version of the show is available from KFI's web page.

You can take a cruise with Jesus Christ on September 3rd.

106 calculatorjockey  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:40:45pm

I welcome teaching intelligent design in public schools, frankly.

Darwinian evolution is a crock. People generally accept it because they want to. It is the most absolutely flawed pack of nonsense that I have heard in public schools. It is less credible than global warming.

The fossil record doesn't support evolution, if anything, it argues against it.

However; I would be willing to vote against teaching ID in schools if science teachers were permitted to go on at length about the oodles of fatal flaws in the religion of evolution.

107 MandyManners  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:41:03pm

re: #99 schultzw

I don't see the big deal about teaching ID. It doesn't promote any one religion, and it seeks to explain a lot of what science can't. Can we at LGF get off of talking about ID vs. Evolution and focus on what really matters: keeping America safe from moonbats and terrorists!

You've just told Charles that his furniture sucks.

108 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:41:10pm

Louisiana already got smacked down for sneaking creationism into schools once. I guess some people need lessons repeated.

109 debutaunt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:41:11pm

re: #82 Shug

2 posts in 3 months.

curious

Must have started reading a dictionary and was amazed.

110 Honorary Yooper  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:41:32pm

re: #88 dgax65

So Bobby Jindal gets tossed under the GOP bus for one misstep? I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. He is still early in his political career and, so far, he has much more conservative credibility than most members of the GOP.

Since when did LGF become a GOP website? We're anti-idiotarian.

111 BuddyG  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:41:58pm

re: #84 MandyManners

Do you want the Muslim creation myth taught to kids?


There shouldn't be teaching of any specific religion's dogma in public schools.
But there's nothing wrong with a generic mention that many people believe there is a creator of our Universe. A guiding force.

112 redc1c4  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:42:00pm

re: #76 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Guy had 85 posts while being registered for over a year. Drive by trolling.

kinda what i thought... and now we have "step on a bug".

(gamey buttocks for lunch, anyone? %-)

113 Dianna  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:42:24pm

re: #102 Occasional Reader

I missed Ben Hur's #90. Glad you didn't!

114 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:42:44pm
I don't see the big deal about teaching ID. It doesn't promote any one religion, and it seeks to explain a lot of what science can't.

It promotes belief in a supernatural power, which is not science, no matter how you cook it up.

And folks, I'm not against religion in schools. In philosophy and social studies classes, it's almost a necessity to understanding human history and humanity. In science class? It's a joke.

115 Catttt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:43:04pm

re: #53 zombie

See? as I suspected, it opens the door to ALL political-scientific hoaxery.

A complete disaster.

Thanks for pointing that out.

The law does say "objective" in it and also "no religion or anti-religion or any of that religion stuff" in it. At any rate, it puts it in the hands of the school boards. Perhaps the school boards will be sharper than predicted. You never know. It could happen. Possibly. Mayhap.

116 redc1c4  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:43:18pm

re: #78 snowcrash

Did you lurk much before posting here?

Magic 8-ball says "not likely" %-)

117 MandyManners  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:43:27pm

re: #109 debutaunt

Must have started reading a dictionary and was amazed.

ROFLMAO!

118 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:43:36pm

Shug-

it's no different than the last big controversy at LGF. Suddenly, out of what seems like no where, lurkers feel the need to tell Charles what to do with his blog.

119 wolf  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:43:53pm

For the first time, I can honestly say that I disagree with a lot of the postings on LGF. I believe in intelligent design, and have since Carl Sagan put it forward in the 70's. Why is it hard to believe in a Creator simply because we understand the technology he used to create us?

Jindal has rising in my eyes, and I would support him as VP candidate.

120 redc1c4  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:44:01pm

re: #115 Cattt

The law does say "objective" in it and also "no religion or anti-religion or any of that religion stuff" in it. At any rate, it puts it in the hands of the school boards. Perhaps the school boards will be sharper than predicted. You never know. It could happen. Possibly. Mayhap.

about as likely as me winning the lottery without a ticket.

121 MandyManners  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:44:02pm

re: #111 BuddyG

There shouldn't be teaching of any specific religion's dogma in public schools.
But there's nothing wrong with a generic mention that many people believe there is a creator of our Universe. A guiding force.

As long as they don't teach it, I have no problem with it.

122 Dianna  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:44:07pm

re: #106 calculatorjockey

I'm sorry you feel that way.

123 calculatorjockey  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:44:27pm

OK

124 cjstavern  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:44:29pm

I never did understand the seething rage and irrational hatred for ID...and I'm an agnositc. I remember as a kid we were taught both evolution and I believe they called it creationism back then. That was back in the early 70's and we all turned out ok.

125 Ben Hur  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:44:37pm
126 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:44:59pm

re: #106 calculatorjockey

The fossil record doesn't support evolution, if anything, it argues against it.

I always wondered why all those fossils at the Museum of Natural History were always dated to within six days of each other.

127 zombie  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:45:06pm

re: #88 dgax65

So Bobby Jindal gets tossed under the GOP bus for one misstep? I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. He is still early in his political career and, so far, he has much more conservative credibility than most members of the GOP.

I don't care about "conservative credibility." I care about sane policies.

Conservatism (and liberalism) as a coherent philosophy is out-of-whack with current political realities. Sure, conservativism is on average more "correct" than liberalism, but we need to be able to pick and choose what we believe a la carte from the buffet table of political opinions. I refuse to order a set menu that includes some distasteful dishes I'd rather not swallow.

128 Shug  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:45:20pm

re: #118 Sharmuta

Shug-

it's no different than the last big controversy at LGF. Suddenly, out of what seems like no where, lurkers sock puppets feel the need to tell Charles what to do with his blog.

fixed

129 kulhwch  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:45:52pm
“This bill bullshit is not a license bullshit to propagandize bullshit against something bullshit they don’t like in science bullshit,” West said. “Someone who uses materials bullshit to inject religion bullshit into the classroom is not only violating the Constitution bullshit, they are violating the bill bullshit.”

There, that is much more honest ...

}:)     ["Cleetus, tell yore maw whut you lairned 'bout fossils today ... "]

130 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:46:04pm

re: #119 wolf

Because ID is a political movement. Read the Wedge Strategy.

Read what it's proponents have to say themselves:

"This isn't really, and never has been a debate about science. It's about religion and philosophy."

131 zombie  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:46:15pm

re: #96 buzzsawmonkey

It takes a village to sell a child.

LOL!

132 redc1c4  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:46:16pm

re: #92 Occasional Reader

I assume it begins with a Big Bang.

that's the end... %-)

133 keithgabryelski  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:46:56pm

re: #8 zombie

I don't know much about Bobby Jindal -- only read VP speculation here -- but it seems to me he just squandered whatever national political capital he might have had.

Oh well.

Next.

There is MORE than just "bringing teh ID crazy" from Jindal

He lead an exorcism:
[Link: www.time-blog.com...]

134 BuddyG  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:46:56pm

re: #121 MandyManners

As long as they don't teach it, I have no problem with it.

My daughter has asked "why are we here?"
Kid's minds naturally wonder about these things.

Why something rather than nothing?

There is room for both science and spirituality.

135 Charles  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:47:16pm

re: #62 lawhawk

Folks, here's a copy of the law in question. Also posted to the spinoffs.

The bits about global warming and cloning are just window dressing.

Although as zombie points out, they're not harmless either. Their inclusion makes the political motivations behind this education bill even more obvious.

136 Honorary Yooper  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:47:25pm

re: #118 Sharmuta

Shug-

it's no different than the last big controversy at LGF. Suddenly, out of what seems like no where, lurkers feel the need to tell Charles what to do with his blog.

Yeah, this is no different than when we had the fascists and their supporters last year. In fact, a lot of the YEC criticisms of Charles seem to be exactly the same, complaints he is straying from the topic, complaints he isn't focusing on what they want him to focus one, etc. I'm sorry they feel that way, but they can make up their own fucking website on blogger if they feel that way. I have my own blog (see highlighted nic) for my own purpose. This is Charles's blog for whatever purpose Charles intends to use it for whether they like it or not.

137 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:48:03pm

re: #106 calculatorjockey

The fossil record doesn't support evolution, if anything, it argues against it.

Wrong!

138 redstateredneck  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:48:32pm

re: #106 calculatorjockey

re: #119 wolf

I agree with you. Plus, what about state rights? Less federal government?

139 karmic_inquisitor  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:48:37pm

re: #106 calculatorjockey

I welcome teaching intelligent design in public schools, frankly.

Darwinian evolution is a crock. People generally accept it because they want to. It is the most absolutely flawed pack of nonsense that I have heard in public schools. It is less credible than global warming.

The fossil record doesn't support evolution, if anything, it argues against it.

However; I would be willing to vote against teaching ID in schools if science teachers were permitted to go on at length about the oodles of fatal flaws in the religion of evolution.

All you have to do to support your argument is disprove the theory.

That is how theory works.

Newton took a back seat to Einstein when Einstein usurped many parts of Newtonian Mechanics with his theory of relativity, which was them usurped in part by Hawking. At each step, repeatable experiment demonstrated support for the new theory and disproved the prior understanding.

Post the disproving theory ALONG WITH the observation/experiment that is repeatable by third parties in any lab, please.

140 Ben Hur  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:48:52pm

Then why do they call it the "missing link?"

/stirring pot.

141 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:49:06pm

re: #118 Sharmuta

Sharmuta,

Pro-ID posters are and should be tolerated, so long as they are respectful. This is not the same as the last big controversy here (the Euro-racists) in that their position was vile and had no place on this (or any) conservative blog. ID supporters aren't vile. Just wrong.

142 keithgabryelski  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:49:13pm

re: #111 BuddyG

There shouldn't be teaching of any specific religion's dogma in public schools.
But there's nothing wrong with a generic mention that many people believe there is a creator of our Universe. A guiding force.

What part of SCIENCE CLASS is it appropriate to mention "a creator of our Universe" or "A guiding force"?

143 FloatingRock  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:49:16pm

re: #49 Iron Fist

,

If you are serious, then you, sir, are a moron.

No, I'll be voting against two morons. In that respect, let me correct my prior statement. I won't vote "for" Obama, I'll vote against McCain/Jindal.

Science is bigger and older than any single nation. While I'm a patriotic American I am also loyal to the scientific method. With Jindal's participation in an exorcism combined with this evidence that he doesn't believe in the separation of church and state, (quite the opposite), magnified by his willingness to pervert science, I have to vote against him.

If the numbers ran a different way I might vote for him anyway, but this is the calculation as I see it. A greater number of American's believe in creationism than in leftist political philosophy. Any damage that Obama can to do this country will be easier to undo than that done by somebody like Jindal on the opposite end of the spectrum.

144 Catttt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:49:37pm

re: #30 zombie

To me, the top three educational problems in this country are:

1. Marxist indoctrination of students by leftist teachers, textbook companies, unions and pressure groups.

2. Affirmative action (and just as importantly, stealth affirmative action) watering down the overall standards for college admission, and giving an official imprimatur to institutionalized racist policies.

3. Political influence on scientific education, whether it be the man-made-global-warming fad or the "intelligent design" hoax.

Well put. I hearted it.

145 calculatorjockey  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:50:04pm

#126

haha

It's funny how cocksure scientists are about what they "know" now. It wasn't that long ago that scientists were absolutely sure about dozens of organs (vestigal) in the human body from man's earlier stages. These were regarded as left-overs which served no purpose in the anatomy of the modern human. Some medical journals as late as the 1960s included these including the pituitary gland. Imagine if a 5 year old had his pituitary gland removed because it was garbage.

In another hundred years scientists will have changed their minds about many things that they believe with absolute certainty.

We give so much authority and credibility to the speculations of scientists. It is amazing. Scientists are people, too. They have their own bias and there own issues with God.

146 ContraJihadi  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:50:35pm

re: #1 Lizard by the Bay

No VP slot for you.

Yes, whatever the merits of the issues or the realities of Louisiana politics, Jindal has just taken himself off the national stage.

147 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:50:36pm

re: #138 redstateredneck

re: #119 wolf

I agree with you. Plus, what about state rights? Less federal government?

I don't see anyone here arguing that the Federal government should somehow override the Lousiana legislature here. We're saying that what they did is a bad idea, not that they didn't have the right to do it.

148 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:51:00pm

re: #138 redstateredneck

1) States do not have rights over the rules of science.
2) It's quite a stretch to suggest this bill promotes state's rights when it actually usurps the First Amendment.

149 loppyd  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:51:05pm

re: #143 FloatingRock

If the numbers ran a different way I might vote for him anyway, but this is the calculation as I see it. A greater number of American's believe in creationism than in leftist political philosophy. Any damage that Obama can to do this country will be easier to undo than that done by somebody like Jindal on the opposite end of the spectrum.

Put down the crack pipe.

150 debutaunt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:51:11pm

re: #140 Ben Hur

Then why do they call it the "missing link?"

/stirring pot.

PIYF - didn't ya mean to say linky?

151 kulhwch  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:51:28pm

re: #14 NJDhockeyfan

Yesterday he signed the “The Sex Offender Chemical Castration Bill."

Without chemistry instruction, that'll prove to be a tad difficult to enforce ... but maybe their alchemy will work better ...

}:)     ["Okay, then, we're going to hit your gonads now with the Philosopher's Stone ... this should smart a bit ... "]

152 WriterMom  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:51:32pm

re: #92 Occasional Reader

It was one of the biggest bangs ever apparently.

153 lawhawk  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:51:46pm
The State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, upon request of a city, parish, or other local public school board, shall allow and assist teachers, principals, and other school administrators to create and foster an environment within public elementary and secondary schools that promotes critical thinking skills, logical analysis, and open and objective discussion of scientific theories being studied including, but not limited to, evolution, the origins of life, global warming, and human cloning.

Such assistance shall include support and guidance for teachers regarding effective ways to help students understand, analyze, critique, and objectively review scientific theories being studied, including those enumerated in Paragraph (1) of this Subsection.

C. A teacher shall teach the material presented in the standard textbook supplied by the school system and thereafter may use supplemental textbooks and other instructional materials to help students understand, analyze, critique, and review scientific theories in an objective manner, as permitted by the city, parish, or other local public school board unless otherwise prohibited by the State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education.

D. This Section shall not be construed to promote any religious doctrine, promote discrimination for or against a particular set of religious beliefs, or promote discrimination for or against religion or nonreligion.

E. The State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education and each city, parish, or other local public school board shall adopt and promulgate the rules and regulations necessary to implement the provisions of this Section prior to the beginning of the 2008-2009 school year.

That's the text of this bill. The way it is worded does open up a whole can of worms, but not only on the issue evolution, but on global warming, or any other issue for that matter.

It allows junk science to enter the classroom in the name of supplemental materials. Heck, a teacher could argue that The Inconvenient Truth is a useful educational tool to teach about ecology, the environment, and global warming.

This bill opens the door for chicanery from all sides, not just on ID.

I understand the general desire by Jindal and the legislature to do something to help students learn, but this law obfuscates the matter by allowing just about anything to enter the classroom in the name of supplemental materials. Of course, one has to wonder how is that any different than the current mess that LA (or anywhere else) is in.

154 MandyManners  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:52:13pm

re: #134 BuddyG

My daughter has asked "why are we here?"
Kid's minds naturally wonder about these things.

Why something rather than nothing?

There is room for both science and spirituality.

Agreed but, I don't want the public schools teaching the latter.

155 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:52:23pm

re: #147 Occasional Reader

But they don't have the right to violate the First Amendment- that's what's really behind the ID movement.

156 Ben Hur  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:52:36pm

re: #152 WriterMom

It was one of the biggest bangs ever apparently.

OR, the MAN!

157 WriterMom  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:52:40pm

re: #140 Ben Hur

No, get with the program. It's a "missing 404" nowadays.

158 zombie  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:52:42pm

re: #111 BuddyG

There shouldn't be teaching of any specific religion's dogma in public schools.
But there's nothing wrong with a generic mention that many people believe there is a creator of our Universe. A guiding force.

Fine.

But what exactly does that have to do with evolution?

Nothing.

Teach the various religious philosophies in religion class or anthropology class.

Or should we also teach in geology class that volcanos spew fire because Haephestus is down there making horseshoes for Pegasus on his divine anvil?

I mean, some people thought that was true, so it belongs in science class, by your way of thinking.

159 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:52:52pm

re: #119 wolf

I believe in intelligent design, and have since Carl Sagan put it forward in the 70's.

Huh?

160 Charles  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:53:09pm

re: #141 Lizard by the Bay

Sharmuta,

Pro-ID posters are and should be tolerated, so long as they are respectful. This is not the same as the last big controversy here (the Euro-racists) in that their position was vile and had no place on this (or any) conservative blog. ID supporters aren't vile. Just wrong.

I agree -- however, I won't tolerate people who deliberately propagate information that is false (e.g., by dumping quotes from creationist "quote mines").

161 WriterMom  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:53:27pm

re: #156 Ben Hur

But I was the only one disgusting enough to continue along...

162 Iron Fist[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:53:32pm
163 redc1c4  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:53:41pm

re: #142 keithgabryelski

What part of SCIENCE CLASS is it appropriate to mention "a creator of our Universe" or "A guiding force"?

in the "philosophy" module?

oh wait... philosophy *isn't* a science...

/never mind

164 Catttt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:54:00pm

re: #110 Honorary Yooper

Since when did LGF become a GOP website? We're anti-idiotarian.

True. For example, I'm a Democrat. Still. I was going to go Indie, but the guy at the MVA pointed out that I wouldn't be able to vote in primaries.

165 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:54:31pm

re: #155 Sharmuta

But they don't have the right to violate the First Amendment- that's what's really behind the ID movement.

You're right, and I should have been a lot more clear; I meant that I don't see anyone arguing that the Federal government should be setting Louisiana's educational standards.

166 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:54:44pm

re: #141 Lizard by the Bay

I'm just pointing out the similarity in tactics- that's all.

167 BuddyG  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:55:08pm

re: #142 keithgabryelski

What part of SCIENCE CLASS is it appropriate to mention "a creator of our Universe" or "A guiding force"?



Science class, among other things, talks about our Universe, the Big Bang, and so forth. That's a relevant context for mention of a creator, guiding force.

168 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:55:11pm

re: #156 Ben Hur

OR, the MAN!

Yeah, baby! Yeah, yeah!

169 FloatingRock  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:55:21pm
#66 dgax65 6/27/08 12:31:51 pm reply quote 1

Heretofore impartial science instruction? Does that include global warming indoctrination? Junk science has been pushed on school children for quite a while now. I don't agree with ID, but I doubt it will cost us as much as all the global warming hysteria-driven legislation that is out there.


Except now that both ends of the political spectrum have an interest in perverting science through the education system both will be more intractable. The correct solution is to try to stop the other side, not participate and compound the problem.

170 Oh no...Sand People!  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:55:27pm

"Behead those who threaten Islam evolution!" *

/ (ducks under desk,)

*Though I personally agree that a Supreme Being organized always existing materials, ID is not the way to move forward.

171 filetandrelease  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:55:34pm

Perhaps if they use the book "The Mind of God" by Paul Davies for the curriculum it would at least be interesting and not devoid of all merit.

172 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:56:03pm

re: #167 BuddyG

Science class, among other things, talks about our Universe, the Big Bang, and so forth. That's a relevant context for mention of a creator, guiding force.

Oh my Gaia.

No, it isn't. Because that has nothing to do with "science".

By the way, I assume if they opted (in a public school) for talking about Allah as the guiding force, right?

173 Dianna  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:56:09pm

re: #138 redstateredneck

What are you talking about?

174 WriterMom  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:56:12pm

re: #168 Occasional Reader

Uh oh-we've created a monster!

175 zombie  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:56:19pm

re: #119 wolf

I believe in intelligent design, and have since Carl Sagan put it forward in the 70's.

Say what?

Link, please.

176 sinsremoved  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:56:42pm

There seems to be a lot of transitional life forms seething over an ID bill.

177 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:57:18pm
178 WriterMom  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:57:40pm

re: #175 zombie

Here's the link.

179 karmic_inquisitor  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:57:46pm

re: #119 wolf

For the first time, I can honestly say that I disagree with a lot of the postings on LGF. I believe in intelligent design, and have since Carl Sagan put it forward in the 70's. Why is it hard to believe in a Creator simply because we understand the technology he used to create us?

Jindal has rising in my eyes, and I would support him as VP candidate.

I am careful to distinguish two things : (1) the "body of work" that is commonly termed Intelligent Design and promoted by the Discovery Institute along with other organizations and (2) the IDEA that a creator could have set all this into motion with a good idea (or even a complete, deterministic understanding) of how it would turn out.

Anyone who has spent a lot of time trying to understand the sciences knows one thing - There is so little that we know. We humans should be humbled by the totality of that which is the Universe. If you believe in a creator (I do) than it is easy to contemplate that such a creator is infinitely more complex and capable than what we can even imagine.

I fall into the #2 camp, and am morally certain that God is not intimidated by our efforts in science. No believer should feel threatened by true science but instead sit in awe and wonder of ALL that there is and that we are so fortunate to live in a time where we aren't ruled by superstition. Instead, we can seek out that enormity that is creation itself, and the mechanics that govern what we observe.

What is the harm in that? And what God would give us a Universe that lies to us?

180 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:57:48pm

re: #175 zombie

Say what?

Link, please.

"Billyuns and billyuns of Demskis ago..."

181 keithgabryelski  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:58:14pm

re: #119 wolf

Why is it hard to believe in a Creator simply because we understand the technology he used to create us?

Jindal has rising in my eyes, and I would support him as VP candidate.

You are propagating a falsehood that abiogenesis is linked to evolution and (by connection) that it refutes the existence of god.

1) evolution does not attempt to describe how life started.
2) believing in evolution does not exclude a belief in god.

The problem is not ID as an idea. It is that it is being presented as science, which IT IS NOT.

It can not be taught in science class because said class would not be teaching science.

Jindal is a problem because he argues dishonestly about these subjects.

182 ContraJihadi  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:58:40pm

re: #148 Sharmuta

1) States do not have rights over the rules of science.
2) It's quite a stretch to suggest this bill promotes state's rights when it actually usurps the First Amendment.

Does the bill forbid students from speaking in favor of Darwin's theory? Or does it forbid private schools from teaching it? I am not aware that the First Amendment applies to what states decide that their employees will teach in the public schools--foolish though that might be.

183 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:58:59pm

re: #171 filetandrelease

Perhaps if they use the book "The Mind of God" by Paul Davies for the curriculum it would at least be interesting and not devoid of all merit.

How about if kids did that on their own, and we left science class to the fundamentals of science that the kids will need to know in order to achieve scholarly success in a variety of fields?

184 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:59:03pm

re: #172 Occasional Reader

PIMF:

By the way, I assume you'd be okay with it if they opted (in a public school) for talking about Allah as the guiding force, right?

185 Charles  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:59:44pm

re: #162 Iron Fist

I've pretty much kept my mouth shut about this issue, because I'm of mixed minds on it. But you can't possibly mean that it is OK to teach Al Gorism in science class but not Creationism?

No, and I didn't say that. I said that the political motivations of the bill are clear, from the subjects it covers. But as lawhawk mentions, when you open these kinds of doors the effects can go far beyond just these subjects. This bill ends up with much more government intrusion into science classes, not less, with political groups vying for influence, teachers caught in the middle, and kids losing out the most because they're at the end of a chain of political bottom feeders.

It's just a horrible idea.

186 KingKenrod  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:59:44pm

This whole debate seems a waste of time. Our kids are being taught a boatload of Marxist multi-culturalist lies all day long, and we throw a fit over this? At least this law has one positive benefit in that the global warming fanatics will at least be challenged.

187 Ben Hur  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:59:56pm

Alright.

Outty like a Saudi.

(G-d my sign-offs suck now.)

188 WriterMom  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 12:59:59pm

re: #184 Occasional Reader

Two words for you:

Private schools.

189 Pastorius  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:00:34pm

Louisiana sure does know how to vote in the winners:

David Duke
Ray Nagin
and now, Jindal

190 Adrenalyn  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:00:44pm

well, perhaps Obama could use him as his Veep choice
since he is Jimmy Carter II

I still vividly remembering going to public school under Jimmy
when we had creationism taught, or should I say force fed
daily bible reading/quotes
oh yeah, and separate bathrooms for blacks/whites

what if the Muslims wanted your kids to be taught their version of religion, beheading, etc.

and what if the Mormons got to teach
your own planet in the afterlife, as many women as you want (no 72 virgin limit like in Islam)

and what about the Jehovah's
no doctors

way to go Jindal

191 Killian Bundy  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:00:56pm

Muslims may not have to undergo sniffer dog checks in UK

Muslim passengers may not be touched by sniffer dogs of the British Transport Police after complaints that the practice is against Islam. According to the religion, dogs are deemed to be spiritually “unclean”.

A Transport Department report has raised the prospect that animals should only touch passengers’ luggage because it is considered “more acceptable”, the Daily Express reported. The ban may restrict the efficiency of sniffer dog squads which have been trained to spot terrorists at railway stations.

On Thursday night, British Transport Police insisted that it would still use sniffer dogs with any passengers regardless of faith, but handlers would remain aware of “cultural sensitivities”.

Well, considering that 99.9% of terrorists are Muslim, that kind of defeats the purpose of having sniffer dogs in the first place, no?

/the police may as well just save time and money and blow up the trains and planes themselves, the way this is going

192 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:01:06pm

re: #182 ContraJihadi

It violates the Establishment Clause.

193 lawhawk  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:01:10pm

re: #175 zombie

Sagan commented on the nature of the universe in Cosmos, but I recall it was in terms of discussing the history of cosmology and how some in an earlier time discussed the heavenly engineer (the watchmaker), the nature of the universe and the big bang. It wasn't, if I recall, an endorsement of ID, but rather man's attempt to describe the universe in terms that were understandable.

194 dgax65  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:01:19pm

re: #127 zombie

I guess I'm just more pragmatic about our political system. I rarely ever agree with every policy of individual politicians. I realize that you have to take some bad with the overall good. I think the immigration policies of the current president are dangerous, but I have balance that against what a Gore or Kerry administration would have done.

195 BuddyG  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:01:28pm

re: #172 Occasional Reader

Oh my Gaia.

No, it isn't. Because that has nothing to do with "science".

By the way, I assume if they opted (in a public school) for talking about Allah as the guiding force, right?

Specific religion's deities needn't/shouldn't be mentioned.
Just include the concept of a creator.

196 debutaunt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:01:38pm

re: #188 WriterMom

Two words for you:

Private schools.

One word:

Vouchers.

197 Catttt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:01:55pm

re: #151 kulhwch

Without chemistry instruction, that'll prove to be a tad difficult to enforce ... but maybe their alchemy will work better ...

}:)     ["Okay, then, we're going to hit your gonads now with the Philosopher's Stone ... this should smart a bit ... "]

This subject always makes me think of William Faulkner, and in particular Sanctuary. Of course, chemical is different from physical castration, but still - evil is evil, and chemical alteration can be reversed or stopped - or fail.

198 jaunte  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:01:56pm

re: #90 Ben Hur

Not strictly on-topic, but in regards to the adoption issue. There are a lot of children here in the US who need parents, who are being passed over as insufficiently exotic. [Link: www.capbook.org...]

199 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:02:12pm
200 Oh no...Sand People!  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:02:28pm

re: #190 Adrenalyn

well, perhaps Obama could use him as his Veep choice
since he is Jimmy Carter II

I still vividly remembering going to public school under Jimmy
when we had creationism taught, or should I say force fed
daily bible reading/quotes
oh yeah, and separate bathrooms for blacks/whites

what if the Muslims wanted your kids to be taught their version of religion, beheading, etc.

and what if the Mormons got to teach
your own planet in the afterlife, as many women as you want (no 72 virgin limit like in Islam)

and what about the Jehovah's
no doctors

way to go Jindal

Just come on out to Brigham Young University and you can partake as well!

/?

201 zombie  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:03:03pm

re: #162 Iron Fist

,

I've pretty much kept my mouth shut about this issue, because I'm of mixed minds on it. But you can't possibly mean that it is OK to teach Al Gorism in science class but not Creationism?

Last time I checked, no one was trying to add a "creation" tax to your gas bill, let alone try to cut the economy back to a smaller, more "creationist correct" size. Algorism is taught as gospel, and is a greater threat to our society than any form of creationism.

If this bill tries to address that, it is good.

No, it's the reverse of what you think. From what I understand, the bill allows creationism AND algorism. The worst of both worlds.

202 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:03:19pm

re: #195 BuddyG

Specific religion's deities needn't/shouldn't be mentioned.
Just include the concept of a creator.

And again; that's got nothing to do with science. Nor will I insist on going to your church/synagogue and teaching an organic chemistry class.

(Not that I'd do a very good job of it)

203 Iron Fist[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:04:02pm
204 Pastorius  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:04:15pm

#5 The Shadow Do,

The Republican Party is no stupider on religious issues than is the Democratic Party. People who are not Christians or Jews, often tend towards Pagan expressions for their religious sensibilities. They are into the healing power of crystals, they're into astrology, "the power of mind", etc.

Just a few weeks ago, some idiot Democrat wrote a piece for a major newspaper claiming that Barack Obama is a special spiritual being called a "Lightworker."

205 KingKenrod  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:04:54pm

re: #191 Killian Bundy

Muslims may not have to undergo sniffer dog checks in UK

Well, considering that 99.9% of terrorists are Muslim, that kind of defeats the purpose of having sniffer dogs in the first place, no?

/the police may as well just save time and money and blow up the trains and planes themselves, the way this is going

That Mo was a smart guy. How did he know 1400 years ago that the infidel would be sniffing out his holy bombers with dogs?

206 FloatingRock  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:05:15pm

re: #149 loppyd

Put down the crack pipe.

If that's your response I'll assume you don't dispute the percentages, then.

207 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:05:22pm

re: #196 debutaunt

One word:

Vouchers.

I used to be a big supporter of vouchers. But when I think of tax money taken away from public schools and given to radical Islamist madrases I start to rethink my position.

208 ContraJihadi  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:05:23pm

re: #192 Sharmuta

It violates the Establishment Clause.

Hmm, perhaps. Will ID under this bill be taught as a doctrine of religious faith or as a hypothesis of empirical science? (Again, irrespective of its merits)

209 Perry  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:05:27pm

re: #188 WriterMom

Paying for it since 98, will continue until 2016ish. But I still regard myself as their primary teacher.

210 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:05:43pm

re: #201 zombie

No, it's the reverse of what you think. From what I understand, the bill allows creationism AND algorism. The worst of both worlds.

Algorisms should stay in mathematics and computer science classes, where they belong!

211 Pastorius  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:05:59pm

And adding to my comment at #204, many Liberals are caught up in ethnic nationalism of one form or another. For instance, Jeremiah Wright and his Black Nationalism.

Ethnic Nationalism, as it is based on the mystical properties of blood, is a form of Paganism.

212 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:06:11pm

Phillip Johnson- father of today's ID movement showed his true intent long ago:

Johnson calls his movement "The Wedge." The objective, he said, is to convince people that Darwinism is inherently atheistic, thus shifting the debate from creationism vs. evolution to the existence of God vs. the non-existence of God. From there people are introduced to "the truth" of the Bible and then "the question of sin" and finally "introduced to Jesus."

Is this what you want for your kids in science class? Someone else's ideas of God, Jesus and religion? How is this science at all, and how do we keep other religions (read: islam) from abusing this?

This is not about science- this is about a group of Christian Fundamentalists trying to indoctrinate America's kids with their concept of God.

213 Adrenalyn  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:06:12pm

re: #200 Oh no...Sand People!

Just come on out to Brigham Young University and you can partake as well!

/?


well, I was invited to Salt Lake City once
by my brother
to go to his wedding
actually, to stand outside the church
because I am not a card carrying commended worthy wearer of white underwear so I was not allowed in the church

so I stayed home in global warming creating California
where the smoke of a thousand fires is going to reverse global warming, like a nuclear winter
and it's already started happening
what temps would be in the 90's now
are in the 80's since the sun cannot penetrate the smoke

I should post a photo of it, truly astounding
and ashes falling from the sky

214 Honorary Yooper  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:06:27pm

re: #182 ContraJihadi

Here's the problem with ID, the teaching in schools, and the First Amendment.

First, the text of the amendment, which so many people seem to forget:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Now, the first part of that, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" is the establishment clause in a nutshell. What does it mean? It means that Congress cannot promote any specific religion or religious practice or belief. ID is a religious belief practiced by a few groups out there, and is being passed off as science when it most certainly is not. YECs have been attempting to have public schools teach six-day creation for quite some time now. In fact, they did succeed in a few places in the early 20th Century by having the teaching of evolution banned by law (see the Scopes Trial as an example). However, it has been the YECs all along attempting to have government promote their literalist religious belief which not all Chirstians share (in fact, only a minority shares those beliefs) and force them on the rest of us.

And it applies to the states as well, via the Fourteenth Amendment. Thus, any attempt by a state legislature to promote a religion or religious belief or practice is also a violation of the establishment clause as stated above.

215 MandyManners  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:06:27pm

re: #191 Killian Bundy

Muslims may not have to undergo sniffer dog checks in UK


Well, considering that 99.9% of terrorists are Muslim, that kind of defeats the purpose of having sniffer dogs in the first place, no?

/the police may as well just save time and money and blow up the trains and planes themselves, the way this is going

Can't we train cats to sniff out explosives?

216 lawhawk  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:07:05pm

re: #153 lawhawk

To take it further. A teacher could bring in math materials that are the antithesis of mathematics in order to teach. A geography teacher could bring in a Flat Earther to teach geography. A chemistry or physics teacher could bring in Rosie to talk about how steel can't be melted by fire.

Those may be extreme examples, but this law, as written, opens the door to those kinds of activities.

And it can work on any subject - in any direction. It could bring in supplemental materials you agree with or oppose, but therein lies the problem. How exactly are these materials vetted and what is considered acceptable. The law doesn't exactly spell it out, leaving it up to the school districts

Which means, that unless the state is going to entertain a whole new bureaucracy to determine acceptable materials, you're going to end up with a whole bunch of junk in the trunk. And each jurisdiction may come up to completely different results.

The more I think about this law, the more I find that it is a singularly bad example of how to write a law.

217 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:07:13pm

re: #212 Sharmuta

Opps- for got the link-

[Link: findarticles.com...]

218 BuddyG  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:07:30pm

re: #202 Occasional Reader

And again; that's got nothing to do with science.


What existed before the Big Bang ?
Why there's something rather than nothing ?

These types of questions are very commonin young minds as they learn science. And there is where the concept of a creator can be introduced (not a specific religion).

219 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:07:33pm

re: #215 MandyManners

Can't we train cats to sniff out explosives?

Or get some of those truffle-sniffing pigs... ah, wait, same issue...

220 dave in NC  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:07:41pm

so happy to see the secularists get pi**ed off about this; they've had it all their way for far too long.

221 Oh no...Sand People!  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:08:04pm

re: #213 Adrenalyn

well, I was invited to Salt Lake City once
by my brother
to go to his wedding
actually, to stand outside the church
because I am not a card carrying commended worthy wearer of white underwear so I was not allowed in the church

so I stayed home in global warming creating California
where the smoke of a thousand fires is going to reverse global warming, like a nuclear winter
and it's already started happening
what temps would be in the 90's now
are in the 80's since the sun cannot penetrate the smoke

I should post a photo of it, truly astounding
and ashes falling from the sky

Easily fixable.
/ducks under desk

222 Lawrence Schmerel  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:08:42pm

I wonder how much time teachers in elementary and secondary schools spend teaching children about evolution in the first place.

I assume it may be no more than one or two hours over the entire education of a student. (How much of that time is the average student even paying attention?)

I also wonder whether learning about evolution is of much importance to a student's overall education. If a student is particularly interested in it, wouldn't the student do a lot more study of evolution outside of the classroom anyway?

It has never been clear to me how it actually helps the average person to know the history and map of the evolutionary process of all the extinct creatures that preceded us. These skeletons and reconstructions are somewhat interesting, but these creatures don't even exist here in our world and almost certainly they never will again.

I do not support teaching ID or creationism in public schools. I am merely wondering about the importance of this issue.

I say this as a sincere and humble sleestak--a lonely creature, forgotten by the evolutionary process millions of years ago. Yet, I am doing okay.

223 WriterMom  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:08:44pm

re: #199 buzzsawmonkey

I'm not sure I understand your comment.

224 Honorary Yooper  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:08:58pm

re: #208 ContraJihadi

Hmm, perhaps. Will ID under this bill be taught as a doctrine of religious faith or as a hypothesis of empirical science? (Again, irrespective of its merits)

If taught and challenged as scientific theory, ID falls apart rather quickly as the only basis for it is religious belief.

225 Adrenalyn  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:09:00pm

re: #221 Oh no...Sand People!

Easily fixable.
/ducks under desk

no need to duck my friend
I come in peace

226 Kosh's Shadow  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:09:34pm

All the biotech companies will be lining up to get Louisina graduates.
/not

227 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:09:36pm

re: #218 BuddyG

What existed before the Big Bang ?

"A creator" is not a scientific response to that question.

Why there's something rather than nothing ?

That's philosophy (metahphysics) or religion, not science.

And there is where the concept of a creator can be introduced

You just tipped your hand, there, Buddy.

228 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:09:36pm

re: #222 Lawrence Schmerel

I wonder how much time teachers in elementary and secondary schools spend teaching children about evolution in the first place.

Some are just too busy burning crosses on their students' arms to bother.

229 Perry  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:09:36pm

re: #215 MandyManners

Can't we train cats to sniff out explosives?


Feline obedience training?

230 goddessoftheclassroom  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:09:53pm

re: #203 Iron Fist

,

Science classes have always had this problem. Some of my science teachers coming through the system were overtly hostile towards religion, and didn't try to hide that fact in class. Why should they be allowed to teach anti-religion as fact?

That also isn't subject to scientific experimentation. Now they teach global warming as a scientific fact. The "science" is settled. This is a travesty.

I think one reason that you are seeing ID make the inroads that it has (and the people defending it the way they are) is because of how politicized science classes already are.

A Creator cannot be proved NOR disproved. That's why many people, even students, resist the idea of spontaneous generation and random evolution as a new gospel. The Theory of Evolution is not controversial over all; using it to "prove" that there is not Creator is the problem.

231 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:10:14pm

re: #223 WriterMom

I'm not sure I understand your comment.

You're looking at it too hard. (It's just a pun.)

232 wolf  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:10:38pm

re: #159 Occasional Reader

Huh?

Ever read any Sagan? I'm not talking seeing a movie with Jodie Foster topless, either. I mean actually read his books. If not, you prolly wouldn't understand.

233 dgax65  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:10:47pm

re: #169 FloatingRock

I don't support the teaching of ID. I realize that there is no science to support it. I just take issue with the statement that science education has been conducted in an impartial manner. Global warming has become just as much an article of faith to liberals as intelligent design and it is foisted on school children on a daily basis.

234 WriterMom  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:10:48pm
235 ec marm  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:10:57pm

re: #196 debutaunt

One word:

Vouchers.


You realize what the opposition to vouchers is, more than any other reason? Catholic schools. There is a certain unspoken bigotry toward the Catholic school system that has its roots as far back as the KKK. Nevermind that they educate a student at ONE THIRD of the cost of the public school system.
For that reason alone vouchers will never fly. It's a shame. I have known Jewish parents, Lutheran parents, black parents, just about every race, color and creed that have placed their child into a Catholic school. Because it was a better option than the public school. But the parents have to foot the entire bill out of their own pockets.

236 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:11:11pm

re: #208 ContraJihadi

Please read Yooper's comments (which I'm sure you are). He summed it up perfectly. They'd like to teach it as science, but it can't- it fails the scientific method.

237 WriterMom  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:11:13pm

re: #231 Occasional Reader

Is that really a pun, or are you just happy to see me?

238 Kosh's Shadow  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:11:36pm

re: #190 Adrenalyn

well, perhaps Obama could use him as his Veep choice
since he is Jimmy Carter II

I still vividly remembering going to public school under Jimmy
when we had creationism taught, or should I say force fed
daily bible reading/quotes
oh yeah, and separate bathrooms for blacks/whites

what if the Muslims wanted your kids to be taught their version of religion, beheading, etc.

and what if the Mormons got to teach
your own planet in the afterlife, as many women as you want (no 72 virgin limit like in Islam)

and what about the Jehovah's
no doctors

way to go Jindal

If we want to talk about the afterlife, the Pastafarians have one involving a beer volcano and a stripper factory.

239 debutaunt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:11:40pm

re: #207 Lizard by the Bay

I used to be a big supporter of vouchers. But when I think of tax money taken away from public schools and given to radical Islamist madrases I start to rethink my position.

I think competition will create a rising tide.

240 Lawrence Schmerel  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:11:56pm

re: #228 Sharmuta

I think you are probably right.

Teachers probably spend more time mistreating students that teaching evolution.

241 ContraJihadi  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:12:00pm

re: #214 Honorary Yooper

Alright, if indeed ID is a religious doctrine, then I agree that it may not be taught in public schools.

242 noraono  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:12:11pm

re: #12 zombie

If Louisiana wants to continue their downward spiral into third-world status, than I guess that's their choice.

that's a pretty... ignorant statement. Not even sure what the implication is- that religious people are caveman- like idiots who couldn't create an intelligent society? That teaching a religious concept in science class will suddenly ruin millions of little scientist's minds?

I don't believe that ID needs to be taught in school - anyone who is interested enough in science will go on to make their own choices. I hold degrees in mechanical engineering and math, and i believe in creation- my belief got stronger as i learned more about the way the earth moves and works.

BUT, here's the deal. I can't believe that all the non-believer or anti-ID people here honestly believe that what gets taught in grades 1-12 is even remotely science. You learn NOTHING about evolution or what the theory is. NOTHING. Science classes are a complete joke in our schools- if you want to get upset about something get off your Christians- are- idiots high horse and work on fixing the real problems in our schools.

243 WriterMom  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:12:16pm

re: #235 ec marm

Hi ecmarm...I sent you a note.

244 keithgabryelski  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:12:56pm

re: #167 BuddyG

Science class, among other things, talks about our Universe, the Big Bang, and so forth. That's a relevant context for mention of a creator, guiding force.

No. The big bang is a scientific theory -- god making things is faith.

Scientific theories belong in science class. There is no connection to "faith" and "science".

See definitions for science and faith

science:
systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.

faith:
belief that is not based on proof

They are diametrically opposed and because of that "faith" has no connection to science and should not be conflated with it by bringing it into science class.

Hey kids, today in Math class I'd like to teach you how to mow a lawn because it is only fair that some people don't like mathematics (or find it difficult) so we should go over other ways you can apply yourself later in life.

245 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:13:20pm

re: #232 wolf

Ever read any Sagan? I'm not talking seeing a movie with Jodie Foster topless, either. I mean actually read his books. If not, you prolly wouldn't understand.

Yes, I've read Sagan. I love your "you wouldn't understand" dodge. Really? I wouldn't understand the writings of a popularizer of science? (I mean, we're not talking string theory here.) Okay, 'splain it to me, wolf. And/or, give us a link showing that Sagan seriously promoted ID theory.

246 filetandrelease  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:13:33pm

re: #20 Boondock St. Bender

Well,...it is the south and louisiana...
(ducks and runs)

Bigot.

247 Tigger2005  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:14:30pm

So forcing teachers to teach fake science, and forcing children to learn fake science, and pretending it's "real" science, will somehow make us a more moral nation. Same with making movies filled with lies and deception, and "quote-mining" writings from evolution-supporting biologists to make it sound like they have doubts about evolution.

248 ec marm  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:14:31pm

re: #243 WriterMom
Got it. Piece of cake. I already have something very similar to it all ready, believe it or not.

249 Psaturn  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:14:38pm

re: #45 zombie

I agree. But two wrongs don't make a right.

We need to get rid of ALL political hoaxery disguised as science. If we just end up with two opposing sides each jousting to foist their particular lie on our kids, then it's a lose-lose situation.

I fight against leftist influence on schools just as much I do against creationism in the schools.


I agree with you Zombie that we should get politics out of school there.

If we could teach children the basics, reading, math, history (NEUTRAL! not revised!), pass some basic accepted societal values, teach critical thinking...I think that would be great right there.

250 ContraJihadi  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:14:48pm

re: #236 Sharmuta

Understood, Sharmuta. It just takes me a little time to bounce between threads. I agree that if ID is a religious doctrine, it falls under the rebuke of the Establishment Clause.

251 twons  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:14:48pm

re: #100 Dianna

No. I'm not cruel!

It's bad enough that my mom saddled me with two 'n's.

What do you mean saddled! I'm not that much of a cross to bear...

Besides, I hardly even know you!

252 zombie  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:15:10pm

re: #234 WriterMom

OT: Better Mailbox Than Charles or Zombie?

Wow! Pat Condell's mail really is worse than mine. I didn't think that was possible!

253 NJDhockeyfan  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:15:14pm

re: #215 MandyManners

Can't we train cats to sniff out explosives?

Or pigs?

254 Yankee Division Son  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:15:26pm

Way OT..

BBC reports that Al-Qaeda's emir of Mosul is kaput.. (I posted this earlier in the week)

Key Iraqi al-Qaeda figure 'dead'

What i find interesting is how the BBC "news" puts dead in quotes..

255 tgibson1962  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:16:06pm

"Evolving standards of decency must embrace and express respect for the dignity of the person, and the punishment of criminals must conform to that rule.” - Justice Anthony Kennedy

Ideas do have consequences. Evolution has slipped its banks as a scientific theory and become a unifying view of life for many; in short, it has become a de facto religion.

BTW, where do I direct the little girl so she can thank Justice Kennedy's biology teachers?

256 lawhawk  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:16:18pm

re: #254 Yankee Division Son

He's dead in the Monty Python parrot sense...

257 goddessoftheclassroom  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:16:30pm

re: #240 Lawrence Schmerel

I think you are probably right.

Teachers probably spend more time mistreating students that teaching evolution.

Please tell me you forgot the sarc tag.

258 debutaunt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:16:45pm

re: #235 ec marm

You realize what the opposition to vouchers is, more than any other reason? Catholic schools. There is a certain unspoken bigotry toward the Catholic school system that has its roots as far back as the KKK. Nevermind that they educate a student at ONE THIRD of the cost of the public school system.
For that reason alone vouchers will never fly. It's a shame. I have known Jewish parents, Lutheran parents, black parents, just about every race, color and creed that have placed their child into a Catholic school. Because it was a better option than the public school. But the parents have to foot the entire bill out of their own pockets.

It's a shame that we are forced to pay for crappy public schools.

259 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:17:01pm

re: #252 zombie

Wow! Pat Condell's mail really is worse than mine. I didn't think that was possible!

I'll send you some hair-curling death threats if it'll make you feel better...

260 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:17:37pm
261 filetandrelease  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:17:41pm

re: #254 Yankee Division Son

He was shot dead by American troops during a raid on a building in Mosul.


Unintended consequences of a recent SCOTUS ruling?

262 Boondock St. Bender  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:17:51pm

re: #127 zombie

Hear!hear!

263 BuddyG  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:18:04pm

re: #227 Occasional Reader

You just tipped your hand, there, Buddy.

The word philosophy is of Ancient Greek origin meaning "love of knowledge". Philisophical questions helped mankind acquire much of our scientific knowledge.

Is the philosophical concept of a creator really so anathema to you?

264 NJDhockeyfan  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:18:20pm

It's Kosher: Bomb-sniffing pigs will help protect settlements

265 ContraJihadi  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:18:33pm

re: #63 Cattt

Too bad biology isn't more like chemistry. If you mix subjectivity into chemistry, it can blow up in your face.

Good observation. One of the difficulties with biology is that it does not achieve the mathematical certainty of physics or chemistry.

266 loppyd  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:18:34pm

re: #258 debutaunt

It's a shame that we are forced to pay for crappy public schools.

Not all public schools are crappy.

Not all private schools are excellent, either.

267 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:18:48pm

re: #242 noraono

that's a pretty... ignorant statement. Not even sure what the implication is- that religious people are caveman- like idiots who couldn't create an intelligent society? That teaching a religious concept in science class will suddenly ruin millions of little scientist's minds?

Religion can benefit society only when it's not getting in the way of it. It's the difference between the dark ages (when the church burned scientists for daring to claim the Earth was round) and the Renaissance. ID is Inherit the Wind in reverse.

268 Killgore Trout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:18:54pm

re: #234 WriterMom

We're long overdue for a new rant from Pat Condell.

269 Honorary Yooper  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:19:03pm

re: #255 tgibson1962

"Evolving standards of decency must embrace and express respect for the dignity of the person, and the punishment of criminals must conform to that rule.” - Justice Anthony Kennedy

Ideas do have consequences. Evolution has slipped its banks as a scientific theory and become a unifying view of life for many; in short, it has become a de facto religion.

BTW, where do I direct the little girl so she can thank Justice Kennedy's biology teachers?

I'd like to know how you made the jump from Justice Kennedy's comment (which has nothing to do with science what-so-ever) to evolution being a unifying view for "many"?

You do realise that Justice Kennedy is not using the term "evolve" in the scientific sense there, or are you being deliberately dishonest?

270 ec marm  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:19:04pm

The "Big Bang" is a perfect example of how the religious folks feel on this issue. Is it science? No, it is not much more than an idea. Is it a possible concept of how the universe began? Yes. Worthy of discussion in a science class? Yes.
How many religious folks are upset and seeking to change the curriculum so that the "Big Bang" is not presented in class? Zero?

271 Catttt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:19:20pm

re: #143 FloatingRock

I disagree with you, but you explained why you said what you said. I personally have two issues with your logic (without considering the issue itself):

*One issue, in and of itself, should not preclude the safety of our country - even for just four years. Fortunately for me, my big issues tend to fall in line with the security issue, but if they didn't, I'd have a great deal of trouble pulling the lever for a socialist Chicago machine creep who might p**s away our country's security.

*We are talking about the veep (and I realize that he could, yes, become President).

272 Bogeyfre  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:19:28pm

re: #242 noraono

Can I get an Amen?

273 Catttt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:20:16pm

re: #215 MandyManners

Can't we train cats to sniff out explosives?

Try rubbing raw liver on the explosives.

274 formercorpsman  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:20:28pm

re: #226 Kosh's Shadow

Actually, I don't think the biotech companies are recruiting from the high school level.

275 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:20:38pm
276 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:20:41pm

re: #270 ec marm

The "Big Bang" is a perfect example of how the religious folks feel on this issue. Is it science? No, it is not much more than an idea. Is it a possible concept of how the universe began? Yes. Worthy of discussion in a science class? Yes.
How many religious folks are upset and seeking to change the curriculum so that the "Big Bang" is not presented in class? Zero?

That's just it- the only aspect of science coming under attack is evolution.

277 Tigger2005  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:20:42pm

If I were a science teacher, I just couldn't do this. I couldn't lie to children. Fortunately there are probably openings for science teachers in other states. Louisiana is going to see quite a drain of whatever brains it has left down there...what scientists are going to want their kids to go to public schools that teach this junk? It will probably also have trouble attracting companies in fields like bioengineering and medicine.

278 goddessoftheclassroom  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:21:05pm

re: #266 loppyd

Not all public schools are crappy.

Not all private schools are excellent, either.

Thank you for saying that.

279 oceansidecon  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:21:11pm

ID-Creationists are the 9/11 truthers of the right.

280 wolfie  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:21:28pm

re: #203 Iron Fist

,

Science classes have always had this problem. Some of my science teachers coming through the system were overtly hostile towards religion, and didn't try to hide that fact in class. Why should they be allowed to teach anti-religion as fact?

That also isn't subject to scientific experimentation. Now they teach global warming as a scientific fact. The "science" is settled. This is a travesty.

I think one reason that you are seeing ID make the inroads that it has (and the people defending it the way they are) is because of how politicized science classes already are.

You have made an excellent point.

The solution, IMO, is not to further politicize science classes, but to try to unpoliticize them as much as possible.

One way to further this goal is to "get back to basics." We need to be teaching basic science and the scientific method to public school kids and cut down on all the fluff. That would be a start.

281 debutaunt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:21:32pm

re: #266 loppyd

Not all public schools are crappy.

Not all private schools are excellent, either.

I agree with you. I do think that vouchers and a choice about schools would improve public and private schools. Let them compete so I can choose the better school.

282 Oh no...Sand People!  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:22:14pm

Not that this changes 'evolution', but out of curiosity, isn't it true that Darwin had someone visit him before he died and he wanted the person to read stories about Jesus out of the Bible and sing hymns?

Is this correct?

283 loppyd  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:22:36pm

re: #278 goddessoftheclassroom

Thank you for saying that.

You are welcome.

And thank you for doing what must feel like a thankless job at times.

284 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:22:49pm

re: #270 ec marm

The "Big Bang" is a perfect example of how the religious folks feel on this issue. Is it science? No, it is not much more than an idea. Is it a possible concept of how the universe began? Yes. Worthy of discussion in a science class? Yes.

The big bang theory has some subjective scientific support. We use the Doppler effect to measure how stars move in the universe, and it shows a universe ever-expanding away from a nearly central point. Run that tape in reverse a few trillion years and... viola! Big bang theory. ID has no such evidence.

Nice try, though.

285 loppyd  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:23:03pm

re: #281 debutaunt

I agree with you. I do think that vouchers and a choice about schools would improve public and private schools. Let them compete so I can choose the better school.

I am 100% in favor of vouchers.

286 WriterMom  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:23:07pm

re: #275 buzzsawmonkey

Gotcha. It's late afternoon on Friday and I'm faaading.

287 Attaboid  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:23:39pm

I just flew in on Pterodactyl Airways. Drinks are on me.

288 Catttt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:23:45pm

re: #265 ContraJihadi

Good observation. One of the difficulties with biology is that it does not achieve the mathematical certainty of physics or chemistry.

I think that's why I enjoyed physics and chemistry and disliked biology. The only fun parts in biology were the experiments and watching cells divide. Plus, my biology teacher was a slut who spent most of her time trying to get male teachers into the horizontal mode.

289 Boondock St. Bender  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:23:50pm

I think we too often fall into the habit of debateing whether id or evolution are correct,instead of the real crux of the biscuit which is whether id should be taught in a science classroom.I believe charles point (and why he is posting these threads)is that there are disingenuous types who wish to use the id issue as a cats paw for re-introducing religion into public schools.

290 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:24:19pm

re: #275 buzzsawmonkey

Just wordplay. Military ranks and aspects of private schools.

Well, you're a specialist in wordplay, aren't you. (Nevertheless, some of your posts contain a colonel of truth.)

291 debutaunt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:24:33pm

re: #278 goddessoftheclassroom

Thank you for saying that.

I was lucky enought to attend excellent public schools. Now I see large problems in many public schools.

292 Perry  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:24:38pm

re: #283 loppyd

You are welcome.

And thank you for doing what must feel like a thankless job at times.

YESYESYES.

293 Catttt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:24:48pm

re: #279 oceansidecon

ID-Creationists are the 9/11 truthers of the right.

Truthers of the right - wasn't that a big Sinatra hit? /

294 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:25:05pm

re: #282 Oh no...Sand People!

If you're speaking of Lady Hope- it's a myth.

295 ec marm  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:25:28pm

re: #258 debutaunt

It's a shame that we are forced to pay for crappy public schools.


Even worse is the situation of the parent that has to pay for both the crappy public school and private school. I did it for six years for my children. While I listened to friends who were public school teachers bitch and moan about the possibility that vouchers might be enacted. They simply refused to accept the possibility that there was something inherently unfair about my having to pay their salary, pay for their building, pay for textbooks my children would never use, and the thousand other expenses my children did not cause by not being there. We ended up chucking them as friends.

296 WriterMom  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:25:39pm

re: #278 goddessoftheclassroom

Every class depends on having a good teacher at the helm. Of course this can happen in public or private schools. My point was only that if you have certain values that you want to pass along as a parent, or a world view it's easier in private schools in my experience. And I had some excellent teachers in both systems. I still remember all of their names and the incredible lessons they taught in and out of the classroom. So-it may be a thankless job, but THANKS!

297 Oh no...Sand People!  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:25:43pm

re: #294 Sharmuta

If you're speaking of Lady Hope- it's a myth.

I don't know who it was...just a rumor I heard. That's why I am asking for validation/invalidation.

Fair enough.

298 wolfie  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:26:04pm

re: #207 Lizard by the Bay

I used to be a big supporter of vouchers. But when I think of tax money taken away from public schools and given to radical Islamist madrases I start to rethink my position.

Have you started to rethink your position about freedom in general?

Tax money is not "taken away from public schools." The schools, believe it or not, have no money of their own. Tax money is taken from...and ONLY taken from...tax payers.

299 Iron Fist[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:26:07pm
300 Salamantis  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:26:08pm

Here are two of the last books that Carl Sagan wrote before he died:

The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark
[Link: www.amazon.com...]

The Varieties of Scientific Experience: A Personal View of the Search for God

[Link: www.amazon.com...]

They do not appear to me to be very anti-science; nor do they appear to me to be very fond of creationism/intelligent design.

301 BuddyG  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:26:57pm

re: #284 Lizard by the Bay

The big bang theory... Nice try, though.


The Big Bang theory was proposed by a Catholic priest
Sweet irony.

Goes to show, that science & sprituality can co-exist.
They're not mutually exclusive.

302 WriterMom  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:27:14pm

re: #295 ec marm

Here in Ontario taxpayers pay for TWO public systems-Catholic and regular. So, my after tax dollars go to private school and two school boards that I don't send my children to.

303 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:27:16pm

More on Lady Hope.

The Lady Hope Story is generally recognised, even by many Creationists, to be false — or at least unverifiable — and if true, probably exaggerated. The story remains a popular urban legend, even though it stands in sharp contrast to Darwin's published and known views about Christianity.

304 Hillbilly Mike  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:27:20pm

Screw the ACLU! If we are descended from apes, then why are there still apes?

305 NJDhockeyfan  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:27:24pm

Madison Wisconsin wants to ban drive-throughs to save the planet.

306 Killgore Trout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:27:31pm

Jindal object of latest recall petition

Louisiana's Secretary of State's Office says a recall petition has been filed against Governor Bobby Jindal.

Jindal has been the focus of sharp criticism for his refusal to veto a bill doubling legislators' base pay. Four lawmakers, including House Speaker Jim Tucker, are also targets of recall efforts.

The Secretary of State's news release Friday did not include the name of the chaiman of the recall effort. Forcing a recall election against Jindal will be a tough task. It would require verifiable signatures from well over 900,000 registered Louisiana voters.

307 keithgabryelski  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:27:49pm

re: #276 Sharmuta

That's just it- the only aspect of science coming under attack is evolution.

no. ID attacks "science" at its base. Its advocates claim for a different definition of "science" something that is not based on the scientific method.

They are, by attempting to define ID as science, define science as "any idea someone comes up with".

There is no scientific evidence for ID or put in a better way "there is no claim made by a theory of ID that can be disproved". This makes it, most certainly, NOT science.

308 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:28:06pm
309 Dianna  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:28:44pm

re: #220 dave in NC

If you think dumbing down education is a good thing, why are you here?

310 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:28:51pm

re: #293 Cattt

Truthers of the right - wasn't that a big Sinatra hit? /

Truthers on the right
quote-mining Demski
Throwing powder in our eyes
irreducible complexity
They'll be stomping off
before the debate is through...

311 Catttt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:28:51pm

I know this is an important issue, but I'm still thinking about fried food.

My tummy is growling.

312 Oh no...Sand People!  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:28:52pm

re: #305 NJDhockeyfan

Madison Wisconsin wants to ban drive-throughs to save the planet.

aaaAAAaaagGGGgggHHH!

(pulls out hair...bangs head on desk)

313 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:28:59pm

re: #298 wolfie

Tax money is not "taken away from public schools." The schools, believe it or not, have no money of their own. Tax money is taken from...and ONLY taken from...tax payers.

Thank you. That only reinforces my point. I most certainly don't want my money being given to radical Islamist madrases, and vouchers, as you pointed out, would be funded with my money.

314 ec marm  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:29:11pm

re: #284 Lizard by the Bay

The big bang theory has some subjective scientific support. We use the Doppler effect to measure how stars move in the universe, and it shows a universe ever-expanding away from a nearly central point. Run that tape in reverse a few trillion years and... viola! Big bang theory. ID has no such evidence.

Nice try, though.


You are looking at the universe 5 billion years ago at the speed of light. So what will have happened when you notice that the universe has begun to contract? Too late, right?
Do you drive down the street looking in the rear view mirror for guidance? Big Bang is hardly science.

315 Killgore Trout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:29:47pm

The bill from Bogalusa

Either Bobby Jindal is toast... or we all are.

One bizarre item in that story is that the reporter contacted the Discovery Institute, who quickly disavowed any association with the bill, saying that they did not "directly" support it and that they certainly wouldn't support any attempt to insert religion into the schools. Like everything that comes out of the DI, they are lying reflexively. Barbara Forrest has an excellent overview of the context and history of the bill — the bill has the DI's frantic, fervid paws all over it.

I do think we need to call this the Bogalusa Bill, after the district that the sponsor, Ben Nevers (a creationist and a democrat, for shame!), comes from.

316 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:29:59pm

re: #307 keithgabryelski

Good point, although I stand by my larger meaning. Creationists are not attacking Relativity or chemistry. I fully understand what your point is.

317 debutaunt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:30:23pm

re: #313 Lizard by the Bay

Thank you. That only reinforces my point. I most certainly don't want my money being given to radical Islamist madrases, and vouchers, as you pointed out, would be funded with my money.

I believe you would pay for your own vouchers.

318 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:30:30pm

Okay, now either buzzsaw or I have to be voted off. Oh, the tension!

319 ContraJihadi  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:30:41pm

re: #288 Cattt

I must admit that I found high school biology to be more fun. A friend and I went out collecting frogs for dissection, and I enjoyed making drawing of those and the other things we dissected, like worms. I also enjoyed the schemes of categorization--families, order, classes, etc.

But there might have been a romantic element. I was not yet sexually awakened, but there was a young woman in the class whom I worshiped in a kind of Dante-Beatrice sort of way, so the class has a special charm.

All that however, does not compensate for the fact that biology is less precise than physics and chemistry and so offers more scope for chicanery.

320 Catttt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:31:02pm

re: #308 buzzsawmonkey

Truthers of the right, targeting science
With ideology, they seek compliance
Hoping through all schools
They'll quickly spread their view...


That one?

Yes! I knew you'd remember it. :D

321 ec marm  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:31:06pm

re: #318 Occasional Reader

Okay, now either buzzsaw or I have to be voted off. Oh, the tension!


Bring me your torch!

322 Tigger2005  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:31:17pm

re: #282 Oh no...Sand People!

Not that this changes 'evolution', but out of curiosity, isn't it true that Darwin had someone visit him before he died and he wanted the person to read stories about Jesus out of the Bible and sing hymns?

Is this correct?

No, it's a myth that won't die.

But, even if true, it would say nothing about evolution. Evolution-supporting biologist Ken Miller is a Catholic who believes that Jesus died for his salvation. I'm sure he will be given last rites when his time comes.

323 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:31:27pm

re: #314 ec marm

Big Bang is hardly science.

"Hardly" still beats "not at all" by a country mile. ID is not at all science. Period.

324 Cygnus  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:31:46pm

re: #187 Ben Hur

Alright.

Outty like a Saudi.

(G-d my sign-offs suck now.)

How about:

I gotta make like s**t and hit the trail.
I gotta make like a bird and get the flock out of here.

325 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:31:59pm

re: #321 ec marm

Bring me your torch!

But it wasn't a torch song!

326 Dianna  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:32:17pm

re: #230 goddessoftheclassroom

I've never had a teacher try to "prove" or "disprove" the existence of a deity.

327 wolf  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:32:49pm

re: #245 Occasional Reader

Yes, I've read Sagan. I love your "you wouldn't understand" dodge. Really? I wouldn't understand the writings of a popularizer of science? (I mean, we're not talking string theory here.) Okay, 'splain it to me, wolf. And/or, give us a link showing that Sagan seriously promoted ID theory.

First, read Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors. It addresses many of the similarities between humans and animals. Although the book, on the face, seems to be a review of Darwinism, it actually implied that there was/is a Creator.

Sagan always couched these issue subtly. Although he believed in a Creator/Higher Being, he never advocated it openly. Even the book Contact is full of innuendo about a Creator. If you read Cosmos, not watched the TV show, you would see that he implies again that there was a Creator.

If you are old enough to remember Sagan, then you would not be questioning the way he tried to combine Creationism with Evolution. He had to walk a tight line with the science community that would brand him a heretic if he openly advocated a Creator.

I am not real familiar with the ID movement that everyone talks about, but I believe in a Creator that used to materials available to create mankind. This belief was the direct result of my exposure to Sagan's works. He made it clear that because we are starting to understand how God created, we should not diminish His role.

Why is it easier for people to believe in UFO's than God? Do you recall Chariots of the Gods? I believe, by any definition, that God is an alien. It is very possible that an vastly superior alien race created mankind through DNA manipulation. It is as reasonable as anything else I have heard. That reconciles Creationism and evolution for me. It is a rather simplistic view of my beliefs, but there it is.

Why, people ask, would aliens do such a thing? I don't know, but maybe it has something to do with the next plane of existence. Unless you are willing to dismiss the existence of the human soul.

And in regard to Einstein and Newton, Einstein did not supplant Newton. Einstein's greatest ideas led to quantum physics. Newton is as relevant today as he was 400 years ago. Science since has only refined Newton. It is funny that Einstein's greatest discovery was that the universe is expanding and had a beginning. Something he called his greatest mistake. Why? Because it supported the idea of a Creation event.

'Course, we all know that he was right after all, even if he denounced his own mathematics.

328 WriterMom  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:32:51pm

re: #324 Cygnus

How about like it or lump it, take it the dump and dump it?

329 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:32:59pm

re: #317 debutaunt

I believe you would pay for your own vouchers.

What about the segment of the population that pay no income tax (apart from payroll taxes)? They still get vouchers under every plan I've seen. The money comes from someone.

330 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:33:09pm

re: #297 Oh no...Sand People!

The driving force behind Darwin's agnosticism wasn't his own theory, it was the death of his young daughter. Obviously, there are a lot of misinformation about Darwin out there, but if you'd like to learn more, I recommend this book:

Saving Darwin: How to Be a Christian and Believe in Evolution

It's an easy read, and very engaging.

331 Dianna  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:33:15pm

re: #232 wolf

Link? Please?

332 WriterMom  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:33:52pm

re: #325 Occasional Reader

OY VEY.

Baaad.

333 NJDhockeyfan  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:35:37pm

re: #312 Oh no...Sand People!

aaaAAAaaagGGGgggHHH!

(pulls out hair...bangs head on desk)

The first comment is great:

Michael says:

Does that mean that they should ban stoplights as well, since cars are idling there?

heh.

334 Oh no...Sand People!  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:36:06pm

re: #330 Sharmuta

The driving force behind Darwin's agnosticism wasn't his own theory, it was the death of his young daughter. Obviously, there are a lot of misinformation about Darwin out there, but if you'd like to learn more, I recommend this book:

Saving Darwin: How to Be a Christian and Believe in Evolution

It's an easy read, and very engaging.


Though I have had enough of Darwin to choke a camel the book looks interesting. Might have to give it a peek.

Thanks.

335 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:36:33pm
336 Spider Mensch  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:37:03pm

re: #327 wolf


"if your old enough to remember Sagan..."

what is this MySpace.com...I bet everyone here is old enough...

337 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:37:39pm

re: #334 Oh no...Sand People!

I was disappointed to reach the end- I enjoyed it that much.

338 Catttt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:37:49pm

re: #319 ContraJihadi

Ahh, frogs and romance. Reminds me of the biology class scene in E.T. - the Extra-Terrestrial, where Elliott lets the frogs go then kisses the cute girl.

339 ploome hineni[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:38:00pm
340 Honorary Yooper  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:38:13pm

re: #299 Iron Fist

OK, I think we need to clear up the difference between scientific theory and how the term theory is used in the vernacular.

In the vernacualr, theory often means conjecture or a hunch. However, for science, the term theory is much more rigidly defined. A scientific theory is a model that is testable and repeatable. It is logically self-consistent. For example, there is a Theory of Gravity that describes how gravity (and observed phenonemon like evolution) works.

Then we have hypotheses. A hypothesis is a suggested explanation for an observed event. It may also be tested, and is not the same as a theory. For example, there can be many hypotheses regarding how gravity works. If valid, they may become part of the theory.

Next we have scientific laws. The laws are empirical in content, and can also be tested. For example, we have a Law of Gravity that basically says that things fall down.

341 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:38:25pm

re: #327 wolf

If you are old enough to remember Sagan, then you would not be questioning the way he tried to combine Creationism with Evolution

Bollocks. I am old enough to remember Sagan, and yes, I read Cosmos. You are conflating his leaving the door open for religion, with his advocating creationism. Those are two different things.

Actually, in Cosmos, he wrote: "Evolution is a fact, not a theory".

342 karmic_inquisitor  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:38:44pm

re: #304 Hillbilly Mike

Screw the ACLU! If we are descended from apes, then why are there still apes?

Because we didn't descend from apes. The "descend from apes" is a phrase coined by creationists to mis-state evolution and thereby get people to reject it.

Apparently it was effective.

343 noraono  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:38:44pm

re: #279 oceansidecon

ID-Creationists are the 9/11 truthers of the right.

Totally true! Believing in a higher power or a specific God and having faith in him is totally the same as that guy sitting in his parent's basement talking about how there were no Jews in the building when it came crashing down.

I've avoided these posts almost entirely and am really sad to see this kind of thought in the comments with a bunch of dings up.

344 ContraJihadi  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:39:00pm

re: #338 Cattt

Yes, that was very much the feeling.

345 debutaunt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:39:27pm

re: #329 Lizard by the Bay

What about the segment of the population that pay no income tax (apart from payroll taxes)? They still get vouchers under every plan I've seen. The money comes from someone.



I like vouchers because I believe everything improves with competition. I understand your concern.

346 keithgabryelski  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:39:40pm

re: #299 Iron Fist

,

That is exactly what I've been trying to say, but you are more succinct. A lot of what is taught in science class is theory. Unfortunately a lot of it is taught as fact. If Algorism is given a place at the table, why not Creationism? As far as the Big Bang theory goes, well, God said let there be light.

No one knows, nor can, realistically, claim to know what came before that.

1) scientific theory is as good as it gets. fact is relegated to "mathematical facts".

2) Your BS on "Algorism" falls short by conflating "sky is falling" type words with what is actually taught in science class namely the green house effect (which is pretty well understood) and the problems associated with increasing the gasses that cause the green house effect.

3) You claim creationism should be taught in science class if something else that is not science is taught in science class. What logic are you working from, there?

347 Dianna  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:40:03pm

re: #252 zombie

Yikes!

348 Beobachter  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:40:19pm

re: #329 Lizard by the Bay

What about the segment of the population that pay no income tax (apart from payroll taxes)? They still get vouchers under every plan I've seen. The money comes from someone.

Okay, so do not give out vouchers, but allow us, who choose to send our kids to private school, opt out of paying twice.

349 Oh no...Sand People!  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:40:25pm

re: #333 NJDhockeyfan

heh.

It's so nice to see sanity in the comments.

350 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:41:27pm

re: #343 noraono

I've avoided these posts almost entirely and am really sad to see this kind of thought in the comments with a bunch of dings up.

Zero equals a bunch of ding ups, huh?

351 Oh no...Sand People!  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:41:29pm

re: #339 ploome hineni

?

same way you are a Chistian and belive in birth control and abortion

no?

Abortion? Only for liberals.
Birth Control? Darn skippy!

352 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:41:30pm

re: #346 keithgabryelski

You claim creationism should be taught in science class if something else that is not science is taught in science class. What logic are you working from, there?

That's the "The well water tastes a little funny, so let's take a shit in it" school of logic.

353 ec marm  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:41:41pm

re: #323 Lizard by the Bay

"Hardly" still beats "not at all" by a country mile. ID is not at all science. Period.


I really, really can't understand the position of people who think that even, at the very least, "interesting ideas" can not be presented in science class. I felt absolutely moronic in college when a psych professor mentioned phrenology and I had absolutely no clue as to what he was talking about. Would it really have been such a sin (oops) to present the concept and history of phrenology in a public high school science class?

354 NJDhockeyfan  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:41:43pm

re: #349 Oh no...Sand People!

It's so nice to see sanity in the comments.

Yup. Seems the Madison citizens aren't moonbats, just the city officials are.

355 JHW  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:41:53pm

re: #300 Salamantis

Lynn Margulis was Sagan's first wife, and is best known for the Gaia hypothesis and the theory of symbiotic relationships
driving evolution.

She later formulated a theory to explain how symbiotic relationships between organisms of often different phyla or kingdoms are the driving force of evolution. Genetic variation is proposed to occur mainly as a result of transfer of nuclear information between bacterial cells or viruses and eukaryotic cells. While her organelle genesis ideas are widely accepted, symbiotic relationships as a current method of introducing genetic variation is something of a fringe idea. However, examination of the results from the Human Genome Project lends some credence to an endosymbiotic theory of evolution—or at the very least Margulis's endosymbiotic theory is the catalyst for current ideas about the composition of the human genome. Significant portions of the human genome are either bacterial or viral in origin—some clearly ancient insertions, while others are more recent in origin. This strongly supports the idea of symbiotic—and more likely parasitic—relationships being a driving force for genetic change in humans, and likely all organisms. It should be noted that while the endosymbiotic theory has historically been juxtaposed to Neo-Darwinism as a competitor, the two theories are not irreconcilable. An emerging synthesis holds that natural selection works on many levels (genetic up to the ecosystem) and variation is introduced both at the genetic and the cellular level.

356 ContraJihadi  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:42:33pm

Well, right now my attention is being drawn to the biology of gastric juices. Time for lunch. Be brave, lizards.

357 Catttt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:42:57pm

re: #310 Occasional Reader

Truthers on the right
quote-mining Demski
Throwing powder in our eyes
irreducible complexity
They'll be stomping off
before the debate is through...

:D

Why did I suddenly have "these boots are made for walking" stuck in my head?

358 Maui Girl  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:43:47pm

From most of the comments I've read here, you all need to read Dinesh Souza's book, What's so Great About Christianity? No, it's not a book pushing any particular religious dogma but effectively joins together early and modern day science and its Judeo/Christian beginnings. I think you'll be very surprised with what you read.

359 NJDhockeyfan  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:43:47pm

re: #349 Oh no...Sand People!

It's so nice to see sanity in the comments.

Here's another good one:

Californian says:

I live in California and for those of you who live in Wisconsin and say you would like to move Madison to California, I say nooo. We have enough crazy liberal cities here, they are already going bankrupt and taking freedom away at an astounding rate!

If you think it's bad living with a city like Madison in your state, you should try on San Francisco for size. My wife and I recently drove our Hummer H2 right into the heart of San Francisco, it was great! You should have seen the faces and fingers flying. Those people have bought the lie entirely. It's a religion for them. It makes them feel good emotionally to have perceived that they helped the environment so don't expect to win any arguments using facts. They simply can't or won't listen because of their emotional attachment to their religion which is environmentalism. It is exactly like debating a bible thumper on the issue of evolution.

360 wolf  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:43:51pm

re: #331 Dianna

Link? Please?

Sorry, no link, just an old fashioned book. Do folks remember what those are? I provided it:

"Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors"

361 Oh no...Sand People!  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:44:23pm

re: #341 Occasional Reader

Bollocks. I am old enough to remember Sagan, and yes, I read Cosmos. You are conflating his leaving the door open for religion, with his advocating creationism. Those are two different things.

Actually, in Cosmos, he wrote: "Evolution is a fact, not a theory".

I had the misfortune of being stuck in a hotel and the only thing on was ''V' 'T' for Vendetta Troof''...'bollocks' was half the dialogue.

362 Catttt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:44:30pm

re: #351 Oh no...Sand People!

Abortion? Only for liberals.
Birth Control? Darn skippy!

Funny - my church is the other way around. Evolution - render to Caesar. Those other two things - no no.

363 wolf  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:44:34pm

re: #341 Occasional Reader

Bollocks. I am old enough to remember Sagan, and yes, I read Cosmos. You are conflating his leaving the door open for religion, with his advocating creationism. Those are two different things.

Actually, in Cosmos, he wrote: "Evolution is a fact, not a theory".


Maybe I need to use smaller words.

364 keithgabryelski  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:44:36pm

re: #314 ec marm


Do you drive down the street looking in the rear view mirror for guidance?

You do if you want to see where you have been.

Big Bang is hardly science.

It most certainly is. It fits all the information we have gathered about the current universe and what we can deduce from that information.

365 MandyManners  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:44:43pm

re: #360 wolf

Sorry, no link, just an old fashioned book. Do folks remember what those are? I provided it:

"Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors"

Book? What is "book"?

366 wolfie  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:44:56pm

re: #313 Lizard by the Bay

Thank you. That only reinforces my point. I most certainly don't want my money being given to radical Islamist madrases, and vouchers, as you pointed out, would be funded with my money.

And you evidently don't mind your money going to support state indoctrination centers. Fine. But I DO...and I'm am forced at gunpoint to support your schools no matter what I think of them.

367 Honorary Yooper  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:45:16pm

re: #304 Hillbilly Mike

Screw the ACLU! If we are descended from apes, then why are there still apes?

That's because we are not decended from apes, but rather, share a common ancestor with them. Or, I should say, common ancestors as they branched off at different times from us and the other apes, of which the most recent was between humans and chimpanzees, approximately 5 million years ago.

368 Dianna  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:45:17pm

re: #277 Tigger2005

In Palo Alto, the parents - many of them scientists and engineers - managed to force newnewmath out.

369 WriterMom  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:45:27pm

re: #361 Oh no...Sand People!

Sandra Bollocks is very pretty.

370 Oh no...Sand People!  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:45:43pm

re: #359 NJDhockeyfan

Spot on.

371 MandyManners  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:45:47pm

re: #341 Occasional Reader

Bollocks. I am old enough to remember Sagan, and yes, I read Cosmos. You are conflating his leaving the door open for religion, with his advocating creationism. Those are two different things.

Actually, in Cosmos, he wrote: "Evolution is a fact, not a theory".

Sagan had a column in Cosmo?

372 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:46:07pm

re: #348 Beobachter

Okay, so do not give out vouchers, but allow us, who choose to send our kids to private school, opt out of paying twice.

Which makes vouchers the exclusive domain of those who can afford them, and since vouchers are sold as a way of getting kids out of the country's worst performing schools (i.e. in poor areas), then vouchers fail at their mission.

I could support vouchers if they had a provision excluding all religious schools. Sadly, that eliminates a vast chunk of good private schools along with the bad ones.

373 Catttt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:46:22pm

I wonder if some school board will introduce the "space aliens" theory of man's evolution. /

374 ec marm  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:46:22pm

re: #364 keithgabryelski

It most certainly is. It fits all the information we have gathered about the current universe and what we can deduce from that information.


So you believe all of the matter in the universe could fit into the space occupied by the "." at the end of this sentence?

375 Oh no...Sand People!  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:46:43pm

re: #362 Cattt

Funny - my church is the other way around. Evolution - render to Caesar. Those other two things - no no.

Those are my personal (though taking the low road) views...nothing to do with a church.

376 debutaunt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:46:51pm

re: #366 wolfie

And you evidently don't mind your money going to support state indoctrination centers. Fine. But I DO...and I'm am forced at gunpoint to support your schools no matter what I think of them.

And a lot of schools aren't improving their quality.

377 noraono  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:47:45pm

re: #350 Sharmuta

It did when i first looked at the comment- I was the ding that brought it back to zero.

How about i list the absence of comments labeling that statement as ludicrous?

378 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:48:11pm

I wonder what will stop groups such as CAIR from offering Louisiana schools "supplemental" learning material for schools...

379 tgibson1962  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:48:20pm

re: #269 Honorary Yooper

No, I wasn't trying to be dishonest.

Justice Kennedy chose the word, not me. He is, of course, applying a scientific construct in a philosophical/moral setting. My point was that he had, in all likelihood utterly unconsciously, appropriated the idea of evolution to justify his ruling.

Evolution, as his ruling illustrates, provides no basis for moral decisions; it is amoral. To the contrary, it only provides excuses.

380 Honorary Yooper  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:48:27pm

re: #373 Cattt

I wonder if some school board will introduce the "space aliens" theory of man's evolution. /

Heh. I almost made a comment about teaching Chariots of the Gods as science as an equivalent to teaching ID as science.

/Neither one is.

381 Throbert McGee  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:48:46pm

re: #3 pegcity

i thought America was done with this nonsense

Not for a while yet, I think.

But in some ways, I think that the Intelligent Design junk-science has possibly improved the quality of the discussion about how evolution is taught in schools. For example, the ID debates have provided a good reminder that there is not a stark binary choice between believing that we live in a godless, purposeless universe OR believing that Adam and Eve rode around on dinosaurs about 6000 years ago.

Not that this is news to long-time participants in creation/evolution debates, but for people who only take occasional interest in the subject when there's a political flare-up over it, it may be a novel idea that there's actually a "Continuum of Belief" between Young Earth Creationists and staunch atheists like Richard Dawkins.

382 Charles  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:48:56pm

re: #341 Occasional Reader

Bollocks. I am old enough to remember Sagan, and yes, I read Cosmos. You are conflating his leaving the door open for religion, with his advocating creationism. Those are two different things.

Actually, in Cosmos, he wrote: "Evolution is a fact, not a theory".

Not to mention 'The Demon-Haunted World: Science As a Candle in the Dark,' a copy of which I just pulled out of my attic to re-read.

383 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:48:58pm

re: #360 wolf

Sorry, no link, just an old fashioned book. Do folks remember what those are? I provided it:

"Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors"

Nope, didn't read that one. But I'm having an awfully hard time finding any reviews of it that say it promoted Creationism. No mention here, for instance:

Sagan's goal is to explain how luck and natural selection combined to produce human beings after three and a half billion years of life on earth.

Funny sort of "creationism", that.

384 Honorary Yooper  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:49:31pm

re: #379 tgibson1962

No, I wasn't trying to be dishonest.

Justice Kennedy chose the word, not me. He is, of course, applying a scientific construct in a philosophical/moral setting. My point was that he had, in all likelihood utterly unconsciously, appropriated the idea of evolution to justify his ruling.

Evolution, as his ruling illustrates, provides no basis for moral decisions; it is amoral. To the contrary, it only provides excuses.

Again, how did he use the scientific theory of evolution in his ruling? He used the term "evolving" in a legal, not a scientific sense, and had absolutely nothing to do with science what-so-ever.

385 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:50:31pm

re: #363 wolf

Maybe I need to use smaller words.

No, maybe you need to stop being such an insufferable jerk, and actually defend your position.

386 Catttt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:50:38pm

re: #375 Oh no...Sand People!

Those are my personal (though taking the low road) views...nothing to do with a church.

I meant that to include the prior comment about Christian views. Sorry about that.

387 coquimbojoe  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:50:46pm

re: #368 Dianna

In Palo Alto, the parents - many of them scientists and engineers - managed to force newnewmath out.

Having been born in Palo Alto and attended High School there, the education at the public high school (Go Paly Vikings) was very good.

388 Salamantis  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:51:02pm

re: #263 BuddyG

The word philosophy is of Ancient Greek origin meaning "love of knowledge". Philosophical questions helped mankind acquire much of our scientific knowledge.

Is the philosophical concept of a creator really so anathema to you?

Actually, my BA is in philosophy, and Philo Sophia is translated as 'love of wisdom', not 'love of knowledge'.

There is indeed an interplay between philosophy and science. Philosophy asks questions. Some of these questions turn out to be amenable to empirical investigation, and are also for one reason or other interesting, so they are submitted to experimentation to verify/falsify various possible answers. The answers thus obtained inform philosophy as to the scope and parameter of the possible, outside of which speculation is useless, and then philosophy comes up with a different set of questions, informed by the scientific answers to their last ones, in those cases where scientific answers were indeed possible.

The trend has been for more and more territory to be ceded by both philosophy and religion to the realm of science, as we learn more and more about our surrounding world, aided by the technological augmentation of our perceptions (microscopes, telescopes, etc.) and cognitions (computer) made possible by previous scientific advances. Whenever empirical evidence can be presented concerning an assertion, it becomes an article of knowledge (more or less statistically probable given the evidence) and neither an article of faith (which depends upon the ansence of evidence) or an axiom of philosophy (which is more interested in basic premises and their logically deduced conclusions than in the empirically testable, although there is indeed a philosophy of science that delineates precisely what belongs within the scientific domain, and why).

The divisions of philosophy are, Epistemology (theory of knowledge - logic is a subdiscipline), Axiology (theory of values - ethics and aesthetics belong here) and Ontology (theory of being). These days, metaphysics is not much practiced in philosophy; that territory has been ceded to theology. It is the foundational underpinnings of being (the beneath rather than the beyond; that which must be so for being to be as it is and not otherwise) that are investigated via ontology.

389 Ma Sands  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:51:08pm

re: #343 noraono

I love your avatar...is there a story behind it? :)

390 Dianna  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:51:18pm

re: #311 Cattt

I know this is an important issue, but I'm still thinking about fried food.

My tummy is growling.

Yeah. I'm stuck - I can't go for some lunch until the president of the foundation leaves.

It's almost two, and I'm beginning to actively suffer.

391 Crimsonfisted  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:51:27pm

re: #342 karmic_inquisitor

Because we didn't descend from apes. The "descend from apes" is a phrase coined by creationists to mis-state evolution and thereby get people to reject it.

Apparently it was effective.

I thought ol' Mo coined the "descended from apes" thing, but that it only applied to Jews?

Come to think of it, how DID apes and pigs mate according to Mo? Did he ever say?

392 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:51:44pm

re: #371 MandyManners

Sagan had a column in Cosmo?

Yep. He explained how you can have billyuns and billyuns of orgasms.

393 yochanan  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:52:23pm

re: #15 zombie

given the whole global warming stuff passing itself off as science. I would sa science is very political this will just be one more layer of it.

394 Oh no...Sand People!  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:53:33pm

re: #386 Cattt

I meant that to include the prior comment about Christian views. Sorry about that.

No need to apologize...I just wanted to make sure that my 'jaded/mean spirited/vile' outlook of pinning abortion as being a positive when liberals reduce the number of children who might be raised up with their views is strictly my own and not affiliated with anything other than me.

395 Dianna  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:53:37pm

re: #360 wolf

Try using Amazon for the linkage, thus.

And stop being a snot.

396 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:53:37pm

re: #361 Oh no...Sand People!

I had the misfortune of being stuck in a hotel and the only thing on was ''V' 'T' for Vendetta Troof''...'bollocks' was half the dialogue.

Well, then, never mind the bollocks.

397 karmic_inquisitor  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:54:01pm

OK - I take it all back.

By exploring the interwebs, I have discovered that evolution is a hoax.

We have thetans to thank.

/Just think - Scientology can now be part of Louisiana science instruction.

398 NJDhockeyfan  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:54:01pm
399 Crimsonfisted  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:54:02pm

re: #388 Salamantis

I need a degree just to read that post!

Interesting I must say, and bookmarked to re-read since my small brain can't wrap around it at this time of day.

400 rasachema[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:54:03pm
401 Beobachter  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:54:23pm

re: #372 Lizard by the Bay

Which makes vouchers the exclusive domain of those who can afford them, and since vouchers are sold as a way of getting kids out of the country's worst performing schools (i.e. in poor areas), then vouchers fail at their mission.

I could support vouchers if they had a provision excluding all religious schools. Sadly, that eliminates a vast chunk of good private schools along with the bad ones.

But, I am not trying to get vouchers from the government, it just irks me to no end, that I have to pay twice, one time for the failing school system and for the private school.

402 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:55:16pm

re: #353 ec marm

I really, really can't understand the position of people who think that even, at the very least, "interesting ideas" can not be presented in science class.

I have an interesting idea. What if the world of Harry Potter were real, and there were really witches and warlocks and magical spells? Can I teach Harry Potter in science class now?

As for the phrenology reference, I suppose some kind of "science history" class, teaching about things we once believed were science fact but we now know to be bunk could be interesting, but I don't see how it relates to (or justifies) teaching ID as a valid "alternative science".

403 Franktalk  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:55:21pm

Lets call science by its real name "naturalism". Science by not allowing any supernatural events forces all conclusions to be within the natural order of things. This is violated many times in many areas of science as long as they don't interfere with the atheistic view of the world. So in physics we can say things disappear and then reappear somewhere else even if we have never witnessed this event. We can even say that photons communicate with each other even when we have no idea how that could happen. But let someone say that it looks like some of the parts of man were designed and you become a religious nut job. I say let the debate happen and let the chips fall where they fall. From reading some of these post I would guess that some would love to burn Bibles. Be careful what ideas you limit the youth of today to learn. To learn that it is OK to limit debate will one day come back in some unexpected form. Who knows how debate will be limited in the future. A firing squad comes to mind.

404 Boondock St. Bender  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:55:24pm

re: #383 Occasional Reader

The lord works in mysterious ways.

405 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:55:25pm

re: #400 rasachema

WTH?

406 noraono  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:55:34pm

re: #389 Ma Sands

I like this topic so much better! I have a zoo...2 dogs, a cat, and a giant bunny (not quite full grown and hit the 15lb mark already...). The dog in the picture is the hyper one that drives everybody crazy, but the bunny is too hyper for ever her as you can see by her baleful look.

407 Crimsonfisted  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:56:12pm

re: #397 karmic_inquisitor

Just think - Scientology can now be part of Louisiana science instruction.

If someone had whispered that comment to the Governor, I bet the bill would have been dead in the water.

408 Jewels (AKA Julian)  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:56:32pm

Oy vey...what is with both the parties...are they all clinically thick?

409 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:56:36pm

re: #403 Franktalk

Booo to DI talking points!

410 ec marm  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:56:54pm

re: #392 Occasional Reader

re: #371 MandyManners

Sagan had a column in Cosmo?

Yep. He explained how you can have billyuns and billyuns of orgasms.

Let me guess; that was the issue with the perpetual question, "Does Size Really Matter?" on the cover?

411 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:56:57pm

re: #401 Beobachter

But, I am not trying to get vouchers from the government, it just irks me to no end, that I have to pay twice, one time for the failing school system and for the private school.

I completely sympathize, and was lucky enough to have some private schooling in my life, but vouchers are too open to abuse. We need a better solution.

413 wolfie  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:57:08pm

re: #381 Throbert McGee

Good point.

414 Oh no...Sand People!  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:57:35pm

re: #396 Occasional Reader

Well, then, never mind the bollocks.

Go Sex Pistols.

415 Dirk Diggler  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:57:36pm

Great piece of legislation. The Discovery Institute does great work.

/

416 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:57:54pm
417 Ma Sands  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:58:29pm

re: #398 NJDhockeyfan

Snow! Wow. My sons have climbed that mountain several times --beautiful country! ...there's a fabulous summer-school place half way up...teaches kids coming out of high school how to beard the college professors in their dens, concerning worldview. :) Poor kid --I wish the loveliness of the place had stayed his gas-pedal foot...

418 MandyManners  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:58:29pm

re: #392 Occasional Reader

Yep. He explained how you can have billyuns and billyuns of orgasms.

Oh, you're just too good.

419 Oh no...Sand People!  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:58:43pm

re: #410 ec marm

Let me guess; that was the issue with the perpetual question, "Does Size Really Matter?" on the cover?

No. It was about the 'Big Ba...uh..never mind.

420 FrogMarch  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:58:47pm

anyone optimistic about the Republicans in 08 is fooling themselves.

read it and weep.

421 Psaturn  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:59:26pm

re: #265 ContraJihadi

Good observation. One of the difficulties with biology is that it does not achieve the mathematical certainty of physics or chemistry.

I agree!

You would think that the word 'species' which is integral in Biology would be precisely defined.

It is not.

The difficulty of Biology is that it encompasses quite a few fields:
Botany, Microbiology, Zoology, Paleontology, Physiology etc...and each have their own definition and view...

422 rasachema[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:59:34pm
423 karmic_inquisitor  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:59:35pm

re: #403 Franktalk

If you changed "science" to "naturalism," what would science mean?

Would it be "let's talk about how this COULD have come about and not support it with any evidence?"

/Science, by definition, does not allow for supernatural explanations. If a phenomenon cannot be explained it is described as such - unexplained.

424 Beobachter  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 1:59:44pm

re: #411 Lizard by the Bay

I completely sympathize, and was lucky enough to have some private schooling in my life, but vouchers are too open to abuse. We need a better solution.

I am not advocating vouchers. I would like to have a 100% refund of the school taxes I pay, though.

425 Psaturn  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:00:08pm

re: #373 Cattt

I wonder if some school board will introduce the "space aliens" theory of man's evolution. /

That is called Panspermia..

426 Ma Sands  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:00:09pm

re: #406 noraono

Thank you! :) Sounds like such fun! :)

427 gunjam  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:00:26pm
Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal has signed a stealth creationist bill into law, and American educational standards take a huge step backward: Science law could set tone for Jindal.

Charles: So, we creationists won a round! That doesn't happen every day.

I think I'll have a Carlsberg!

428 keithgabryelski  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:00:34pm

ehre: #374 ec marm

So you believe all of the matter in the universe could fit into the space occupied by the "." at the end of this sentence?

Yes. The math works out until you get down to a point where the fundamental forces were mucked with (basically there were only two of them instead of four). I think we have a pretty good idea what the universe looked like back until then -- when "2 + 2" did not equal 4.

Here is a good set of youtube videos on physics. Easy enough for most people to understand (all math is does by the professor). There are many lectures but they are well worth your time:

Physics for Future Presidents
[Link: www.youtube.com...]

Professor Richard A. Muller. The most interesting and important topics in physics, stressing conceptual understanding rather than math, with applications to current events.

429 Occasional Reader  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:00:49pm

Hasta luego.

430 Dianna  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:00:50pm

re: #353 ec marm

I really, really can't understand the position of people who think that even, at the very least, "interesting ideas" can not be presented in science class. I felt absolutely moronic in college when a psych professor mentioned phrenology and I had absolutely no clue as to what he was talking about. Would it really have been such a sin (oops) to present the concept and history of phrenology in a public high school science class?

In a segment on pseudo-sciences, perhaps.

431 wolfie  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:01:13pm

re: #401 Beobachter

But, I am not trying to get vouchers from the government, it just irks me to no end, that I have to pay twice, one time for the failing school system and for the private school.

I feel your pain.

432 debutaunt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:01:38pm

re: #411 Lizard by the Bay

I completely sympathize, and was lucky enough to have some private schooling in my life, but vouchers are too open to abuse. We need a better solution.

Have you heard of a better way than competition?

433 Dirk Diggler  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:01:38pm

Cosmos was crap.

434 karmic_inquisitor  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:01:54pm

re: #416 buzzsawmonkey

Absolute, complete, utter crap.

I sense reservation and ambiguity in your position, counselor.
/

435 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:01:56pm
436 captkirk35  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:02:00pm

re: #8 zombie

What's ridiculous is the over-reaction of so many of your about this. Even if you don't agree w/ this movement, or Jindal's support for it, that doesn't mean the guy's a dud or something.

Just because you don't agree w/ the totality of someone's positions or beliefs doesn't mean he isn't a fantastic potential candidate, who probably is closer than any other politician out there across all conservative positions.

The absolutist nature of some of you, starting with you, Zombie, and Charles, astounds me.

437 Catttt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:02:05pm
#119 wolf
I believe in intelligent design...

Fine. It is a belief. It is not scientific theory.

438 Ma Sands  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:02:15pm

re: #416 buzzsawmonkey

Hello, buzz. :)

439 Franktalk  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:02:19pm

So as we all debate the fine points of ID or evolution lets show our kids how tolerant we are of opposing ideas and make them illegal.

440 gunjam  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:02:42pm

re: #24 HelloDare

Jindal was so good on every other issue. And he's a good speaker. Damn. Hope Sarah Palin doesn't have any skeletons in her walk-in closet.

I'd be amazed if Palin were NOT a creationist. (It fits the basic profile: Conservative Evangelical Christian.)

... Which is A-OK with me! :-)

441 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:03:10pm
442 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:03:27pm
443 ec marm  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:03:31pm

re: #435 buzzsawmonkey

I'm sorry, but phrenology has been bumped from the curriculum.


Couldn't they at least combover the topic to some degree?

444 Catttt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:03:47pm

re: #425 Psaturn

That is called Panspermia..

Ewww.

445 Psaturn  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:04:17pm

[Link: www.americanchronicle.com...]

I think this writer does have interesting argument for critical thinking skills...

446 Catttt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:04:48pm

re: #443 ec marm

Couldn't they at least combover the topic to some degree?

No. The want to get ahead of such topics.

447 gunjam  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:04:58pm

re: #3 pegcity

i thought America was done with this nonsense

Why on earth did you ever think that?

One man's nonsense is another man's credo.

448 Da_Beerfreak  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:05:09pm

re: #210 Occasional Reader

Algorisms should stay in mathematics and computer science classes, where they belong!

You have to be kidding.
The last time I tried to run an Algorisms it blew my java compiler all to hell.
// {;-)™

449 Dianna  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:05:09pm

re: #379 tgibson1962

Evolution, as his ruling illustrates, provides no basis for moral decisions; it is amoral. To the contrary, it only provides excuses.

That is one of the most nonsensical statements that wasn't a joke it's been my misfortune to read.

450 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:05:14pm

re: #424 Beobachter

I am not advocating vouchers. I would like to have a 100% refund of the school taxes I pay, though.

And how would you calculate your exact refund? Schools get money from property taxes, state income taxes, and Federal monies. And (with the exception of some special property taxes) all of the money comes from "general funds". Every taxpayer pays a different amount of money into the general fund. You think the "opt-out" plan is simpler. It's not.

451 taxfreekiller[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:05:16pm
452 Psaturn  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:05:44pm

re: #444 Cattt

Ewww.

I agree.

453 Honorary Yooper  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:05:48pm

re: #439 Franktalk

So as we all debate the fine points of ID or evolution lets show our kids how tolerant we are of opposing ideas and make them illegal.

OK, the YECs have already tried that. In their tolerance of ideas, they made the teaching of evolution illegal in many places in the early 20th Century. The Scopes Trial is a prime example of that. And in fact, only one side of this whole debate has tried to make the teaching of the other illegal.

Why is it YECs have so much in common with liberals?

454 Killgore Trout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:06:49pm

re: #403 Franktalk

That's just plain stupid.

455 zombie  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:07:12pm

re: #403 Franktalk

Lets call science by its real name "naturalism". Science by not allowing any supernatural events forces all conclusions to be within the natural order of things. This is violated many times in many areas of science as long as they don't interfere with the atheistic view of the world. So in physics we can say things disappear and then reappear somewhere else even if we have never witnessed this event. We can even say that photons communicate with each other even when we have no idea how that could happen. But let someone say that it looks like some of the parts of man were designed and you become a religious nut job. I say let the debate happen and let the chips fall where they fall. From reading some of these post I would guess that some would love to burn Bibles. Be careful what ideas you limit the youth of today to learn. To learn that it is OK to limit debate will one day come back in some unexpected form. Who knows how debate will be limited in the future. A firing squad comes to mind.

Get back to me when the supernaturalists have their own robot on Mars, cure or prevent most infectious diseases, develop a worldwide network of intelligent machines, convert sunlight to electricity, harness the power of an atomic nucleus, discover a planet halfway across the galaxy, genetically engineer food crops to feed the world, transplant a working heart into a man's chest, or explain the orbit of Mercury.

Until then, you don't have a leg to stand on.

/Except for the bionic leg that pesky naturalism SCIENCE created for you.

456 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:08:20pm
457 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:08:23pm

re: #453 Honorary Yooper

OK, the YECs have already tried that. In their tolerance of ideas, they made the teaching of evolution illegal in many places in the early 20th Century. The Scopes Trial is a prime example of that. And in fact, only one side of this whole debate has tried to make the teaching of the other illegal.

Why is it YECs have so much in common with liberals?

(By citing the Scopes Trial ...) Point well made!

458 Ma Sands  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:08:35pm

re: #451 taxfreekiller

...the huge snow melt that is in the rivers that are now flooding.

Of note are the rivers in Montana, that flow into the Yellowstone, and the FACT that the Yellowstone if plum full all the way from its headwaters to its end.


I'm glad...I think that's what's been keeping it somewhat cooler here than the blazing heat elsewhere in the country...MN has always had the best airflow! :)

459 Crimsonfisted  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:08:55pm

re: #443 ec marm

re: #435 buzzsawmonkey

I'm sorry, but phrenology has been bumped from the curriculum


Couldn't they at least combover the topic to some degree?

I think that the topic should be rogained and then maybe get a new review before another brush off.

460 aboo-Hoo-Hoo  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:09:52pm

Bobby Jindal

brother.

There goes another one...

461 karmic_inquisitor  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:10:24pm

re: #416 buzzsawmonkey


Small quibble ...

...[T]reating the term "theory," a scientific term of art which denotes an explanation for a group of proven hypotheses, as if it meant "idle speculation."

IIRC

A proven hypothesis is a fact.

A theory is a hypothesis that is supported by evidence but yet proved and yet disproved.

/Great post, BTW.

462 reno911  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:10:33pm

re: #420 FrogMarch

Frankly, I don't care much what the letter after a persons name (D or R) is. I care only that when they vote, they do so in good faith i.e. they do what they think is the right thing. Democrats tend to be much more conservative when they were in the majority. Look at eight years of Clinton. Take a look at the Republicans, they abandoned every principle they ever espoused when they were in the majority. Politicians are politicians are politicians. It's all about the benjamins. Whichever viewpoint pays the most, prevails.

463 VegasRick  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:10:53pm

re: #451 taxfreekiller

Dear Global Warming Liars and Fraud, and your msm suck up buds,


Do not say a word about the huge snow melt that is in the rivers that are now flooding.

Of note are the rivers in Montana, that flow into the Yellowstone, and the FACT that the Yellowstone if plum full all the way from its headwaters to its end.

What the truth got to do with your shit any way.

[Link: www.usgs.gov...]

to water watch on the right hand side,,,click

"I wouldn't sweat the thundershowers"
[Link: video.google.com...]

464 Dianna  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:11:12pm

re: #403 Franktalk

No one said ID can't be taught - just not in a science classroom.

You are also conflating observed weirdness with magical thinking.

465 ec marm  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:11:26pm

re: #459 Crimsonfisted

I think that the topic should be rogained and then maybe get a new review before another brush off.


Ah, the good, really old days, when "One lump or two?" was a pickup line in a bar. Now it's "So babe, what's your sign? Text me."

466 Beobachter  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:11:57pm

re: #450 Lizard by the Bay

And how would you calculate your exact refund? Schools get money from property taxes, state income taxes, and Federal monies. And (with the exception of some special property taxes) all of the money comes from "general funds". Every taxpayer pays a different amount of money into the general fund. You think the "opt-out" plan is simpler. It's not.

You got a point there, but I do pay money directly to the school district and I would be happy just not having to pay that exorbitant amount.

467 abu boo boo  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:12:00pm
1 AN ACT
2 To enact R.S. 17:285.1, relative to curriculum and instruction; to provide relative to the
3 teaching of scientific subjects in public elementary and secondary schools; to
4 promote students' critical thinking skills and open discussion of scientific theories;
5 to provide relative to support and guidance for teachers; to provide relative to
6 textbooks and instructional materials; to provide for rules and regulations; to provide
7 for effectiveness; and to provide for related matters.
8 Be it enacted by the Legislature of Louisiana:
9 Section 1. R.S. 17:285.1 is hereby enacted to read as follows:
10 &sect285.1. Science education; development of critical thinking skills
11 A. This Section shall be known and may be cited as the "Louisiana
12 Science Education Act."
13 B.(1) The State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, upon
14 request of a city, parish, or other local public school board, shall allow and
15 assist teachers, principals, and other school administrators to create and foster
16 an environment within public elementary and secondary schools that promotes
17 critical thinking skills, logical analysis, and open and objective discussion of
SB NO. 733
SLS 08RS-1629 REENGROSSED
Page 2 of 3
Coding: Words which are struck through are deletions from existing law;
words in boldface type and underscored are additions.
1 scientific theories being studied including, but not limited to, evolution, the
2 origins of life, global warming, and human cloning.
3 (2) Such assistance shall include support and guidance for teachers
4 regarding effective ways to help students understand, analyze, critique, and
5 objectively review scientific theories being studied, including those enumerated
6 in Paragraph (1) of this Subsection.
7 C. A teacher shall teach the material presented in the standard textbook
8 supplied by the school system and thereafter may use supplemental textbooks
9 and other instructional materials to help students understand, analyze, critique,
10 and review scientific theories in an objective manner, as permitted by the city,
11 parish, or other local public school board.
12 D. This Section shall not be construed to promote any religious doctrine,
13 promote discrimination for or against a particular set of religious beliefs, or
14 promote discrimination for or against religion or nonreligion.
15 E. The State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education and each
16 city, parish, or other local public school board shall adopt and promulgate the
17 rules and regulations necessary to implement the provisions of this Section prior
18 to the beginning of the 2008-2009 school year.
19 Section 2. This Act shall become effective upon signature by the governor or, if not
20 signed by the governor, upon expiration of the time for bills to become law without signature
21 by the governor, as provided by Article III, Section 18 of the Constitution of Louisiana. If
22 vetoed by the governor and subsequently approved by the legislature, this Act shall become
23 effective on the day following such approval.

What exactly is objectionable in this?

468 keithgabryelski  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:12:26pm

re: #439 Franktalk

So as we all debate the fine points of ID or evolution lets show our kids how tolerant we are of opposing ideas and make them illegal.

Objecting to ID being defined as science is not "intolerance" -- it is simply holding a value.

You have conflated a pipe dream with SCIENCE.

Should we teach alchemy in science class?
Should we teach astrology in science class?
Should we teach "keith's belief laying on the couch is a great way to lose weight" in science class?

469 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:13:28pm

re: #455 zombie

Get back to me when the supernaturalists have their own robot on Mars, cure or prevent most infectious diseases, develop a worldwide network of intelligent machines, convert sunlight to electricity, harness the power of an atomic nucleus, discover a planet halfway across the galaxy, genetically engineer food crops to feed the world, transplant a working heart into a man's chest, or explain the orbit of Mercury.

Until then, you don't have a leg to stand on.

/Except for the bionic leg that pesky naturalism SCIENCE created for you.

Wow. OWNED.

470 Franktalk  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:14:21pm

re: #423 karmic_inquisitor

Actually that is what science does. It talks about what could have been a cause for some event. It just limits the causes to "acceptable" causes. The people who accept the limits of science don't normally talk about the limits. They choose instead to talk about the conclusions based on the limits. In some fields where experiments can't be performed on the theories the theories are by majority rule given acceptance. This line of thought presented here because it is outside of science may be illegal in some states in public schools. So please don't allow your kids to cut and paste this into a science discussion. OK, maybe not but you get the picture.

471 Killgore Trout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:14:56pm

re: #467 abu boo boo

It takes time away from real topics in to teach bullshit. It's a form of intellectual equivalence. All ideas are given a platform regardless of their merits.

472 Iron Fist[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:14:59pm
473 Dirk Diggler  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:14:59pm

Abu Boo Boo,

Bobby Jindal

brother.

There goes another one...

Hey Jindal also signed a law castrating pedophiles Wednesday. You win some, you lose some.

474 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:15:42pm

"Franktalk on the Behe thread:

So does ones feelings on evolution also reflect in their choice of moral fabric? I think so. This is why I have on many occasions tried to show how evolution is a weak argument and science in this area is not on firm ground as other areas of science

475 captkirk35  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:16:32pm

re: #467 abu boo boo

Exactly. There's nothing wrong with it.

The bill allows teachers to question the theory. Its intent isn't too push "Creationism". Evolution is full of holes, and now the gaps in the theory can be examined w/o retrobution or intimidation.

What a concept.

Boy.. that Jindal... WHAT A NUT! Where's Bucannon when we need him.

Oy'

476 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:16:35pm

re: #467 abu boo boo

What exactly is objectionable in this?

Literally, nothing, but it should be evaluated in a larger context.

If the DI hadn't trumpeted it as a victory, I'd have yawned at the passage of the bill and gone back to sleep.

477 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:16:53pm

re: #466 Beobachter

You got a point there, but I do pay money directly to the school district and I would be happy just not having to pay that exorbitant amount.

But if you could do that, than any taxpayer with no children (and that's about half of them) would demand the same right, and then the public schools would be so critically under-funded they would not function at all.

478 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:18:19pm

re: #467 abu boo boo

What exactly is objectionable in this?

I bet you'll find plenty wrong with it when CAIR sees fit to send teachers their ideas of supplemental material for teachers.

479 gunjam  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:18:45pm

re: #467 abu boo boo

What exactly is objectionable in this?

Thank you for your post. Very timely and apt (in my backwoods, creationist view).

480 debutaunt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:18:56pm

re: #477 Lizard by the Bay

But if you could do that, than any taxpayer with no children (and that's about half of them) would demand the same right, and then the public schools would be so critically under-funded they would not function at all.

But with all they money they do have, they barely function.

481 Throbert McGee  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:19:15pm

re: #381 Throbert McGee

there's actually a "Continuum of Belief" between Young Earth Creationists and staunch atheists like Richard Dawkins.

Following up on my "continuum" point -- a lot of people may have heard of the so-called "Kinsey Scale" relating to sexual orientation. If you haven't heard of it, it's a seven-point scale from 0 to 6, with 0 standing for total heterosexuality and 6 for total homosexuality. A person who's pretty much an equal-opportunity, 50/50 bisexual would be a "Kinsey 3," with the other numbers representing different shades of bisexuality.

The reason I described it as the "so-called Kinsey Scale" is that the original "Kinsey Scale" devised by Alfred Kinsey had a strong reek of pseudo-science about it, as you might expect considering what a questionable personality Kinsey himself was (to put it mildly).

However, most people who use the Kinsey Scale today are simply using it as a colloquial, shorthand way to talk about the complexities of bisexuality, without intending to endorse Alfred Kinsey generally. (It's much quicker to say "John Smith is a Kinsey 1.5" than to say "John is mainly hetero, happily and faithfully married, and only dated women before meeting his wife -- but he has fond memories of doing circle jerks with two other dudes back in ninth grade, and if one day when John's wife isn't home, Brett Favre should happen to drop by wearing only a sauna towel, it might possibly lead to wokka chicka wokka chicka...)

And I think it's totally okay to use the Kinsey Scale in this loose way, as long as there's no pretense of scientifickiness.

All this is just by way of suggesting a similar sort of scale to describe beliefs about the origin of the universe -- perhaps with 1 being "Atheistic Evolution" and 10 being "Young Earth Creationism" -- in hopes of combatting the stupid binary thinking on this topic.

482 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:19:15pm

re: #479 gunjam

Yeah- wait til CAIR abuses this- you won't be drinking it up that night.

483 Ma Sands  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:20:08pm

Ah! Neat, rough storm coming in! See ya all later...nice seeing you zombie, Killgore... :)

484 ec marm  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:20:38pm

re: #467 abu boo boo


snip
Such assistance shall include support and guidance for teachers
4 regarding effective ways to help students understand, analyze, critique, and
5 objectively review scientific theories being studied, including those enumerated
snip

What exactly is objectionable in this?


Exactly. 'Analyze and critique'. Two critically important skills for children to develop. But some believe that all the answers are already answered, so why should children engage in the practice of conjecture and debate?
While I may personally believe that I.D. is currently BS, I reserve the right to change that opinion in light of future research and findings. But at least I know what the debate is about.

485 Killgore Trout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:20:46pm

re: #476 pre-Boomer Marine brat

If the DI hadn't trumpeted it as a victory, I'd have yawned at the passage of the bill and gone back to sleep.


The whole bill was an invention of the Disco Institute: The Discovery Institute, the LA Family Forum, and the "LA Science Education Act" UPDATED
There are about 8-9 other bills floating around in other states. The release of Ben Stein's Expelled was timed to coincide with all these pending "Academic Freedom" bills.

486 Mich-again  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:20:52pm

Religion in the science class is a bad idea, but politics in the science class is apparently OK. My kid had to watch "An Inconvenient Truth" at school and that is more political than scientific.

487 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:21:03pm

re: #480 debutaunt

But with all they money they do have, they barely function.

Killing the patient is usually not the best way to cure the disease.

488 abu boo boo  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:21:44pm

re: #471 Killgore Trout

It takes time away from real topics in to teach bullshit. It's a form of intellectual equivalence. All ideas are given a platform regardless of their merits.

You obviously have no idea what goes on in public schools.

Would you like me to describe as a parent some of the anti-science, anti-knowledge stuff that goes on?

Do you understand why more and more families choose home schooling?

489 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:21:52pm

re: #486 Mich-again

I, for one, don't think it's okay.

490 Milk Toast Intolerant  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:22:53pm

I believe in the Genesis account, but it should not be taught in a science class; that's for Sunday school. Next thing we know, our kids will come home and claim Muhammed split the moon in two.

Can you see the Islamists being all over this opportunity? God help us all.

491 zombie  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:22:59pm

re: #467 abu boo boo

What exactly is objectionable in this?

It allows each school board, each district, each individual school to basically teach whatever they want; and to be easily influenced by pressure groups who supply bogus "supplemental" materials. So if some creationist principal wants all the kids in his school to learn that Darwin was a crackpot, that's what the kids will learn, and no one can do anything about it.

492 keithgabryelski  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:23:03pm

re: #403 Franktalk

But let someone say that it looks like some of the parts of man were designed and you become a religious nut job.

No. You are not a religious nut job if you believe god designed man.

You are a religious nut job if you attempt to change the definition of science so that you can force such a belief on other people.

I say let the debate happen and let the chips fall where they fall.

There is no "debate". When there is ONE peer-reviewed research paper on the subject of ID then we can debate.

The proponents of ID are the ones not debating the subject. There are rules for debate and they haven't yet started.

Again, let me repeat that: ID proponents are the ones preventing debate by not initiating an honest discussion.

Science has no care (and no worries) about whether ID is true or not, but it can't be classified as true or false until an honest discussion starts.

Until then, ID is not even wrong.

493 gunjam  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:23:10pm

re: #478 Sharmuta


I bet you'll find plenty wrong with it when CAIR sees fit to send teachers their ideas of supplemental material for teachers.

Are you saying that you are totally oblivious to the Judaeo-Christian influence on the founding and development of this country.

Question for thought:

On the Mayflower there were lots of creationists, Christians, and Bibles.

There were approximately ZERO Islamists, nominal Muslims, or copies of the Qur'an.

This has no significance to you?

Of course I would object if CAIR proposed their stuff.

You might say I am not fair? I am a Christian, not a Muslim. And it affects the way I think and vote.

494 Killgore Trout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:23:15pm

re: #488 abu boo boo

You obviously have no idea what goes on in public schools.


Wrong.

495 noraono  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:23:20pm

re: #455 zombie

When did believing in Creation or ID negate the laws of physics? Every damn thing you named in your rant is dependent on the ruling forces of our present earth- not a single one has ANYTHING to do with how the earth got here. You have taken this argument into a realm which it doesn't belong.

i'll be back...gotta go tell my boss that my religion apparently negates my college degree...

496 Franktalk  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:23:22pm

re: #474 Sharmuta

Thanks for the extra post.

For all of you Darwinist out there. Please tell me how the theory of evolution contributed to society?

497 Charles  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:23:33pm

re: #485 Killgore Trout

The whole bill was an invention of the Disco Institute: The Discovery Institute, the LA Family Forum, and the "LA Science Education Act" UPDATED

There are about 8-9 other bills floating around in other states. The release of Ben Stein's Expelled was timed to coincide with all these pending "Academic Freedom" bills.

That's a good link. Shows pretty conclusively that the Discovery Institute is very much behind this and similar bills.

498 Beobachter  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:23:51pm

re: #477 Lizard by the Bay

But if you could do that, than any taxpayer with no children (and that's about half of them) would demand the same right, and then the public schools would be so critically under-funded they would not function at all.

I thought about that too, but as long as I do not have to pay school taxes, only while my son is in a private school, I would be happy.

499 sparrowlake  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:25:06pm

re:

500 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:25:07pm
501 Throbert McGee  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:25:24pm

re: #136 Honorary Yooper

Yeah, this is no different than when we had the fascists and their supporters last year.

Was that last year? It seems like only yesterday, to me...

502 gunjam  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:25:37pm

re: #485 Killgore Trout

There are about 8-9 other bills floating around in other states. The release of Ben Stein's Expelled was timed to coincide with all these pending "Academic Freedom" bills.

Oh no! Don't tell me there is a CONSPIRACY among EEEVILL creationists to take over the world?

(May their tribe increase!)

503 keithgabryelski  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:25:56pm

re: #475 captkirk35

Evolution is full of holes, and now the gaps in the theory can be examined w/o retrobution or intimidation.

What are the holes you are talking about?

504 MJ  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:26:17pm

re: #467 abu boo boo

13 promote discrimination for or against a particular set of religious beliefs, or
14 promote discrimination for or against religion or nonreligion

.


Evolution is seen by many of the supporters of ID as being "against religion". Therefore, to satisfy this provision, creationism will be taught to promote "balance".
It's the proverbial case of allowing the camels nose into the tent.
Besides, as I once asked on a previous thread, why privilege the Judeo-Christan creation myth?

505 abu boo boo  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:26:57pm

re: #491 zombie

It allows each school board, each district, each individual school to basically teach whatever they want; and to be easily influenced by pressure groups who supply bogus "supplemental" materials. So if some creationist principal wants all the kids in his school to learn that Darwin was a crackpot, that's what the kids will learn, and no one can do anything about it.

Read it again. It doesn't say that.

Three key points in the Act:

1. It requires teaching using the existing approved textbooks.
2. The use of supplemental materials is optional.
3. It explicitly prohibits promoting or teaching any religion.

506 keithgabryelski  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:27:53pm

re: #496 Franktalk

Thanks for the extra post.

For all of you Darwinist out there. Please tell me how the theory of evolution contributed to society?

we understand the propagation of disease a lot better?

507 Charles  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:28:31pm

Interesting paragraph: The Discovery Institute, the LA Family Forum, and the "LA Science Education Act."

Creationists are always forced to morph into something less recognizable -- and, they hope, less legally vulnerable -- after losses in federal court. "Creation science" had morphed into "intelligent design" after the U.S. Supreme Court's 1987 Edwards v. Aguillard ruling barred public schools from teaching it. However, after Kitzmiller, that term, too, is legally dangerous, so DI had to disguise its efforts yet again. Consequently, "intelligent design" creationists now shroud ID in multiple alternative identities: "critical analysis of evolution," "teaching the controversy," teaching the "strengths and weaknesses of evolution," "evidence for and against evolution," and, in the form of legislation in Louisiana and five other states this year, "academic freedom." These code terms are instantly recognized by DI's supporters as announcements of creationist initiatives. However, the local foot soldiers cannot be relied on to stick to the DI terminological playbook. Early in the effort, Sen. Nevers candidly told a reporter that he introduced the legislation on behalf of the LFF because "they believe that scientific data related to creationism should be discussed when dealing with Darwin's theory." (emphasis added) After some quick spinning for the media (and probably some additional coaching), Nevers got back on message.

508 reno911  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:28:45pm

re: #472 Iron Fist

Point taken. Economically, Clinton was a Global/Free Trader. Socially, he was left, but not able to do much damage beyond executive fiat (Don't Ask Don't Tell). Supreme Court nominees notwithstanding.

With regards to what the Dems have done in the last two years. I guess the answer is "not much". I should have clarified though, I meant relatively speaking. When Dems are in power, they tend to govern to the right of what they espoused when they were out of power. I'm not getting this across well and I apologize for that.

Hmmm...After reading what I just wrote, I might be full of crap.

Nevermind.

509 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:29:12pm

re: #485 Killgore Trout

The whole bill was an invention of the Disco Institute: The Discovery Institute, the LA Family Forum, and the "LA Science Education Act" UPDATED
There are about 8-9 other bills floating around in other states. The release of Ben Stein's Expelled was timed to coincide with all these pending "Academic Freedom" bills.

Yes. I can well imagine.
(visualize bile rising, and me running for the toilet)

My first and last awareness of ID was ... gosh ... ages ago when the words first came out. I haven't followed it since. These last few weeks, as I've seen data on LGF about the DI, I've come to see what ID has become -- the Scopes Trial re-cast in wolf's scientific clothing.

510 gunjam  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:29:28pm

re: #491 zombie

It allows each school board, each district, each individual school to basically teach whatever they want; and to be easily influenced by pressure groups who supply bogus "supplemental" materials. So if some creationist principal wants all the kids in his school to learn that Darwin was a crackpot, that's what the kids will learn, and no one can do anything about it.

Clear apology for a centralized, Soviet-style educracy.

(Uh, no thanks.)

511 zombie  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:29:29pm

re: #495 noraono

When did believing in Creation or ID negate the laws of physics? Every damn thing you named in your rant is dependent on the ruling forces of our present earth- not a single one has ANYTHING to do with how the earth got here.

Say what?

That comment is so bizarre I hardly even know what to say.

But, in short: The laws of physics that obtain on Earth today have EVERYTHING to do with how Earth got here in the first place.

And Creationism negates the laws of physics by denying the factuality of the innumerable geological, genetic and biochemical facts that confirm evolution is real.

512 Milk Toast Intolerant  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:29:37pm

Even if the Genesis account is the truth, we don't have enough scientific data to teach it in the classroom. That's why it's a belief for now. Imagine a teacher explaining to their students how God assembled the molecules to form the first human being. That is nuts.

513 Colonel Panik  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:30:08pm

re: #59 MJ

Jindal also wants to chemically castrate rapists.

Who knows, perhaps he'll want to cut of the hands of thieves next.

[Link: talkingpointsmemo.com...]

I think giving rapists a case of lead poisoning is a good idea, if you catch my drift.

514 FloatingRock  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:30:30pm

We should pass legislation mandating that evolution be taught in Sunday school and see how that goes over. Why stop there? There are all kinds of topics that should be covered in Sunday school that currently aren't.

515 rawmuse  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:32:15pm

Getting in late to this thread. My own personal feelings about the issue aside, the bottom line is that it is THEIR state. The Louisianans elect the leaders, start the programs, etc.

Far be it for me, living in a state as bolloxed up as California, with all our incredibly stupid programs designed to generate one generation after another of witless and dependent commies, to preach to them about anything.

516 Salamantis  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:32:27pm

Here's a joke concerning phrenology that an old philosophy prof told me:

A professor of intellectual history had arrived at the hotel where the Discredited Theories convention was to be held. Looking through the offerings (the Doctrine of Signatures, Phlogiston, the Ptolemaic System, etc.), he decided to begin with a presentation on Phrenology beginning in a half hour.

On the elevator up to his room, a bellhop told him that a very skilled prostitute had driven over, only to find that her trick had become ill, and she was willing to go for half price so her trip would not be wasted.

The professor flipped a coin.

Get it?

scroll down...


Heads or Tails! (HeeHee!)

517 zombie  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:32:55pm

re: #505 abu boo boo

Read it again. It doesn't say that.

Three key points in the Act:

1. It requires teaching using the existing approved textbooks.
2. The use of supplemental materials is optional.
3. It explicitly prohibits promoting or teaching any religion.

1. The textbooks will be approved by local school boards and rubberstamped by the same legislature that passed this bill. Hence, they may allow for the discuission of creationism.
2. The supplemental materials will be supplied by the Discovery Institute and similar organizations, and will most likely be in wide use, since it takes a long time to make new textbooks.
3. They won't need to teach any specific religion -- just supernaturalism. That's the whole point of step 2 of the "Wedge" strategy.

518 Franktalk  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:33:02pm

re: #492 keithgabryelski

What you say is true. I personally feel the ID group is way ahead of the data in stating that ID is true. I think we know little of the real underlying mechanics of the molecular engines. But this feeling of mine also applies to the evolutionist who declare that evolution is a fact when the data does not support it. The amount of complexity in the mechanisms makes it very unlikely it happened in the way Darwin said it did. I sure don't have the answers but I won't accept somebody's guess at this point.

519 usmc1968  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:33:23pm

Well, I don't have a dog in this hunt and if I did I wouldn't let him bark.

520 Colonel Panik  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:33:31pm

re: #512 Milk Toast Intolerant

Imagine a teacher explaining to their students how God assembled the molecules to form the first human being. That is nuts.

With primordial epoxy?

521 gunjam  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:34:04pm

re: #482 Sharmuta


re: #479 gunjam

Yeah- wait til CAIR abuses this- you won't be drinking it up that night.

True! But, let me bask in this too-short, sweet moment!

One battle at a time, my dear.

522 tgibson1962  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:35:02pm

re: #416 buzzsawmonkey

"The phrase "evolving standards of decency" has been used by the Supreme Court in deliberations on what is or is not cruel and unusual punishment for well over 50 years. It was already a cliche common in an extensive line of Supreme Court decisions when I was in lawschool over 30 years ago."

And if evolutionary theory were something less than 50/30 years old, then I'd obviously be incorrect that there is an overlap between the use of word in its strict scientific use and its being appropriated (high-jacked?) for philosophical purposes. Or does the word "evolving" in the legal context not carry the connotation of advancement/improvement over the previous state of affairs? Does it mean "change" that is neither good nor bad?

523 Franktalk  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:36:06pm

re: #506 keithgabryelski

We understand disease because we studied disease.

524 zombie  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:37:04pm

re: #510 gunjam

Clear apology for a centralized, Soviet-style educracy.

(Uh, no thanks.)

Well, there goes public schooling in the US, then.

I'm not advocating for Soviet-style (or French-style actually, which were even more centralized that Soviet schools), only for basic standards of scientific literacy.

If you want each school board, each school district to teach whatever they want according to local "community standards," you will end up with a completely crazy patchwork of unequal schools across the country, and I predict most parents will flee to the private system.

525 gunjam  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:37:07pm

re: #511 zombie

But, in short: The laws of physics that obtain on Earth today have EVERYTHING to do with how Earth got here in the first place.

Sorry. Don't buy that presupposition for a New York minute -- and it is not proveable (or disproveable, either).

In short, it is faith-based statement.

You are very insistent that your religion become the state-approved one, it seems!

526 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:37:23pm
527 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:37:27pm

re: #493 gunjam

Are you saying that you are totally oblivious to the Judaeo-Christian influence on the founding and development of this country.

I didn't say that at all.

Question for thought:

On the Mayflower there were lots of creationists, Christians, and Bibles.

There were approximately ZERO Islamists, nominal Muslims, or copies of the Qur'an.

This has no significance to you?

You're building a strawman.

Of course I would object if CAIR proposed their stuff.

Then you're a hypocrite.

You might say I am not fair?

And I did.

I am a Christian, not a Muslim. And it affects the way I think and vote.

And when this bill bites you in the ass, I'll be sure to remind you of all this.

528 gunjam  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:38:35pm

Enjoyed the give and take, folks! Back to my Carlsberg! :-)

529 abu boo boo  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:39:01pm

re: #504 MJ

.

It's the proverbial case of allowing the camels nose into the tent.
Besides, as I once asked on a previous thread, why privilege the Judeo-Christan creation myth?

As a parent, I have plenty of experience of what is already in the public school tent.

But I think you and others are going out of your way to read into this bill ideas that simply are not there.

For example, there is nothing in this bill that would require a science teacher to "teach" anything that isn't in the existing approved textbooks.

In the worst case, a teacher might be asked by a local school board of city to mention criticisms of popular theories such as evolution and global warming.

Public schools claim they teach children critical thinking. But how can you do that if you don't expose children to multiple ideas--including wrong ideas--and encourage them to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of each?

It's amazing how little faith some people have in the ability of science to withstand scrutiny...

530 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:39:16pm

re: #507 Charles

THANK you for that. It's obvious to me now that, back then, I was fooled by the re-packaging.

I'd been adamantly opposed to creationism. ID came along. I gave it a glance and thought it was something new, more rational than creationism, and hence "a step forward". I went back to my daily life.

531 captkirk35  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:39:42pm

re: #503 keithgabryelski

Good Lord..

I don't have time right now to document them all. The whole point of Stein's movie was NOT to promote ID (in fact, my only complaint about the movie was how little it touched upon ID), but instead it focused on the Mack-truck sized holes in Darwin's theory. Go watch the movie or Google it.

532 sparrowlake  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:40:29pm

re: #523 Franktalk

We understand disease because we studied disease.

Our understanding of disease and treatment has evolved thanks to the scientific method.
So put a couple of leeches on it, will ya?

533 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:42:59pm
534 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:43:27pm

re: #515 rawmuse

it is THEIR state

*grin*
(with affection)

Yes, these ARE Cajuns. We need Cajuns around to leaven the fabric of our culture.

/that has not a GD! thing to do with ID or the bill

535 wolf  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:43:44pm

re: #341 Occasional Reader

Bollocks. I am old enough to remember Sagan, and yes, I read Cosmos. You are conflating his leaving the door open for religion, with his advocating creationism. Those are two different things.

Actually, in Cosmos, he wrote: "Evolution is a fact, not a theory".

I agree with you. Sagan believed in evolution. He disavowed orgainized religion and claimed science was the only real belief system. However, he continually implied that evolution could have been a means to and end.

I hate to use fiction to get my point across, but that was one of the basic messages in the book, Contact. That something very well may exist equivalent to God. Not the God painted by Michaleanglo, not a God ionvolved in every aspect of our daily lives, but a God that may have initiated a process whereby evolution was allowed to proceed in a given direction.

Carl Sagan strongly demounced the anthropocentric view of universe, but he did not rule out a God that may have impacted our world to a large degree. Who is to say that man wasn't created? Why is there no DNA link between us and Neanderthals? Who can unequivocally say that Eve was not produced for the genetic material from Adam's rib? There had to be a first human. Was it an accident or design?

Can it be said that only science can answer that?

I sometimes wonder why Moses spent 40 days on the mountain and came back with only ten commandments. Oh, sure, he came back with a lot of other things, for instance the story of creation. How would God have explained to Moses how man was created? Would Moses have understood the manipulation and splicing of genetic material necessary? Moses was a bright guy for his day, but I doubt he had a solid understanding of modern biology. More than likely God left out the details of how he created life here, and left it to Moses to figure it out.

One thing I remember from Cosmos, if my memory serves, is his explanation of how humans could terraform Mars. By imbedding certaining fungi into the martian soil, we could rapidly (subjective term alert) convert the CO2 in the martian atmosphere to oxygen. Plants could then be introduced to increase the level of oxygen which would cause the atmosphere to thicken, trapping heat, meltiing ice, and making the planet more hospitable to human life. He claimed we could do that with the technology we had at hand. The implication was, why could not another being have doen the same here?

Sagan was not a believer in the doctrines of religious institutions, but in the Contact, he clearly should, via the two main characters, that science and religion are not mutually exclusive.

Now, I am not going to bother making it any clearer. If you do not see what I, and Sagan, are saying. Then I am just unable to relate my thoughts adequately. If that is the case, I am sorry. But I would like to add that I believe Jindal did the right thing.

536 Milk Toast Intolerant  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:43:51pm

re: #521 gunjam

True! But, let me bask in this too-short, sweet moment!

One battle at a time, my dear.

This is the #1 reason I have suddenly turned against ID being taught in the class room; I don't want the Islamists like CAIR to ride on the coattail of the ID proponents to push Islam on our children. There are other reasons, but this one is a major no-no for me.

When I was in school, my science teacher mentioned ID on the first day of the school year. He included it in his introduction to the curriculum and basically said here is another point of view, but it would not be taught in the classroom. We were free to investigate it on our own and I was fine with that. I believe that is the way it should be. Teaching ID in science class inevitably opens up a giant can of worm that we are just not ready to open.

537 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:44:15pm

re: #519 usmc1968

Well, I don't have a dog in this hunt and if I did I wouldn't let him bark.

Hi there!
How are you?

538 see bs  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:45:36pm

re: #279 oceansidecon

ID-Creationists are the 9/11 truthers of the right.

I don't support ID or it being taught in public schools, but I dinged you down because All 9-11 Truthers are nuts, Not ID-Creationists are nuts, some are just misguided.

539 abu boo boo  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:47:20pm

re: #517 zombie

1. The textbooks will be approved by local school boards and rubberstamped by the same legislature that passed this bill. Hence, they may allow for the discuission of creationism.
2. The supplemental materials will be supplied by the Discovery Institute and similar organizations, and will most likely be in wide use, since it takes a long time to make new textbooks.
3. They won't need to teach any specific religion -- just supernaturalism. That's the whole point of step 2 of the "Wedge" strategy.

Your concern about point 1 applied even before this Act was passed. But the fact is that the textbook industry teaches evolution. (Which, by the way, is fine with me.)

Re: point 2--who do you think should provide the supplementary material. If it's to promote critical thinking, it needs to be a contrarian view. That doesn't prevent teachers from favoring evolution, which you can be sure that vast majority do.

Re: point 3. Let's assume you are right and that "supernaturalism" is introduced. Do you think children interested in science can't tell the difference between verifiable facts and blind faith beliefs?

540 Killgore Trout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:47:56pm

re: #531 captkirk35

Read the wedge document. It's their entire motivation.

541 wolf  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:49:10pm

re: #385 Occasional Reader

No, maybe you need to stop being such an insufferable jerk, and actually defend your position.

Ouch, you win. Hope that makes your day. You have changed my mind. I don't believe in a Creator now, only in the blind luck of evolution. I will now donate some money to Obama to prove my conversion.

542 Dianna  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:49:16pm

re: #535 wolf

Sagan had mystic urges. Clearly, so do you.

543 debutaunt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:49:28pm

re: #487 Lizard by the Bay

Killing the patient is usually not the best way to cure the disease.

If the schools are guaranteed the money with no requirement of success, the school is slowly dying.

544 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:49:50pm

re: #539 abu boo boo

Re: point 3. Let's assume you are right and that "supernaturalism" is introduced. Do you think children interested in science can't tell the difference between verifiable facts and blind faith beliefs?

Apparently- we have adults who can't do this.

545 Dianna  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:50:34pm

re: #541 wolf

Ouch, you win. Hope that makes your day. You have changed my mind. I don't believe in a Creator now, only in the blind luck of evolution. I will now donate some money to Obama to prove my conversion.

You truly are being an insufferable jerk!

546 Franktalk  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:52:16pm

re: #526 buzzsawmonkey

A bad case of tunnel vision will do that.

547 twons  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:52:28pm

re: #523 Franktalk

We understand disease because we studied disease.


We studied disease from a SCIENTIFIC PERSPECTIVE, driven by an understanding of biology derived from tenets found in evolutionary theory.

You're exhibiting the typical reticence displayed by creationists - you ask for evidence, then discount it out of hand when it's given to you.

It's intellectually dishonest, and it is EXACTLY why the level of frustration in these debates gets so high. Those of us who are trying to educate and bring the whole debate into the light it needs - we get sick of playing whack-a-mole.

548 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:52:30pm

re: #525 gunjam

Sorry. Don't buy that presupposition for a New York minute -- and it is not proveable (or disproveable, either).

In short, it is faith-based statement.

You are very insistent that your religion become the state-approved one, it seems!

With respect (and perhaps I misunderstand the context for your comment), I feel your statements, as I have highlighted, are nonsensical, utterly out of line and insulting.

They were not made to me, but I DO take them as a personal affront.

/going off-line to cool down!

549 Milk Toast Intolerant  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:52:48pm

Is Obama the Manchurian candidate or Jindal?

550 sparrowlake  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:52:58pm

re: #539 abu boo boo

Do you think children interested in science can't tell the difference between verifiable facts and blind faith beliefs?

Most kids have enough trouble learning the 3 R's and some basic science without being sidetracked by having this oooga booga shoved down their throats in order to placate a bunch of religious zealots.

551 Dianna  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:53:39pm

re: #549 Milk Toast Intolerant

Neither.

552 captkirk35  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:53:40pm

re: #511 zombie

So where did the Laws come from? Start winding the story back.. and where do we get to..

The point about "Creationism" is that at some point you're left with two options.

1. Either the whole ball of wax (i.e. this universe, a parent universe, whatever theory you want to use) has always been.

2. Or at some point, something started the movie rolling forward.. a "Creator".

Now it can be argued whether this Creator is the same one mentioned in the bible or not, but for the purposes of this post, set that aside, as it's a moot point. ID does not quibble here.

The larger question is, is it more absurd to assume a Creator started it all, or that everything that is has been there/here.. for infinity. Even the notion of infinity is absurd.. in my mind (yes.. a belief), not having a Creator makes no logical sense.

553 ec marm  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:57:17pm

re: #532 sparrowlake

Our understanding of disease and treatment has evolved thanks to the scientific method.
So put a couple of leeches on it, will ya?


That's actually a pretty poor analogy. Leeches have been discovered to possess anti-coagulative and anti-inflammatory properties that actually have use in modern medicine. I'm sure hoping they will eventually isolate the effect and eliminate the nasty little bloodsucker.

554 Dianna  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:58:22pm

I'm out.

Have a great weekend, folks.

555 ballantrae  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:59:16pm

School.

Choice.

556 abu boo boo  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 2:59:21pm

The key element missing from this debate

Everyone is worried that either (1) students will be taught to confuse religious beliefs with scientific facts and laws or (2) that students will be taught to completely reject religion.

Today's schools seem most concerned with producing an army of science technicians. They are the people who perform experiments, record observations, and present data in various formats.

Lost in the debate is the fact that what really set this country apart in terms of science excellence was an atmosphere conducive to making new discoveries and inventions.

That requires almost total freedom at the input side of the scientific process. (The place we should be demanding rigor is on the output--not the input.)

This attitude is part of the larger misguided "leave no child behind" philosophy. In practice, it does more to ensure that no child gets too far ahead.

557 Salamantis  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:00:00pm

To me God does not yet exist; but there is a creative force
constantly struggling to evolve an executive organ of godlike
knowledge and power: that is, to achieve omnipotence and
omniscience; and every man and woman born is a fresh attempt to
achieve this object.

The current theory that God already exists in perfection involves
the belief that God deliberately created something lower than
Himself when He might just as easily have created something
equally perfect. That is a horrible belief: it could only have arisen
among people whose notion of greatness is to be surrounded by
inferior beings -- like a Russian nobleman -- and to enjoy the
sense of superiority to them.

To my mind, unless we conceive God as engaged in a continual
struggle to surpass Himself -- as striving at every birth to make a
better man than before, we are conceiving nothing better than an
omnipotent snob.

Also we are compelled by the theory of God's already achieved
perfection to make Him a devil as well as a god, because of the
existence of evil. The god of love, if omnipotent and omniscient,
must be the god of cancer and epilepsy as well.

Whoever admits that anything living is evil must either believe
that God is malignantly capable of creating evil, or else believe
that God has made many mistakes in His attempts to make a
perfect being. But if you believe, as I do... that the croup bacillus
was an early attempt to create a higher being than anything
achieved before that time, and that the only way to remedy the
mistake was to create a still higher being, part of whose work
must be the destruction of that bacillus, the existence of evil
ceases to present any problem; and we come to understand that we are here to help God, to do His work, to remedy His old errors, to strive towards Godhead ourselves.

I put this very roughly and hastily; but you will have no trouble in
making out my meaning. It is all in Man and Superman; but
expressed in another way -- not in the way that an uneducated
man can understand. You said that my manner in that book was
not serious enough -- that I made people laugh in my most earnest
moments. But why should I not? Why should humour and laughter
be excommunicated? Suppose the world were only one of God's
jokes, would you work any the less to make it a good joke instead
of a bad one?

George Bernard Shaw (in a letter to Leo Tolstoy, circa 1919)

558 Throbert McGee  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:00:11pm
Even the book Contact is full of innuendo about a Creator.

Although I enjoyed Robert Zemeckis's film version*, it was a disappointment that he omitted the book's final paragraphs -- wherein a computer, which had been tasked with printing out the first fifty billion digits of pi in base-11 numbers, accidentally reveals a subtle little "Hi there!" from the Creator.

*Especially the sheer-genius opening sequence that combined historic audio clips with CGI visuals so as to establish the movie's philosophical themes in a wonderfully concise and effective way. Plus, I loved Jodie Foster as Eleanor Arroway.

559 Milk Toast Intolerant  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:01:29pm

re: #552 captkirk35

The larger question is, is it more absurd to assume a Creator started it all, or that everything that is has been there/here.. for infinity. Even the notion of infinity is absurd.. in my mind (yes.. a belief), not having a Creator makes no logical sense.

Even with our very limited knowledge of modern science, we can still duplicate most of the claims made by science. We can't duplicate any of the things God did in the Garden of Eden, or anything before or after that. We don't have that kind of knowledge, so how can we teach and convince our students that and claim it's a fact? It's not about whether or not there is a Creator; it's about how feasible and logical it is to teach ID as a science.

560 Franktalk  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:01:41pm

re: #547 twons

Please don't tell me that all scientific research in biology is based on Darwinism. So no one would have studied the human body or any of the systems of the human form if Darwin did not make his grand idea? It just goes to show how far some will place this creep of a guy on a pedestal. To give Darwin credit for man's quest for knowledge is dumb beyond measure.

561 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:02:39pm

re: #556 abu boo boo

Today's schools seem most concerned with producing an army of science technicians

I disagree- I think today's schools seem most concerned with producing citizens who are unable to think critically and/or logically.

562 sparrowlake  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:03:31pm

re: #553 ec marm

That's actually a pretty poor analogy. Leeches have been discovered to possess anti-coagulative and anti-inflammatory properties that actually have use in modern medicine. I'm sure hoping they will eventually isolate the effect and eliminate the nasty little bloodsucker.

Fair point.
Down with Vioxx - up with leeches.
LOL.

563 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:05:04pm

re: #543 debutaunt

If the schools are guaranteed the money with no requirement of success, the school is slowly dying.

Yes, but your "solution" to failing public schools seems to be, "F--k 'em." Pardon me for sounding naive, but I think the nation that put men on the moon can do better.

564 usmc1968  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:05:22pm

re: #537 pre-Boomer Marine brat

I'm persuaded to think I'll see Christmas. Thanks

565 ec marm  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:06:11pm

re: #562 sparrowlake

Fair point.
Down with Vioxx - up with leeches.
LOL.


Hehehe. I've got at least one bum knee. Should I get it replaced at substantial cost in dollars and rehabilitation time or lay in some premo brazilian bloodsuckers? I wonder if I can find some on e-Bay?

566 abu boo boo  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:06:58pm

re: #544 Sharmuta

Apparently- we have adults who can't do this.

So what is your point? Are you saying we should produce scientists who can't tell the difference between a verifiable fact and a belief and just try to insulate them from beliefs?

There is alot of science that lands in the gray area. Quantum physics is brimming with principles that seem to violate classical physics. Should we shield high school children from quantum physics... or should we trust that the ones inclined towards science can sort out these issues through study, discussion, and debate?

567 MJ  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:07:11pm

re: #529 abu boo boo


Well, as the parent of 15 year high school student, I too have some idea what gets taught in school.

The bill will allow creationism to be taught in school. It's there in the language. In fact, it will allow just about any kind of supernatural drivel to be taught as well, all in the name of promoting "critical thinking". The bill should should make Wiccans quite happy along with the folks from the DI. By the way, why not teach holocaust denial if it promotes "critical thinking"?

I agree with you about the teaching of Global Warming. However, there is plenty of science out there to refute the Al Gore clones of global warming. You argue science with science- not with biblical scripture dressed up as science.

As for the use of textbooks, can we be a bit less trusting of their contents? I've written a number of textbooks over the years and, unfortunately, the influence of of certain pressure groups within certain key states can easily destroy the usefulness of any given text. When you write

"there is nothing in this bill that would require a science teacher to "teach" anything that isn't in the existing approved textbooks."

you are unfortunately betraying a level of mis-understanding the adoption process of certain key States. Write a book which is not adopted by the State of Texas and/or Calif. and you'll be dead in the water.
The pressure, by the way, can come form the Left as well as the Right. I frankly don't want the State of Louisiana deciding what's going to be in my daughters science textbook if they bring creationism into the study of evolution.

568 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:07:12pm

re: #556 abu boo boo

Today's schools seem most concerned with producing an army of science technicians. They are the people who perform experiments, record observations, and present data in various formats.

If only that were true.

569 reine.de.tout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:09:19pm

Doggone it, I'm coming in too late to this thread.

This is awful, and it will serve to further degrade Louisiana's public school system.

Things are in such a state right now that any child whose parents and/or grandparents can afford it, attends a private school. This measure will hurt those children who most need a good, solid education - those children from poor families who need an education for their own upward movement in society.

On the thread about the Canadian Human Rights Commission, I noted my belief that our freedoms are taken away slowly and incrementally. This is true of all sorts of changes in our society, and that includes this one - the downgrading of public education has been going on for many years now, and the trend continues with slow, incremental steps like this one. And again, in my opinion, the people who will be harmed the most are the very ones who can least afford to be harmed.

570 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:10:12pm
571 Salamantis  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:11:51pm

re: #552 captkirk35

You're just kicking the can down the road. If the Universe had to have a Creator, then didn't the Creator also have to have a Creator, who had to have a Creator, too, who itself had to have a ... and we're stuck with infinite regress turtles all the way down.

If you answer that the Creator doesn't need a creator, I reply, why would that be true of a Creator, but not of the Universe itself? And if it can be true for either, why introduce an additional superfluous term, rather than sticking with Occam's Razor, which says that entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity?

572 captkirk35  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:13:39pm

re: #559 Milk Toast Intolerant

And the first science teacher that goes there should be canned.

The point getting lost is that this has nothing to do w/ some kind of equivalence between scientific fact and thoery against theological claims. No one is trying to equate the two together. The animus behind this movement is to release the stranglehold and insistence placed upon these teachers to for-go any alternatives to what is clearly a theory. Kinda reminds me of another bastardized area of science in the news these days .. Al.. cough cough.. Gore.. cough cough.

573 dvhendrix  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:15:56pm

Remarkable how much noise is generated when someone in authority dares to challenge the evolution myth...

574 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:16:16pm

What is it with the IDers constantly putting words in people's mouths?

575 debutaunt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:16:24pm

re: #563 Lizard by the Bay

Yes, but your "solution" to failing public schools seems to be, "F--k 'em." Pardon me for sounding naive, but I think the nation that put men on the moon can do better.

You don't understand my position. All I'm saying is that public schools will improve greatly if they have to compete with private schools. Our public schools are going down the drain.

576 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:18:00pm
577 captkirk35  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:18:38pm

re: #571 Salamantis

Yes yes.. i've heard that before. I'm willing to suspend the cause-effect continuum at a super-natural Creator. Goodness.. we're already talking about the entire universe, and perhaps many more. I'm willing to seperate the physical from the super-natural. Perhaps the can does get kicked further, but I'll stop at the gate of what we call our physical universe.

578 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:19:04pm

re: #572 captkirk35

And the first science teacher that goes there should be canned.

The point getting lost is that this has nothing to do w/ some kind of equivalence between scientific fact and thoery against theological claims. No one is trying to equate the two together. The animus behind this movement is to release the stranglehold and insistence placed upon these teachers to for-go any alternatives to what is clearly a theory. Kinda reminds me of another bastardized area of science in the news these days .. Al.. cough cough.. Gore.. cough cough.

No- the driving force of the ID movement to to "bring people to Jesus".

Try reading up on it.

579 twons  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:19:35pm

re: #560 Franktalk

Please don't tell me that all scientific research in biology is based on Darwinism. So no one would have studied the human body or any of the systems of the human form if Darwin did not make his grand idea? It just goes to show how far some will place this creep of a guy on a pedestal. To give Darwin credit for man's quest for knowledge is dumb beyond measure.


Nope - but scientific research has built upon the work of earlier scientists, including the majority of whom firmly believe in evolution by natural selection.

Germ theory and work on cures are accomplished in no small measure by testing and experimentation on animal subjects. If they don't believe those subjects aren't related to us, why do scientists try cures on them?

Try looking around you - if you have a pet, notice that they have the same basic bone structures that you do. Their specific shape and detail of function are slightly different, but the bones are there (most of 'em). Does that mean that God lacked imagination, or that there's a common ancestry? Why do Chimpanzees share the majority of our DNA? Why do they have DNA at all? Couldn't God just poof some different mechanism for Chimps to reproduce? Why do whales have vestigial legs inside their bodies? Did God screw up while making them, or did whales evolve from land creatures with legs?

I don't give Darwin credit for man's quest for knowledge. I give him credit for contributing to man's knowledge, in a way that fits extremely well with the observable world, in my opinion. To demonize Darwin, or any scientist, is dumb without measure to me.

580 MJ  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:21:04pm

re: #576 buzzsawmonkey

"...they are peddling their fish in the wrong market".

It sure isn't Gefilte Fish.

581 Josephine  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:22:37pm

re: #30 zombie

I dinged you up because the same applies to Canada.

582 Salamantis  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:23:15pm

Well, captkirk35, buzzsawmonkey is entirely correct; the cosmology of universal origins has nothing whatsoever to do with evolutionary theory. The universe was already here before life began, so its facticity and a priori existence says nothing one way or the other about how lifeforms changed over time and the mechanisms involved, with the caveat that in the absence of a universe in which to begin and to change, obviously neither could have happened.

583 reine.de.tout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:23:56pm

re: #574 Sharmuta

What is it with the IDers constantly putting words in people's mouths?

That, plus innumerable accusations of faith-bashing where none exists.

584 Throbert McGee  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:24:46pm

re: #557 Salamantis

But if you believe, as I do... that the croup bacillus
was an early attempt to create a higher being than anything
achieved before that time, and that the only way to remedy the
mistake was to create a still higher being, part of whose work
must be the destruction of that bacillus, the existence of evil
ceases to present any problem; and we come to understand that we are here to help God, to do His work, to remedy His old errors, to strive towards Godhead ourselves.
-- George Bernard Shaw (in a letter to Leo Tolstoy, circa 1919)

If there is a God, and if He is in the business of occasionally revealing Divine Wisdom to certain individuals, then George Bernard Shaw must've been be one of God's more recent Prophets -- because Shaw seems to have gotten almost everything exactly right in the letter to Tolstoy.

And just in case anyone from DL is still checking in on me, this is how you write a blood-drawing zinger, my poppets:

That is a horrible belief: it could only have arisen among people whose notion of greatness is to be surrounded by inferior beings -- like a Russian nobleman -- and to enjoy the sense of superiority to them.

George, you cheeky monkey, what did poor Leo ever do to you?

585 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:26:10pm

re: #566 abu boo boo

So what is your point? Are you saying we should produce scientists who can't tell the difference between a verifiable fact and a belief and just try to insulate them from beliefs?

Oh- fercryinoutloud! What is my point? What is my point?! You can't even figure out my point, and yet you think children will be able to figure out the difference between science and theology in middle school and high school?!

586 MJ  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:26:59pm

re: #584 Throbert McGee

Throbert, it's really good to see you posting here again.

587 captkirk35  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:28:17pm

re: #578 Sharmuta

I'll take a look.


Howver, that might be the strategy of this particular group (although a simple search of the article turns up no hits of the word "Jesus"), but since when did they get equated with the entire movement? I'm a part of no organized ID movement, so count me as perhaps the one and only voice who does not have this goal, as it relates to how science is taught in schools), but is perfectly fine w/ this legislation.

588 abu boo boo  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:29:13pm

re: #567 MJ

The bill will allow creationism to be taught in school. It's there in the language. In fact, it will allow just about any kind of supernatural drivel to be taught as well, all in the name of promoting "critical thinking". The bill should should make Wiccans quite happy along with the folks from the DI. By the way, why not teach holocaust denial if it promotes "critical thinking"?

Not everything that is discussed is "taught."

A more optimistic view is that children exposed to diverse ideas will acquire the ability to distinguish verifiable facts from beliefs.

More important, students should at least have the opportunity to hear that some aspects of scientific theories are disputed. There is nothing in the Act that says they have to accept certain criticisms as valid. It works both ways: they can and will apply critical thinking to the ideas challenging theories, as well.

589 captkirk35  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:29:55pm

re: #582 Salamantis

I agree.

I've never thought that the theory and the existence of a Creator were mutually exclusive.

590 Yashmak  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:32:48pm
You argue science with science- not with biblical scripture dressed up as science.

This is the central argument summed up quite concisely. ID doesn't pass muster as science, and should never be allowed into the science classroom.

591 Killgore Trout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:32:50pm

re: #587 captkirk35

as it relates to how science is taught in schools), but is perfectly fine w/ this legislation.


It's unconstitutional and a waste of time and money. The bill struck down in the courts. It's an enormous and foolish waste of money.

592 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:33:23pm

re: #575 debutaunt

You don't understand my position. All I'm saying is that public schools will improve greatly if they have to compete with private schools. Our public schools are going down the drain.

I think you're a little naive about the problems of public schools. Competition will not "help" them, it will close them. And that's because they cannot compete with private schools, partially because of the way money given to schools is earmarked for exceptionally narrow purposes, and also because the public schools cannot do the one critical thing a private school can: fire bad teachers.

There are a lot of things you can do to a car to make it drive better (tire pressure, well-lubed steering column, etc.), but the biggest factor in how well a car drives is the driver. And now I will commit what Dems consider to be the worst possible sin: I am going to blame teachers for the state of our public schools. No, not all teachers. In fact, not most teachers. But the fact is this; children are natural sponges. Even when they think they don't, they want to learn. If they're not learning, it's because they're not being taught!

The real reason the teacher's union is against standardized testing has nothing to do with "the children". Because those tests don't tell us which students are failing. They tell us which teachers are. And that scares the shit out of them. Until the backs of the teachers' unions are broken in this country, public schools cannot compete.

Also, individual schools must have the discretion to use the funds they are given as best they see fit, since every school has its own unique needs and challenges based on its location. And finally, we need to pay the teachers more. A lot more. We will never attract the best and brightest to educate our future generations on $28,000/yr. And no more of this equal pay or seniority shit. Merit system, baby! Good teachers get raises. Bad teachers get fired.

That's my solution to the public school mess. I think it's better than vouchers. Thoughts?

593 Russkilitlover  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:33:43pm

re: #557 Salamantis


George Bernard Shaw (in a letter to Leo Tolstoy, circa 1919)

But Tolstoy died in 1910. If this letter date is correct, then GBS is just a bit chicken shit to not have addressed this to Tolstoy while he was alive.

594 reine.de.tout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:34:46pm

re: #587 captkirk35

I'll take a look.


Howver, that might be the strategy of this particular group (although a simple search of the article turns up no hits of the word "Jesus"), but since when did they get equated with the entire movement? I'm a part of no organized ID movement, so count me as perhaps the one and only voice who does not have this goal, as it relates to how science is taught in schools), but is perfectly fine w/ this legislation.

It is the strategy of many groups wanting big changes in any aspect of our way of life to do it slowly and incrementally, beginning with small, non-controversial steps, and building on those first steps until change is complete.

595 yehoshua  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:34:51pm

I am really confused by the secular fanatics on this web site.
You are at one with Al Gore, Obama, and the ACLU on this issue. All I can say is Hurrah for Jindal!

596 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:35:29pm

re: #587 captkirk35

Oh for Pete's sake. I will repeat myself because it's necessary.

Phillip Johnson- father of the current ID movement has said:

Johnson calls his movement "The Wedge." The objective, he said, is to convince people that Darwinism is inherently atheistic, thus shifting the debate from creationism vs. evolution to the existence of God vs. the non-existence of God. From there people are introduced to "the truth" of the Bible and then "the question of sin" and finally "introduced to Jesus."

597 captkirk35  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:35:31pm

re: #591 Killgore Trout

seems to me like an easy way to dismiss it. Waste of money... surely there's lower hanging fruit than this if the goal is simply an economic one.

598 Salamantis  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:37:35pm

What I worry about are all the creationist high school science teachers in Louisiana who are now free to order the latest version of confusion and obfuscation from the Discovery Institute and stuff it down their young and impressionable public school students' throats from a position of pedagogic authority - and all the creationist principles and school board majorities who will surely mandate that such 'supplemental materials' be used as informational resources.

That will last until the lawsuits begin to roll in, demanding equal time for every creation myth that has an acolyte in a Louisiana public school district. And then the entire system will be thrown into chaos, and it will be the students who suffer the most from it all.

599 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:37:49pm
600 abu boo boo  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:38:08pm

re: #585 Sharmuta

Oh- fercryinoutloud! What is my point? What is my point?! You can't even figure out my point, and yet you think children will be able to figure out the difference between science and theology in middle school and high school?!

No, I think they need to learn to tell the difference. And I can't see how insulating them from ideas that are debated and discussed outside of school is a good thing.

601 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:38:47pm

As was the case with certain bloggers making alliances with other groups-

It might be best to take a look at who you're being asked to align with before you toss in your support. You might just be surprised at what you find.

602 captkirk35  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:39:46pm

re: #594 reine.de.tout

The aim of this movement is not to replace science with some bible-based version of how the world exists. I don't think that's fair at all. They might have a parallel goal to bring people to Christ. But both the goal of loosening the stanglehold of the conventional wisdom as taught in science classrooms, as well as spreading their faith can live together, and not directly overlap.

603 reine.de.tout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:39:57pm

re: #595 yehoshua

I am really confused by the secular fanatics on this web site.
You are at one with Al Gore, Obama, and the ACLU on this issue. All I can say is Hurrah for Jindal!

I am not a "secular fanatic". I am a Christian. My daughter learns our faith from us at home, in our church, and at religion class. She is not taught faith in her science classes, she is taught science in her science classes. And she attends a Catholic school.

People here simply believe that science courses should be science, and religion should be taught at home, in the house of one's faith, and in religious classes.

604 Salamantis  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:40:11pm

re: #593 Russkilitlover

George Bernard Shaw (pronounced /ˈbɝːnɚd ˈʃɔː/[1]) (26 July 1856 – 2 November 1950) was an Irish playwright. Born in Dublin, he moved to London at the age of twenty and lived in England for the remainder of his life.

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

605 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:40:12pm

re: #600 abu boo boo

No, I think they need to learn to tell the difference. And I can't see how insulating them from ideas that are debated and discussed outside of school is a good thing.

Does that discussion really belong in the science classroom, of should it be in a class on logic or philosophy?

606 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:40:15pm
607 Franktalk  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:40:38pm

re: #579 twons

Nope - but scientific research has built upon the work of earlier scientists, including the majority of whom firmly believe in evolution by natural selection.

other stuff deleted

I don't give Darwin credit for man's quest for knowledge. I give him credit for contributing to man's knowledge, in a way that fits extremely well with the observable world, in my opinion. To demonize Darwin, or any scientist, is dumb without measure to me.

You say "majority of whom firmly believe" and "in my opinion" but what makes that belief or opinion any more valid than another? Many may say that there are just too many words in the English language, they may believe that if we get rid of some it will easier to teach the youth. Lets have a show of hands and make a list of all of the words that we can discard. After all if we cast off ideas then words are no problem. Next on the list is thoughts.

608 reine.de.tout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:41:04pm

re: #602 captkirk35

The aim of this movement is not to replace science with some bible-based version of how the world exists. I don't think that's fair at all. They might have a parallel goal to bring people to Christ. But both the goal of loosening the stanglehold of the conventional wisdom as taught in science classrooms, as well as spreading their faith can live together, and not directly overlap.

Faith and science can indeed live together - one is taught in science class; the other is taught at home, in church or in religion class.

609 captkirk35  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:41:07pm

re: #596 Sharmuta

Fair enough.

I guess he's not my Father then.

610 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:41:30pm
611 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:44:10pm

re: #602 captkirk35

You are not listening/reading.

"This isn't really, and never has been a debate about science. Its about religion and philosophy."

-Phillip Johnson.

Read the Wedge, not just search it for "Jesus". Read this, too. Unless, of course, you're afraid of being exposed to the truth about the ID movement. If so- I'm surprised you can handle the rest of the truth that gets exposed at this site daily.

612 Killgore Trout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:44:33pm

re: #597 captkirk35

Well, we're still dealing with idiotic anti science debate an this thread. The real issue is that this is another example of Jindal's poor judgment and lack of executive responsibility. The bill is doomed, he's just wasting millions of dollars that could be put to good use. It could be used towards education. Louisiana already has one of the worst school systems in the country.

613 captkirk35  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:45:08pm

re: #608 reine.de.tout

I can't disagree. However, the point of ID.. of MY ID.. is to question the absolutism of the conventional wisdom that Darwin's theory answers questions of existence with a high degree of accruacy, when that is very much in question. I don't think that's asking for too much.

614 Salamantis  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:45:27pm

Russkiltlover, my guess is that the earlier correspondence between them was published in 1919, or else the date is incorrect.

615 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:45:51pm

re: #612 Killgore Trout

You're right, Killgore. This will get taken to court, and that's just money poorly spent on the part of Louisiana.

616 reine.de.tout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:46:13pm

re: #612 Killgore Trout

Well, we're still dealing with idiotic anti science debate an this thread. The real issue is that this is another example of Jindal's poor judgment and lack of executive responsibility. The bill is doomed, he's just wasting millions of dollars that could be put to good use. It could be used towards education. Louisiana already has one of the worst school systems in the country.

I would be willing to bet Louisiana has the worst school system in the country. Businesses refuse to locate here based solely on their assessment of what the school system will provide for their employees children.

617 Moishe3rd  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:46:48pm

I apologize for not reading all 610 comments here, but I don't understand the problem.
I read Charles' comment of woe.
I read the link.
And, it doesn't seem to me to be a big deal. Was the bill an advocation of Creationist theology? Or even Intelligent Design?
If not, could someone point out to me the flaws or problems with this bill?
Thanks!

618 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:47:07pm

re: #613 captkirk35

You can personally believe whatever you'd like. But that is NOT what the discovery institute is doing. They want to push religion off as science on unsuspecting school kids. THAT is what is going on here.

619 MJ  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:47:22pm

re: #612 Killgore Trout

Well, we're still dealing with idiotic anti science debate an this thread. The real issue is that this is another example of Jindal's poor judgment and lack of executive responsibility. The bill is doomed, he's just wasting millions of dollars that could be put to good use. It could be used towards education. Louisiana already has one of the worst school systems in the country.

It's pandering of the worst kind.
Just like his castration bill.
Both will be declared unconstitutional.

620 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:48:14pm

re: #617 Moishe3rd

We could tell you , but it might take another 600 some odd comments. Or you could, you know- read the thread.

621 Killgore Trout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:48:21pm

re: #613 captkirk35

when that is very much in question.


No, it's not. There are people who believe the earth is flat, the gunman on the grassy knoll and that 911 was an inside job. Although there are people who question reality nobody takes them seriously. There's a difference.

622 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:48:30pm

re: #616 reine.de.tout

I would be willing to bet Louisiana has the worst school system in the country.

Mississippi and Arkansas are up there.

623 Killgore Trout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:49:23pm

re: #617 Moishe3rd

Was the bill an advocation of Creationist theology? Or even Intelligent Design?


Yes, it came from the Discovery Institute.

624 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:49:32pm

re: #564 usmc1968

I'm persuaded to think I'll see Christmas. Thanks

(back in later)
May the persuasion be extended!

625 DistantThunder  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:50:05pm

Why Bobby, Why?

626 Moishe3rd  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:50:18pm

re: #620 Sharmuta

Sure, I tried at random to do just that.
However, I am still clueless as to what the bill actually advocates. Based on the comments and the link, it advocates discussion...
What am I missing?

627 Killgore Trout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:50:41pm

re: #619 MJ

Allah Pundit suspect that these are to appease his base because they're pissed about doubling the legislature's salaries. This guy's an irresponsible mess.

628 captkirk35  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:50:48pm

re: #618 Sharmuta

I'll read more about the goals of this institute,but from what I have been able to determine, what you say is not true, and very unfair.

629 yehoshua  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:52:01pm

re: #610 buzzsawmonkey

People feel so clever when they advocate for evolution. The direct creation of man by God -- from dust and a divine breath/soul -- is too simple for our way too sophisticated intellects to appreciate

630 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:52:31pm

re: #628 captkirk35

Nope. I wasn't sure what to think until Charles linked to the Wedge Document, and I did some research. I speak the truth about DI, as others here will attest to.

631 Josephine  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:52:32pm

re: #153 lawhawk

Gore's propaganda is already being used to indoctrinate Canadian students.

From the National Post last year:

"First it was his world history class. Then he saw it in his economics class. And his world issues class. And his environment class. In total, 18-year-old McKenzie, a Northern Ontario high schooler, says he has had the film An Inconvenient Truth shown to him by four different teachers this year.

"'I really don't understand why they keep showing it,' says McKenzie (his parents asked that his last name not be used). 'I've spoken to the principal about it, and he said that teachers are instructed to present it as a debate. But every time we've seen it, well, one teacher said this is basically a two-sided debate, but this movie really gives you the best idea of what's going on...

"But Mr. Gore's filmed climate-change lecture is showing up in classrooms across Canada, frequently unaccompanied by critical analysis or a discussion of competing theories. 'One of the teachers at my kid's school showed it and he even said ahead of time, 'There is some propaganda in this,' ' says Tim Patterson, a Carleton University earth sciences professor. 'I said to him, 'You even knew this was a propaganda film, and you still showed it in your classroom?' The weirdest part: It was the gym teacher..."

632 reine.de.tout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:55:06pm

re: #617 Moishe3rd

I apologize for not reading all 610 comments here, but I don't understand the problem.
I read Charles' comment of woe.
I read the link.
And, it doesn't seem to me to be a big deal. Was the bill an advocation of Creationist theology? Or even Intelligent Design?
If not, could someone point out to me the flaws or problems with this bill?
Thanks!

If you are sincere in wanting to understand what is going on, read the "wedge" document linked by Sharmuta, and then the lawhawk posts I linked to below:
re: #611 Sharmuta

Read the Wedge, not just search it for "Jesus". Read this, too. Unless, of course, you're afraid of being exposed to the truth about the ID movement. If so- I'm surprised you can handle the rest of the truth that gets exposed at this site daily.

re: #153 lawhawk
re: #216 lawhawk

633 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:55:12pm
634 Moishe3rd  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:55:36pm

re: #623 Killgore Trout

Yes, it came from the Discovery Institute.

Thank you.
Okay - Googling, I get:

National Center for Science Education

Louisiana antievolution bill passes Senate

Senate Bill 733 (PDF), the so-called Louisiana Science Education Act, was unanimously passed by the Louisiana Senate on April 28, 2008. If enacted, the bill would call upon the state board of elementary and secondary education to "allow and assist" teachers and administrators to "create and foster an environment within public elementary and secondary schools that promotes critical thinking skills, logical analysis, and open and objective discussion of scientific theories being studied including, but not limited to, evolution, the origins of life, global warming, and human cloning." Included would be "support and guidance for teachers regarding effective ways to help students understand, analyze, critique, and objectively review [the] scientific theories being studied"; teachers would be permitted to use "supplemental textbooks and other instructional materials to help students understand, analyze, critique, and review scientific theories in an objective manner, as permitted by the city, parish, or other local public school board."


What am I missing?
This is a problem... Why?

635 Salamantis  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:55:40pm

Franktalk, that majority of scientists who subscribe to evolutionary theory do so because they have perused the evidence for it. I will not say that they believe in evolutionary theory, because belief occurs in the absence of evidence, and is what intyelligent design acolytes and other creationists do.

The very artifactual retroviral DNA sequences in positions in our genes isomorphic to the positions that identical sequences occupy in our primate relatives, with whom we share around 99 % of our DNA, is evidence for evolutionary theory; the repeatable-under-controlled-conditions laboratory proof of bacterial evolution is evidence for evolutionary theory, the progressive discovery of more and more transitional forms which continue to more fully fill in the fossil record is evidence for evolutionary theory. With so much evidence for it, scientists have no need for belief.

636 see bs  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:55:54pm

re: #603 reine.de.tout


People here simply believe that science courses should be science, and religion should be taught at home, in the house of one's faith, and in religious classes.

Nicely Put

637 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:56:35pm
638 reine.de.tout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:57:05pm

re: #628 captkirk35

I'll read more about the goals of this institute,but from what I have been able to determine, what you say is not true, and very unfair.

I'm with Sharmuta on this, made a similar journey about this issue.

639 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:57:28pm

re: #629 yehoshua

People feel so clever when they advocate for evolution. The direct creation of man by God -- from dust and a divine breath/soul -- is too simple for our way too sophisticated intellects to appreciate

We can appreciate it just fine. Can you appreciate the fact that it's...

JUST

NOT

SCIENCE!?!

640 Moishe3rd  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:59:08pm

re: #632 reine.de.tout

re: #153 lawhawk
re: #216 lawhawk

I did not read "the Wedge." I was interested in the bill. Am I incorrect in what I posted above?
I really don't get it.
(I assume the "Wedge" is some sort of Creationist tract put out by the Discovery Institute who are reportedly responsible for this bill. Are you all dealing with the "slippery slope issue here?)

641 MJ  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 3:59:09pm

re: #627 Killgore Trout

Allah Pundit suspect that these are to appease his base because they're pissed about doubling the legislature's salaries. This guy's an irresponsible mess.

That makes sense.
He also may want to position himself way to the right of McCain in the hopes that McCain will pick him for VP since there is wide-spread belief that MCain needs someone to appeal to the "conservative wing" of the party.

642 debutaunt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:00:29pm

re: #592 Lizard by the Bay

I think you're a little naive about the problems of public schools. Competition will not "help" them, it will close them. And that's because they cannot compete with private schools, partially because of the way money given to schools is earmarked for exceptionally narrow purposes, and also because the public schools cannot do the one critical thing a private school can: fire bad teachers.

There are a lot of things you can do to a car to make it drive better (tire pressure, well-lubed steering column, etc.), but the biggest factor in how well a car drives is the driver. And now I will commit what Dems consider to be the worst possible sin: I am going to blame teachers for the state of our public schools. No, not all teachers. In fact, not most teachers. But the fact is this; children are natural sponges. Even when they think they don't, they want to learn. If they're not learning, it's because they're not being taught!

The real reason the teacher's union is against standardized testing has nothing to do with "the children". Because those tests don't tell us which students are failing. They tell us which teachers are. And that scares the shit out of them. Until the backs of the teachers' unions are broken in this country, public schools cannot compete.

Also, individual schools must have the discretion to use the funds they are given as best they see fit, since every school has its own unique needs and challenges based on its location. And finally, we need to pay the teachers more. A lot more. We will never attract the best and brightest to educate our future generations on $28,000/yr. And no more of this equal pay or seniority shit. Merit system, baby! Good teachers get raises. Bad teachers get fired.

That's my solution to the public school mess. I think it's better than vouchers. Thoughts?

You just described competition - I'm with ya.

643 reine.de.tout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:00:45pm

re: #627 Killgore Trout

Allah Pundit suspect that these are to appease his base because they're pissed about doubling the legislature's salaries. This guy's an irresponsible mess.

No, this was in the works before the legislative pay raise mess. Jindal is in big trouble with a lot of supporters, including myself, for this, the legislative pay raise mess, and part of his problem is that he has surrounded himself with employees and appointees who are less than the best, who know very little about state government, and who isolate him from knowledgeable people.

644 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:01:49pm

re: #642 debutaunt

You just described competition - I'm with ya.

Vouchers alone will not create this competition you hope for. Can you see that? The public school system must be purged of the unions first, or else any voucher system is just giving up.

645 reine.de.tout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:02:58pm

re: #640 Moishe3rd

I did not read "the Wedge." I was interested in the bill. Am I incorrect in what I posted above?
I really don't get it.
(I assume the "Wedge" is some sort of Creationist tract put out by the Discovery Institute who are reportedly responsible for this bill. Are you all dealing with the "slippery slope issue here?)

If you read the bill and the two comments by lawhawk, you'll have the gist. I would urge you to become familiar with the "wedge" document - this bill, in my opinion, is the first step in a slow and incremental implementation of teaching ID in schools.

646 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:03:12pm

re: #638 reine.de.tout

I'm with Sharmuta on this, made a similar journey about this issue.

Yes- we are sisters on this journey. Mwah!

647 reine.de.tout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:05:10pm

re: #646 Sharmuta

Yes- we are sisters on this journey. Mwah!

mwah back atcha.

648 yehoshua  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:06:12pm

re: #639 Lizard by the Bay

Keep in mind that it's just the theory of evolution, which is no more scientific than belief in God.

649 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:08:11pm
650 CapeCoddah  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:08:40pm

Good evening all, This is beyond outrageous. I wonder if it will be challenged under separation of church and state? I have a feeling it will not be long, and has a good chance of being struck down, as the theory is PURELY religious.

651 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:08:54pm

re: #648 yehoshua

Keep in mind that it's just the theory of evolution, which is no more scientific than belief in God.

Keep in mind that your understanding of the words "scientific theroy" is deeply flawed.

652 debutaunt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:11:17pm

re: #644 Lizard by the Bay

Vouchers alone will not create this competition you hope for. Can you see that? The public school system must be purged of the unions first, or else any voucher system is just giving up.

We are in agreement about unions being a huge problem. To me, the voucher represents a part of the solution that points out that people are being stuck with schools they wouldn't choose on their own. If they could get their children in the very best school, they would. Now they must pay taxes for public schools and if possible, tuition for private schools. Doing that is very expensive and has no positive effect on improving the public schools.

653 reine.de.tout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:11:48pm

It seems to me there are some folks who have registered just for the sheer joy of being able to jump into these threads.

I've also seen others complain about these threads as a "distraction" from the terrorisim and islam threads.

Those are critically important for keeping us informed - but there is really not that much discussion on those threads - there may have been at first (before my time), but now, people are so aware, that there isn't the need for a lot of discussion.

This issue is also an important one. It has to do with the general dumbing down of that part of the population who are not fortunate enough to be able to attend private schools where an attention to genuine education is still the norm.

This issue is not getting the national attention it needs to be gettting. I had never heard of the "wedge" document until these threads started popping up, but now I am ever so grateful to know about this.

This is the power of bloggers. Issues cannot be kept in the dark any longer when the MSM or those with influence want the issues kept low-key.

Complaints about these threads are way out of line, in my opinion. If a person does not want to participate, then don't.

654 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:13:20pm

re: #652 debutaunt

I guess I'm just looking for a larger solution that helps everyone, not just those who will be able to use vouchers to move their kids out of public schools. I'm trying to save an education system, not a handful of kids.

655 reine.de.tout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:14:08pm

re: #652 debutaunt

We are in agreement about unions being a huge problem. To me, the voucher represents a part of the solution that points out that people are being stuck with schools they wouldn't choose on their own. If they could get their children in the very best school, they would. Now they must pay taxes for public schools and if possible, tuition for private schools. Doing that is very expensive and has no positive effect on improving the public schools.

I have been "for" vouchers - but the fly in the ointment, here, to me, is this . . . could these be used for private madrassahs in the U.S? Ouch. Not saying I am against vouchers right now, but I think it needs some thinking through.

656 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:15:02pm

re: #649 buzzsawmonkey

You are using a bullshit definition of the word "theory."

Hear hear !

/beyond that, biting my f*ng tongue!

657 DavidM01  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:15:53pm

600+ posts! Well I guess it is to be expected. Its pretty sad though when a bill is needed to allow debate, especially in a school.

For those of you who think I am off track, please post for me evidence(not theory) about the origin of life. You can't because there isn't any.

So the opponents of this debate are saying "We don't know how life began but we are sure it wasn't an Intelligent outside force." The scientific method at work!

There is no evidence(not even a shred) of how abiogenesis has ever occured. Period. Until we have some there is only theories. Its odd the 'scientific' side of the argument doesn't want to hear a theory which happens to fits the facts(everything has a cause).

658 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:16:54pm

re: #655 reine.de.tout

That's my principle opposition to them too, as stated several times up-thread. That's the single biggest strike against vouchers.

659 MJ  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:17:14pm

re: #653 reine.de.tout

Complaints about these threads are way out of line, in my opinion. If a person does not want to participate, then don't.

What they are really complaining about is losing the argument.
Instead of taking their marbles and going home, they say we are distracting attention from the real problems.

660 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:17:16pm

re: #657 DavidM01

*sigh*

Here we go again.

661 reine.de.tout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:20:11pm

re: #660 Sharmuta

DavidM01

Registered since: May 8, 2008 at 5:52 pm
No. of comments posted: 4
No. of links posted: 0

Methinks this person may be one who registered for the sheer joy of being able to jump into these threads.

662 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:21:50pm

re: #657 DavidM01

600+ posts! Well I guess it is to be expected. Its pretty sad though when a bill is needed to allow debate, especially in a school.

There's no "debate" about it. Religion is not science. Should evolution be debated in science class? Sure, why not? Should "Intelligent Design" or any other supernatural forces existing only as matters of faith be part of the scientific debate? HELL NO!

663 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:25:28pm

re: #653 reine.de.tout

these threads as a "distraction" from the terrorisim and islam threads

The Wedge Document calls for the imposition of a specific theological perspective upon the secular life of this nation.

The DI's vision of the future differs from those who advocate the imposition of Islamist Sharia only in matters of detail.

I am NOT saying that the DI is a Christian equivalent of radical Islamism.

I AM saying that discussion about forces which are on record as wanting to impose religion upon the secular is VERY pertinent.

664 Killgore Trout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:25:52pm

The Freepers are upset.

665 reine.de.tout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:26:28pm

re: #663 pre-Boomer Marine brat

I AM saying that discussion about forces which are on record as wanting to impose religion upon the secular is VERY pertinent.

Yes, indeed, I agree with you.

666 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:29:03pm

re: #663 pre-Boomer Marine brat

Like Reine- I agree with you, too.

667 FinnAgain  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:30:28pm

It's like playing whack-a-mole, except the moles are smarmier.

668 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:31:22pm

re: #667 FinnAgain

It's like playing whack-a-mole, except the moles are smarmier.

Worse- they think they're morally superior.

669 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:32:05pm

re: #665 reine.de.tout

Yes, indeed, I agree with you.

And (obviously, I hope) I with you.

I am amazed my tongue is still intact. I shut down once to cool off. Why th' hell did I come BACK into this thread?! Please reach through your modem and smack me up aside the head.

670 debutaunt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:32:07pm

re: #655 reine.de.tout

I have been "for" vouchers - but the fly in the ointment, here, to me, is this . . . could these be used for private madrassahs in the U.S? Ouch. Not saying I am against vouchers right now, but I think it needs some thinking through.

I'm concerned that we are already paying for them. It's frightening.

671 gman  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:32:18pm

re: #220 dave in NC

so happy to see the secularists get pi**ed off about this; they've had it all their way for far too long.

Ahh... the old "satan- possessed secularists are encroaching on religion" conspiracy theory.

672 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:33:18pm

re: #669 pre-Boomer Marine brat

No- I think the discussion is important. I'm glad you cam back.

673 Josephine  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:34:07pm

re: #213 Adrenalyn

You weren't allowed in the church for your own brother's wedding? Wow.

674 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:34:33pm

re: #599 buzzsawmonkey

Show me one "secular fanatic" here.

Yeah! I thought we were the "high five club". ;)

675 debutaunt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:35:58pm

re: #654 Lizard by the Bay

I guess I'm just looking for a larger solution that helps everyone, not just those who will be able to use vouchers to move their kids out of public schools. I'm trying to save an education system, not a handful of kids.



My hope is that public schools will compete and people will happily put their kids in them because they are equal to or better than the private school down the street. I really want to see our schools improve in every situation.

676 gman  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:37:32pm

re: #653 reine.de.tout

It seems to me there are some folks who have registered just for the sheer joy of being able to jump into these threads.

I've also seen others complain about these threads as a "distraction" from the terrorisim and islam threads.

Those are critically important for keeping us informed - but there is really not that much discussion on those threads - there may have been at first (before my time), but now, people are so aware, that there isn't the need for a lot of discussion.

This issue is also an important one. It has to do with the general dumbing down of that part of the population who are not fortunate enough to be able to attend private schools where an attention to genuine education is still the norm.

This issue is not getting the national attention it needs to be gettting. I had never heard of the "wedge" document until these threads started popping up, but now I am ever so grateful to know about this.

This is the power of bloggers. Issues cannot be kept in the dark any longer when the MSM or those with influence want the issues kept low-key.

Complaints about these threads are way out of line, in my opinion. If a person does not want to participate, then don't.

It's ironic and funny (in a tragic sense) how the posters you mentioned always say they are tired of the ID threads when they only have a few comments to their nic, all posted on guess which kind of thread- ID.

677 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:38:02pm

re: #672 Sharmuta

No- I think the discussion is important. I'm glad you cam back.

Oh, I agree! It's that I've got better things to do than argue with fenceposts. ... welll, no ... when that fencepost took after zombie ... *BITE TONGUE*

WHY am I HERE?
DAMMIT, I've gotta get some supper!

(mwah! Sharmuta)

678 Milk Toast Intolerant  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:39:04pm

re: #657 DavidM01

600+ posts! Well I guess it is to be expected. Its pretty sad though when a bill is needed to allow debate, especially in a school.

For those of you who think I am off track, please post for me evidence(not theory) about the origin of life. You can't because there isn't any.

So the opponents of this debate are saying "We don't know how life began but we are sure it wasn't an Intelligent outside force." The scientific method at work!

There is no evidence(not even a shred) of how abiogenesis has ever occured. Period. Until we have some there is only theories. Its odd the 'scientific' side of the argument doesn't want to hear a theory which happens to fits the facts(everything has a cause).

Some of us are saying we believe a higher power created life, but since we don't have enough fact to prove it, we should stick with the knowledge that we do have. Believe me, I am not a subscriber of macro evolution, but I'll take the other 99% that science offers. That's plenty to learn in one life time.

679 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:39:35pm

re: #675 debutaunt


My hope is that public schools will compete and people will happily put their kids in them because they are equal to or better than the private school down the street. I really want to see our schools improve in every situation.

I'd like to see our public schools be able to compete with the private sector too, but first we must overhaul the rules they operate under before that is ever possible.

680 debutaunt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:40:59pm

re: #679 Lizard by the Bay

I'd like to see our public schools be able to compete with the private sector too, but first we must overhaul the rules they operate under before that is ever possible.

Ideas?

681 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:41:26pm

re: #677 pre-Boomer Marine brat

Well- since my ID enlightenment (thanks to our gracious host) I have had a couple people post back to me that they now understand what the controversy is- much like Reine and I experienced from Charles' links. It is possible to get through to people, and very gratifying when it happens. I'm not going to stop pointing out the Truth, and it's good to know I'm not alone.

682 FloatingRock  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:41:37pm

re: #655 reine.de.tout

I have been "for" vouchers - but the fly in the ointment, here, to me, is this . . . could these be used for private madrassahs in the U.S? Ouch. Not saying I am against vouchers right now, but I think it needs some thinking through.

+1, although in my case I apposed them from the beginning, but for the same reason.

683 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:42:07pm

re: #671 gman

Ahh... the old "satan- possessed secularists are encroaching on religion" conspiracy theory.

*grin*
Yeah, whotta theory.

In college (history major), I did an upper-division paper on the Scopes Trial. Studied the transcript in detail. Etc. Etc.

Oh, the evil satan-possessed secularists!

684 Josephine  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:42:39pm

re: #234 WriterMom

OT: Better Mailbox Than Charles or Zombie?

I'm going to have nightmares for sure after reading just a few of those.

/Religion of Peace!

685 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:42:53pm

re: #680 debutaunt

Ideas?

Re-read post #592. It's all in there. Until that happens, there can be no true "competition".

686 debutaunt  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:45:37pm

re: #685 Lizard by the Bay

Re-read post #592. It's all in there. Until that happens, there can be no true "competition".

I'm an optimistic person and hope you are on the right track.

687 gman  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:49:32pm

re: #655 reine.de.tout

I have been "for" vouchers - but the fly in the ointment, here, to me, is this . . . could these be used for private madrassahs in the U.S? Ouch. Not saying I am against vouchers right now, but I think it needs some thinking through.

They could absolutely be used for private madrassahs unless there was some system to monitor them set up by the state or federal government (an unpleasant necessity).

688 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:53:34pm

re: #681 Sharmuta

enlightenment

Yes. In my ignorance, I figured ID was innocuous. Maybe it in itself is, but I hadn't heard of the Wedge Document. Anything can be innocuous, and harmless, until someone else begins wanting to cram it down my throat.

I believe God created the universe. I do NOT want ID/creationists telling me that I have to believe in THEIR version of it.

/dammit, gotta fix supper!

689 palarson  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:54:25pm

Christians such as myself do appreciate the appearance of a chink or two in the armor of the teaching of evolution as dogma in the public schools for which I pay and my children attend. But don't add bias to a fact just because of the glee it may or may not cause its supporters or detractors. Thats not scientific.

All praise to our mighty God, er, intelligent design. Lets just all hope his is not the intelligence of a highly advanced carnivore.

690 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:55:24pm

re: #685 Lizard by the Bay

Curse you for making me scroll up! ;)

I agree that the teacher's union has too much power, and you touch on one of my favorite government topics- spending! It always comes down to spending.

I have discussed this time and time again with people about a wide range of government spending issues from education, to transportation, to you-name-it. It's the WAY government spends it's money.

First- baseline budgeting- bad idea. Let's say the baseline is 10% increase. Are there programs that can do just fine with less, say a 3% increase? This is more cost effective, and would free up money for other programs that might actually need more than 10%.

Second- the whole spending the entirety of the yearly budget. This is just not how any business or household would spend it's money- period. There is no incentive for programs or departments to save money. If they don't spend it all, they get their budget cut for the next year- that's about as asinine as it gets.

Third- red tape dictating HOW the programs spend their money. We'll go with schools for this one, since that's the context of our discussion. One school in a district might need books, while another might need to improve equipment like microscopes. However- the government might earmark the money for books for both schools. That's not helpful to one of the schools, and directly interferes with the children's education.

Give programs an incentive to save, quit with baseline budgeting, and cut the red tape. I think we'd all be amazed at the amount of money that the government would leave in our pockets, as well as improved conditions in all of our government programs- not just education.

691 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:58:04pm

re: #690 Sharmuta

I couldn't agree with you more on every point. Let the schools spend the money they way they determine they need to, and make teaching jobs a meritocracy. That's the solution.

692 Slumbering Behemoth  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 4:58:05pm

Wow, and I thought some folks were coming unhinged and behaving irrationally when Charles starting posting honest, deserved criticism of Gov. Huckabee. Little did I know that the insanity knob goes to 12.

Here's to Charles! I raise my glass to you sir. You are doing a great job of keeping this blog on focus by exposing idiotarianism wherever and whenever it rears it's ugly head.

693 FloatingRock  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:01:17pm

re: #671 gman

Ahh... the old "satan- possessed secularists are encroaching on religion" conspiracy theory.

In one of the ID threads over at HotAir several of the creationists made repeated attempts to link atheism and science together at the hip. It was implied by several, (and I think stated outright by one or more), that science was the religion of atheism.

694 gman  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:02:56pm

I think overall vouchers have many more advantages over the present system. Any time you give someone the right to invest in the school of their choice, you give them the satisfaction of being a vested partner in their child's education. The level of accountability at schools also rises immensely because schools have to compete for students. Schools no longer have the entitlement of all of the students within their boundaries.

695 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:04:28pm

re: #693 FloatingRock

In one of the ID threads over at HotAir several of the creationists made repeated attempts to link atheism and science together at the hip. It was implied by several, (and I think stated outright by one or more), that science was the religion of atheism.

That's the "Ben Stein Maneuver". Linking evolution to fascism is not beneath them either.

696 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:07:07pm

re: #691 Lizard by the Bay

I couldn't agree with you more on every point. Let the schools spend the money they way they determine they need to, and make teaching jobs a meritocracy. That's the solution.

The public schools are going to have to do something, because even without vouchers they are losing students every year to private schools and homeschooling.

697 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:07:30pm

re: #694 gman

I think overall vouchers have many more advantages over the present system. Any time you give someone the right to invest in the school of their choice, you give them the satisfaction of being a vested partner in their child's education. The level of accountability at schools also rises immensely because schools have to compete for students. Schools no longer have the entitlement of all of the students within their boundaries.

gman,

I know you're late to the thread but I believe (I'd like to think anyway) that I've pretty satisfactorily savaged the notion of public schools being able to "compete" with private schools given the restrictions they currently operate under. Feel free to read my posts about it if you'd like.

698 infidelinc  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:07:49pm

Just what we need... 'superstitious' whiners.
I knew the elimination of dodgeball was going to lead to all sorts of nonsense.

699 Quintus_Arius  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:08:04pm

I remember the sophisticated threads LGF of yesteryear. None were more lively than the comments of the believers and the nonbelievers. I thought there was much mutual respect. Always keeping an eye on a common strategy. Then it was moonbats and the LLL that were in the cross-hairs.

This thread regarding 'creationism' and 'evolution theory' seems to be very counter productive. I am a product of an excellent public school system that introduced neither into the classroom. It is a detriment to the public schools to get people at one another's throats over such issues.

Listing detriments, we could go all night, but it might be wise to take on the root causes. What/who is really causing the demise?

When worrying about what is being taught to children around the world it is not the public or private schools in Louisiana that I'm most concerned about.

700 PatrioticAmerican  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:08:41pm

Oh, the handwringing!

Why all the fuss about discussing issues and theories that challenge existing dogma? Or, in the case of the liberals, propaganda and indocrination.

The topics, if relevant to history, philosophy, or social studies, should be aired out and presented in objective ways. That way, children who are hearing only parts of these topics can make up their own minds about what holds water and what doesn't.

There needn't be an effort to silence differing views. That doesn't somehow validate Truth. In fact, it results in endless "battles" that are pointless and unproductive.

We want critical thinkers in our country. Now kool aid drinkers.

701 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:08:45pm

Also- a lot of schools' funding is based on attendance. They lose students- they lose money. Somehow they have to figure out how to keep the kids in school.

Here's a clue for them- actually try educating our kids.

702 Slumbering Behemoth  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:08:46pm

re: #692 Slumbering Behemoth

To that I would also like to add that I am proud to have the privilege of posting here, and to be in the company of so many rational and intelligent people. My intellect is increased simply by being in the presence of so many learned Lizards.

703 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:10:18pm

re: #700 PatrioticAmerican

You...didn't read the thread, did you?

704 Charles  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:12:37pm

Here comes the evening shift.

705 ladycatnip  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:13:35pm

#670 debutante

re: #655 reine.de.tout

I have been "for" vouchers - but the fly in the ointment, here, to me, is this . . . could these be used for private madrassahs in the U.S? Ouch. Not saying I am against vouchers right now, but I think it needs some thinking through.

I'm concerned that we are already paying for them. It's frightening.

Yes, we ARE paying for them. Charles has posted about the Virginia islamic "public" school in which they teach the koran, pray, and indoctrinate children to hate the Jews and the infidels in their textbooks.

We can argue evolution/creation/ID/BigBang till we're blue in the face, all while the enemy of our freedom and our way of life is educating their children via our tax dollars right under our noses!

Speaking as a believing Christian, I hesitate to allow any religious philosophy or belief taught in our public school system, simply because it means opening the doors to islam in our schools.

706 Thanos  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:14:01pm

re: #327 wolf

[Link: www.positiveatheism.org...]

707 Thanos  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:16:22pm

This sure knocks the pins out from under trying to address what they are teaching at the Saudi Academy if it stands.

708 ContraJihadi  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:17:38pm

re: #571 Salamantis

Unfortunately, a similar logic applies to the claim that the universe did not have a first cause, for then the chain of causes would be infinite. But this is the same as to say that there are no causes at all, since no purported cause would have a sufficient reason to explain it.

Compare Kant's Critique of Metaphysics, especially section 4.

709 jaunte  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:18:34pm

The drinking word tonight must be 'sophisticated.'

710 Thanos  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:19:20pm

re: #700 PatrioticAmerican

Oh, the handwringing!

Why all the fuss about discussing issues and theories that challenge existing dogma? Or, in the case of the liberals, propaganda and indocrination.

The topics, if relevant to history, philosophy, or social studies, should be aired out and presented in objective ways. That way, children who are hearing only parts of these topics can make up their own minds about what holds water and what doesn't.

There needn't be an effort to silence differing views. That doesn't somehow validate Truth. In fact, it results in endless "battles" that are pointless and unproductive.

We want critical thinkers in our country. Now kool aid drinkers.

And those topics should be taught in the proper venue: Philosophy in Philosophy, Comparative World Religions in History, etc. Science needs to be taught in Science, not retreading old controversies and treating them as if they were monumental when most are past and somewhat decided by the prevailing evidence.

711 gman  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:19:37pm

re: #693 FloatingRock

In one of the ID threads over at HotAir several of the creationists made repeated attempts to link atheism and science together at the hip. It was implied by several, (and I think stated outright by one or more), that science was the religion of atheism.

I'm not surprised one bit.
In fact, this topic reminds me of far right/far left convergence
One important commonality of the far left and far right is the lumping of individuals into nameless, faceless groups.
They both then attribute stereotypical characteristics to these artificially constructed groups.
Finally, they use these false constructs to strengthen the bond of their group.

The us vs. them atmosphere created by the use of fear propaganda ensures the strength of the group bond.

712 Salamantis  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:28:55pm

re: #708 ContraJihadi

Unfortunately, a similar logic applies to the claim that the universe did not have a first cause, for then the chain of causes would be infinite. But this is the same as to say that there are no causes at all, since no purported cause would have a sufficient reason to explain it.

Compare Kant's Critique of Metaphysics, especially section 4.

“In the beginning, there was nothing - but nothing is unstable. And nothing borrowed nothing from nothing, within the limits of uncertainty, and became something. The rest is just math.” - Prof. Kim, Macalester College, Physics

713 trendsurfer  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:29:08pm

re: #3 pegcity

i thought America was done with this nonsense


This is what we get when state legislatures are controlled by Republican social conservatives. It's sad to acknowledge but Reagan sowed the seeds of the GOP's demise by bringing these whack-jobs into the Party.

714 gman  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:29:20pm

re: #701 Sharmuta

Also- a lot of schools' funding is based on attendance. They lose students- they lose money. Somehow they have to figure out how to keep the kids in school.

Here's a clue for them- actually try educating our kids.


At my son's school they were throwing parties if kids showed up to school every day. Ridiculous, but the school was just trying to get more funding.

715 HoosierHoops  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:30:18pm

Hi..the Hoopster is in the house.. I said i'd never get involved with an ID/god/creationist/whatever thread.. And i still won't
But i want to give props to someone..
The is like this guy who is considered like the smartest mathmaticians/scientists in the world in Scotland.
This prof is so cool..he struggles with issues of ID/God as a scientist and will discuss it in a frank and honest manner..
He gets about 2 hits/month to his blog cause no one can understand his math and topics..
So blow his mind and go to his site and discuss how the numbers and god add up..the dude is a published genus..
here is his link..
[Link: coraifeartaigh.wordpress.com...]

716 HoosierHoops  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:32:17pm

The is like this guy who is considered like the smartest mathmaticians/scientists in the world in Scotland

ok i blame the beer..like totally

717 Josephine  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:32:59pm

re: #490 Milk Toast Intolerant

I believe in the Genesis account, but it should not be taught in a science class; that's for Sunday school. Next thing we know, our kids will come home and claim Muhammed split the moon in two.

Can you see the Islamists being all over this opportunity? God help us all.

And you know they will. That's another wedge worth considering.

718 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:34:21pm

re: #714 gman

Some states do have laws on the books allowing a form of competition, such as students can attend any public school they wish in the state so long as they can provide transportation for themselves. This has put a bit of pressure on the city schools to compete with suburban schools. It's not necessarily bad, imo, since at some point the city schools will be forced to improve in order to retain students, but we need to figure out a better system for funding the schools instead of this public Ponzi scheme.

719 ContraJihadi  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:36:56pm

re: #712 Salamantis

“In the beginning, there was nothing - but nothing is unstable. And nothing borrowed nothing from nothing, within the limits of uncertainty, and became something. The rest is just math.” - Prof. Kim, Macalester College, Physics

The negation of the negation, hmm?

720 gman  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:40:11pm

re: #697 Lizard by the Bay

gman,

I know you're late to the thread but I believe (I'd like to think anyway) that I've pretty satisfactorily savaged the notion of public schools being able to "compete" with private schools given the restrictions they currently operate under. Feel free to read my posts about it if you'd like.

Thanks. Going back to read your posts now.

721 Thanos  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:42:31pm
In science it often happens that scientists say, "You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken," and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time someting like that happened in politics or religion.
-- Carl Sagan, 1987 CSICOP keynote address
722 Josephine  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:44:04pm

re: #526 buzzsawmonkey

I believe I have never before seen a response which demonstrated such complete, utter and dismal failure to understand that to which the writer was replying as the response quoted above.

This should be preserved in the LGF archives somewhere. Maybe in the "Banging Our Heads Against Our Desks" section. LOL.

723 Josephine  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:44:49pm

re: #527 Sharmuta

Hearted.

724 hazzyday  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:48:07pm

I might still be in the honeymoon phase with Jindal but so far I like him better than most politicians I see. He is an A where most are C's and the rest F's

I do think the concept of separation of church and state is wildly misunderstood on both sides

This statement from the article.--

A leading secular group, the Americans United for Separation of Church and State, has suggested that the bill will spawn litigation, and Marjorie Esman, state director of the American Civil Liberties Union, said, "To the extent that this might invite religion in the public school classroom, we will do everything we can do to keep religion out."

--

Majorie does not explain what she means. I don't think she knows what she is talking about. Much of my public education had religious connotations. As analysis of thought, not as practicing of religion. I was never asked to pray or be saved in a public institution. My relatives pressed me yes. But not the schools. I am far more willing to trust Jindal over the ACLU.

The ACLU is not really interested in individual liberties. IF they were they wouldn't be busy suing small fry to make their larger points. Pretty unethical group of people.

If Jindal is a "young earther" his political career will never go national.

725 DavidM01  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:49:43pm

re: #662 Lizard by the Bay

There's no "debate" about it. Religion is not science. Should evolution be debated in science class? Sure, why not? Should "Intelligent Design" or any other supernatural forces existing only as matters of faith be part of the scientific debate? HELL NO!

So you are saying whatever we can see the effect of, but cannot measure should not be talked about? Peculiar.

You do realize until we discover something it is considered supernatural? You do know that following any theory requires faith? We see the effects of lots of things we can't understand and you don't even want it discussed.

And of course a myriad of people posting that ID is 'religion'. Nonsense. It could be anything, but it is based on the fact that working cells do not just pop into existence on their own.

This is why all schools should be private.

PS. And though I haven't posted much in my 6 weeks, its usually because I read at work and by the time I get to it a story is 'played out'.

726 aidos  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:51:26pm

Good for Jindal. He has guts. Darwiniacs have far more in common with the gospel of Algore and the warm-mongers than ID does with creationism.

727 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:51:53pm

re: #714 gman

At my son's school they were throwing parties if kids showed up to school every day. Ridiculous, but the school was just trying to get more funding.

I feel sorry for the sick kid who got his ass beat the next day for screwing everyone out of a party the day before. Sick a week? Time to transfer.

728 Thanos  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:52:11pm

re: #517 zombie

1. The textbooks will be approved by local school boards and rubberstamped by the same legislature that passed this bill. Hence, they may allow for the discuission of creationism.
2. The supplemental materials will be supplied by the Discovery Institute and similar organizations, and will most likely be in wide use, since it takes a long time to make new textbooks.
3. They won't need to teach any specific religion -- just supernaturalism. That's the whole point of step 2 of the "Wedge" strategy.

Right see the link I posted in spinoffs above, the textbook's already there.

729 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:52:24pm

re: #726 aidos

Good for Jindal. He has guts.

Guts are nice. I prefer brains.

730 freetoken  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:52:25pm

re: #101 Richard Romano


The vote for support was 93-4, so it's not as if it was a "stealth" move by quasi-scientists.

If the vote was that lopsided then that tells me the politicians and electorate's understanding of science is woeful. It also reinforces my belief that Charles is onto something here.

731 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 5:57:57pm

re: #723 Josephine

Wow- thanks!

732 jaunte  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 6:00:47pm

I find it disconcerting that those who are so eager to implement the Discovery Institute's tactics appear not to care that they are opening the school door to Harun Yahya as well. The First Amendment will protect all religious expression, not just the one you're comfortable with.
[Link: www.harunyahya.com...]

733 hazzyday  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 6:02:44pm

re: #518 Franktalk

What you say is true. I personally feel the ID group is way ahead of the data in stating that ID is true. I think we know little of the real underlying mechanics of the molecular engines. But this feeling of mine also applies to the evolutionist who declare that evolution is a fact when the data does not support it. The amount of complexity in the mechanisms makes it very unlikely it happened in the way Darwin said it did. I sure don't have the answers but I won't accept somebody's guess at this point.

There are cliches for ID and it's supporters. People with their head in the clouds and their feet off the ground. Wishes looking for validation. A collective Ostrich. There is not much difference between ID and science fiction. I think it has absolutely been proved in court that the ID crew is as a whole dishonest. They have a Pat Buchanish feel to them. Hitch your wagon to that star and end up being in the undertow.

ID needs to go back to the drawing board and come out with an honest approach to discussing religion in schools. I am sure some current affairs classes address this. There was comparative religion in my high school.

God can create a complex system that evolves. The finite mind of man can error and sin and assume it was all created 6000 years ago. Time would also be a creation of God, as would the concept of distance and space. Evolution falls within those parameters. Science broaches on these concepts as it tries to understand and measure the very infinite and the very finite and finds that it is the mind as instruments that needs to evolve. A candle gets lit once their is a need to dispel darkness.

734 gman  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 6:04:51pm

re: #727 Lizard by the Bay

I feel sorry for the sick kid who got his ass beat the next day for screwing everyone out of a party the day before. Sick a week? Time to transfer.

Maybe not an ass kicking but definitely a brow- beating by classmates, teachers, and administrators.

735 SasquatchOnSteroids  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 6:07:10pm

Read a few posts, skipped the rest.
If the GOP wants to go down this road, more power to them.
But I won't go with them.

736 gman  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 6:11:15pm

re: #697 Lizard by the Bay

gman,

I know you're late to the thread but I believe (I'd like to think anyway) that I've pretty satisfactorily savaged the notion of public schools being able to "compete" with private schools given the restrictions they currently operate under. Feel free to read my posts about it if you'd like.

Ok, I read through the threads on vouchers and now I think we need to completely "gasp" privatize schools. As long as public schools are public, unions will have a stranglehold on them. By privatizing schools, union power will weaken. Now, how to deal with funding and monitoring?

737 Josephine  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 6:16:42pm

re: #695 Lizard by the Bay

That's the "Ben Stein Maneuver". Linking evolution to fascism is not beneath them either.

Didn't he say that science kills people? What was the quote?

738 dcbatlle  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 6:20:11pm

Good for Jindall. Darwinism no longer enjoys an uncontested monopoly in those school districts. Let's see how long it survives the light of scrutiny Intelligent Design shines upon it.

739 jaunte  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 6:21:28pm

re: #738 dcbatlle

Harun says keep up the good work.

740 Killgore Trout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 6:21:59pm

re: #737 Josephine
Ben Stein insists, ‘Science leads you to killing people’

Stein: When we just saw that man, I think it was Mr. Myers [i.e. biologist P.Z. Myers], talking about how great scientists were, I was thinking to myself the last time any of my relatives saw scientists telling them what to do they were telling them to go to the showers to get gassed ... that was horrifying beyond words, and that’s where science — in my opinion, this is just an opinion — that’s where science leads you.

Crouch: That’s right.

Stein: ...Love of God and compassion and empathy leads you to a very glorious place, and science leads you to killing people.

Crouch: Good word, good word.

741 Salamantis  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 6:22:52pm

re: #725 DavidM01

So you are saying whatever we can see the effect of, but cannot measure should not be talked about? Peculiar.

Actually, we can see the effects of evolution, and we can measure them. It has been done regarding the artifactual retroviral DNA that our genes share (and in relative location, too) with the DNA of our most closely related primate relatives. It can be replicated at will for some bacteria in a laboratory.

We cannot find any effects that would be different than they presently are, depending upon the presence or absence of a transcendent designer. That is why ID is not science, and should not be taught in science classes; it is untestable.

You do realize until we discover something it is considered supernatural? You do know that following any theory requires faith? We see the effects of lots of things we can't understand and you don't even want it discussed.

Actually, ascribing to a scientific theory only requires acknowledging the evidence in support of it. In the presence of evidence, one cannot speak of faith, which is adherence in the absence of supporting evidence. If something is not understood, how can it be taught? What these folks want to do is point to everything they don't yet understand and tell the very students who might later have otherwise done the work that opened understanding of it to the world not to even think about it, that 'God did it" and that's all they need to know.

And of course a myriad of people posting that ID is 'religion'. Nonsense. It could be anything, but it is based on the fact that working cells do not just pop into existence on their own.

No, it is based upon the assumption of a transcendent deity that designed all life, and in many different unrelated forms. This is a religious dogma, not a scientific doctrine, and it is one empirically contradicted by the evidence in the genes of all living things. And as such, it belongs in private churches, not public schools.

This is why all schools should be private.

PS. And though I haven't posted much in my 6 weeks, its usually because I read at work and by the time I get to it a story is 'played out'.

742 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 6:24:24pm

re: #738 dcbatlle

LOL! Oh wait- you're being serious.

743 Josephine  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 6:25:15pm

re: #731 Sharmuta

It was brilliant, Shar.

744 Salamantis  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 6:27:00pm

re: #738 dcbatlle

Good for Jindall. Darwinism no longer enjoys an uncontested monopoly in those school districts. Let's see how long it survives the light of scrutiny Intelligent Design shines upon it.

If the scrutiny that has been supplied by the Disco Institute and the creationists on the LGF threads is any indication, those who have perused the overwhelming evidence and accepted evolutionary theory on the basis of it will just have to continue to busy themselves with swatting the selfsame ignorances, distortions, lies and slanders away, over and over and over.

745 Josephine  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 6:27:25pm

re: #740 Killgore Trout

Thank you!

746 DavidM01  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 6:30:42pm

re: #741 Salamantis

Actually evolution has nothing in the way of evidence as to the origins of life, only theories and conjectures - which is of course my point.

If you say only settled science can be taught then you need to ban the 'soup + time = life' argument because there IS NO DATA to support it. None.

"No, it is based upon the assumption of a transcendent deity that designed all life, and in many different unrelated forms. "

No it isn't. It is based on the observation that ALL life we know of came from some other form of life. The belief that life was randomly spawned in some primordial goo is based completely on faith. We need to ban it from schools.

As I said, this is why schools should be private.

As an aside, are the downmods are generally for trollish posts or just unpopular ones? Just curious.

747 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 6:35:21pm

re: #737 Josephine

Didn't he say that science kills people? What was the quote?

See his movie. It has all sorts of references to the 3rd Reich supporting eugenics and equating it with natural selection.

748 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 6:43:32pm

re: #746 DavidM01

If you say only settled science can be taught then you need to ban the 'soup + time = life' argument because there IS NO DATA to support it. None.

You're confusing evolution with biogenesis.

749 sparrowlake  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 6:45:02pm
"Intelligent Design is not alien to Islam. It is very much our cause, and we should do everything we can to support it.
A Call for Action
Here are a few suggestions:
If there should be a clash in the 21st century, it should not be between Islam and the West, but between theism and materialism.

Muslim Students: Go and learn about Intelligent Design. Learn why Darwinism is wrong. Then raise this issue in your classrooms. Question your biology teachers and your textbooks. Form Muslim Student Associations and get in touch with the Intelligent Design groups in your area. Organize lectures by ID scientists and write under the title “The Fall of Darwinism, The Greatest Myth Ever.”

Muslim Families: If you have children in schools, pay attention to their biology classes. Are they being indoctrinated by the myths of Darwinism? If so, appeal to your school board and question this theory by appealing to the work of the ID scientists. Get help from Christian families who support the Intelligent Design cause in your school board.

Muslim Intellectuals: Write and speak about this in your newspapers, magazines, Web sites, lectures, speeches, khutbahs (sermons), and the like. We cannot raise a Muslim generation by merely speaking about the Islamic victories in the past; we have to do something for today. And don’t think that Darwinism is compatible with Islam by referring to some vague theories of limited evolution developed by some medieval Muslims. The real issue at stake here is not whether some organisms have a common ancestor or not. The real issue is whether life is created by God or evolved by itself. We cannot be neutral on this. We have to defend faith against unbelief. This is our raison d’être, the reason why we exist.

If Muslims get involved in this debate, they will help both themselves and Western society. They will also see their common values with Christians more clearly. This alliance will help counter the doomsday calls for a “clash of civilizations.” In fact, if there should be a clash in the 21st century, it should not be between Islam and the West, but between theism and materialism. And since the battlefields in this clash are labs, lecture halls, and Web sites, it will be a much safer place for controversy.
- Mustafa Akyol"

Put this in yer pipes and smoke it.

750 Josephine  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 6:46:02pm

So much willful blindness.

I'm glad Charles and so many lizards (Sharmuta, Buzzsawmonkey, reine.de.tout, Zombie, FinnAgain, keithgabryelski, etc.) care enough -- not just about the issue but about people -- to make the effort to explain, again and again, that this is not about believers vs. atheists but about science vs. non-science being taught in public schools.

Thank you, all. I continue to learn so much from this site.

751 Josephine  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 6:47:18pm

re: #747 Lizard by the Bay

Yeah, I'll have to rent it when it comes out on DVD. I hate to send money their way, though.

752 yehoshua  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 6:59:11pm

Sorry, but the idea of evolution is still a theory. Anyone who honestly believes that human beings were born from amoeba has a rather nutty belief system.

753 Throbert McGee  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 7:02:14pm

re: #586 MJ

Throbert, it's really good to see you posting here again.

Thanks, MJ! I'm liking it here...

754 yehoshua  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 7:02:50pm

Every person who believes in global warming believes in evolution. Every member of the ACLU believes in evolution.
Every member of PETA believes in evolution. Every person who voted for Obama believes in evolution.
This is evidence enough, IMHO, that the theory of evolution is a hoax.

755 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 7:03:58pm

re: #754 yehoshua

What an utter load of crap- you should be ashamed of yourself!

756 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 7:04:29pm

re: #752 yehoshua

Sorry, but the idea of evolution is still a theory.

And creationism is a bedtime story. We still win.

Anyone who honestly believes that human beings were born from amoeba has a rather nutty belief system.

No comment necessary.

757 Slumbering Behemoth  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 7:05:31pm

re: #754 yehoshua

Dishonest bullshit, on every count!

758 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 7:06:31pm

re: #754 yehoshua

Every person who believes in global warming believes in evolution. Every member of the ACLU believes in evolution.
Every member of PETA believes in evolution. Every person who voted for Obama believes in evolution.
This is evidence enough, IMHO, that the theory of evolution is a hoax.

So if a is a subset of b and b is a subset of c, everything in c is contained in a? Your math sucks ass.

759 Salamantis  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 7:07:17pm

David, you would need to explain this:

[Link: www.newyorker.com...]

and this:

[Link: www.washingtonpost.com...]

and this:

[Link: www.technologyreview.com...]
free registration required)

and this:

[Link: www.sciencenews.org...]

and this:

[Link: www.newscientist.com...]

and so much more without reference to evolutionary theory to even begin to chip away at it's settled position as far and away the best explanation available for millions and millions of observed facts. And creationism, whether it calls itself intelligent design or not, could never fill those shoes.

You might also check out the work on complexity theory done by the Santa Fe Institute, among others cutting edge researchers, as to the likelihood of natural biogenesis. For instance, I recommend Steps Towards Life: A Perspective on Evolution by Manfred Eigen, and At Home In The Universe: The Search for the Laws of Self-Organization, and Origins of Order: Self-Organization and selection in Evolution, both by Stuart Kauffman.

But biogenesis doesn't matter when it comes to evolutionary theory; however life began, once it did, it diversified into many genetically related species.

760 Archimedes  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 7:12:27pm

I pressed a + when I meant to pressed a - . No way of taking that back? I promise I won't do that again!

761 DavidM01  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 7:18:46pm

re: #748 Lizard by the Bay

No it is you who are confusing it.

ID and creationism both deal with origins of life. Evolution involves what happened after life started.

Salamantis:
Interesting links, all appear to be evolution(micro or macro) oriented (the first deals with 'fixing' damaged virii), I was speaking only of origins.

I will put the book you mention on my to-do list. Thanks.

762 pingjockey  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 7:24:00pm

I give up. I believe in God, Evolution, the history of the earth is fact. ID is not fact. It is belief. I have had it with this shit.

763 ArcherB  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 7:34:43pm

First, I have to say that you guys are under the impression that you can't believe in ID and evolution at the same time. So, if you are going to call ID believers ignorant, you are only showing your own ignorance and, I hate to say it, bigotry.

Also, don't assume that there needs to be a removal of science to believe in ID. There are many scientists who have come to believe in ID based on their research. For some reading on this, may I suggest you look up "The Anthropic Principle". It goes far beyond evolution, which happens under incredible odds and delves into the chance that the universe is the way that it is. Basically, the odds that Universe should exist at all, and exist in the exact way that it does are extremely small due to the extraordinarily small tolerance that the laws of nature behave under.

Here are some examples:

* Gravity is roughly 10^39 times weaker than electromagnetism. If gravity had been 10^33 times weaker than electromagnetism, "stars would be a billion times less massive and would burn a million times faster."
* The nuclear weak force is 10^28 times the strength of gravity. Had the weak force been slightly weaker, all the hydrogen in the universe would have been turned to helium (making water impossible, for example).
* A stronger nuclear strong force (by as little as 2 percent) would have prevented the formation of protons--yielding a universe without atoms. Decreasing it by 5 percent would have given us a universe without stars.
* If the difference in mass between a proton and a neutron were not exactly as it is--roughly twice the mass of an electron--then all neutrons would have become protons or vice versa. Say good-bye to chemistry as we know it--and to life.
* The very nature of water--so vital to life--is something of a mystery (a point noticed by one of the forerunners of anthropic reasoning in the nineteenth century, Harvard biologist Lawrence Henderson). Unique amongst the molecules, water is lighter in its solid than liquid form: Ice floats. If it did not, the oceans would freeze from the bottom up and earth would now be covered with solid ice. This property in turn is traceable to the unique properties of the hydrogen atom.
* The synthesis of carbon--the vital core of all organic molecules--on a significant scale involves what scientists view as an astonishing coincidence in the ratio of the strong force to electromagnetism. This ratio makes it possible for carbon-12 to reach an excited state of exactly 7.65 MeV at the temperature typical of the centre of stars, which creates a resonance involving helium-4, beryllium-8, and carbon-12--allowing the necessary binding to take place during a tiny window of opportunity 10-17 seconds long.

Now my question is this: Should this be forbidden from being taught in school? There is nothing about God mentioned, just fact. What have we become when FACT is FORBIDDEN from being taught in science class?

764 littleO  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 7:38:44pm

Here we are again, and nobody is surprised?

I believe in states' rights and the rights of voters!

I do not believe in the rights of elitist or intellectual snobs to dictate to everyone else!

Nor, do I believe that the State should use the Judicial system to overcome the will of the citizen!

765 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 7:43:05pm

re: #763 ArcherB

First, I have to say that you guys are under the impression that you can't believe in ID and evolution at the same time. So, if you are going to call ID believers ignorant, you are only showing your own ignorance and, I hate to say it, bigotry.

We are not saying that! We are saying that one has a place in science classes and one doesn't. One is a scientific theory based on fossil record evidence and studies of closed ecosystems. One is a matter of faith based on ancient religious texts.

But you already know that.

766 Salamantis  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 7:45:04pm

re: #763 ArcherB

I think you're caught up in the observer selection effect; it's a common fallacy.

[Link: www.technologyreview.com...]
(free subscription required)

Excerpt:

Now, it might be thought an amazing coincidence if Earth were the only planet in the galaxy on which intelligent life evolved. If it happened here, the one planet we have studied closely, surely one would expect it to have happened on a lot of other planets in the galaxy--planets we have not yet had the chance to examine. This objection, however, rests on a fallacy: it overlooks what is known as an "observation selection effect." Whether intelligent life is common or rare, every observer is guaranteed to originate from a place where intelligent life did, in fact, arise. Since only the successes give rise to observers who can wonder about their existence, it would be a mistake to regard our planet as a randomly selected sample from all planets. (It would be closer to the mark to regard our planet as a random sample from the subset of planets that did engender intelligent life, this being a crude formulation of one of the saner ideas extractable from the motley ore referred to as the "anthropic principle.")

Since this point confuses many, it is worth expanding on it slightly. Consider two different hypotheses. One says that the evolution of intelligent life is a fairly straightforward process that happens on a significant fraction of all suitable planets. The other hypothesis says that the evolution of intelligent life is extremely complicated and happens perhaps on only one out of a million billion planets. To evaluate their plausibility in light of your evidence, you must ask yourself, "What do these hypotheses predict I should observe?" If you think about it, both hypotheses clearly predict that you should observe that your civilization originated in places where intelligent life evolved. All observers will share that observation, whether the evolution of intelligent life happened on a large or a small fraction of all planets. An observation-selection effect guarantees that whatever planet we call "ours" was a success story. And as long as the total number of planets in the universe is large enough to compensate for the low proba­bility of any given one of them giving rise to intelligent life, it is not a surprise that a few success stories exist.

[Salamantis] Likewise, whether or not the happening of a universe that allowed us to evolve were a posteriori analyzed to be statistically probable or improbable, the fact that we are here talking about it proves that it is actual, which most definitely proves its possibility.

767 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 7:46:30pm

re: #764 littleO

I do not believe in the rights of a group of fundamentalists shoving their faith on my unsuspecting kid in violation of the Constitution!

768 Salamantis  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 7:49:07pm

re: #764 littleO

Here we are again, and nobody is surprised?

I believe in states' rights and the rights of voters!

I do not believe in the rights of elitist or intellectual snobs to dictate to everyone else!

Nor, do I believe that the State should use the Judicial system to overcome the will of the citizen!

I live in the deep South. If the Kennedys and Johnson had agreed with you, our schools would still be racially segregated, and Jim Crow and racially discriminatry poll tests would still be in force, because the will of the majority of caucasian citizens down here supported that status quo.

769 mfarmer1  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 7:49:26pm

re: #763 ArcherB

First, I have to say that you guys are under the impression that you can't believe in ID and evolution at the same time. So, if you are going to call ID believers ignorant, you are only showing your own ignorance and, I hate to say it, bigotry.

Also, don't assume that there needs to be a removal of science to believe in ID. There are many scientists who have come to believe in ID based on their research. For some reading on this, may I suggest you look up "The Anthropic Principle". It goes far beyond evolution, which happens under incredible odds and delves into the chance that the universe is the way that it is. Basically, the odds that Universe should exist at all, and exist in the exact way that it does are extremely small due to the extraordinarily small tolerance that the laws of nature behave under.

Here are some examples:

* Gravity is roughly 10^39 times weaker than electromagnetism. If gravity had been 10^33 times weaker than electromagnetism, "stars would be a billion times less massive and would burn a million times faster."

But it's not. So what?

* The nuclear weak force is 10^28 times the strength of gravity. Had the weak force been slightly weaker, all the hydrogen in the universe would have been turned to helium (making water impossible, for example).

But it's not. So what?

* A stronger nuclear strong force (by as little as 2 percent) would have prevented the formation of protons--yielding a universe without atoms. Decreasing it by 5 percent would have given us a universe without stars.

But it isn't. So what?

* If the difference in mass between a proton and a neutron were not exactly as it is--roughly twice the mass of an electron--then all neutrons would have become protons or vice versa. Say good-bye to chemistry as we know it--and to life.

But it is what it is. So what?

* The very nature of water--so vital to life--is something of a mystery (a point noticed by one of the forerunners of anthropic reasoning in the nineteenth century, Harvard biologist Lawrence Henderson). Unique amongst the molecules, water is lighter in its solid than liquid form: Ice floats. If it did not, the oceans would freeze from the bottom up and earth would now be covered with solid ice. This property in turn is traceable to the unique properties of the hydrogen atom.

It floats. So what?

* The synthesis of carbon--the vital core of all organic molecules--on a significant scale involves what scientists view as an astonishing coincidence in the ratio of the strong force to electromagnetism. This ratio makes it possible for carbon-12 to reach an excited state of exactly 7.65 MeV at the temperature typical of the centre of stars, which creates a resonance involving helium-4, beryllium-8, and carbon-12--allowing the necessary binding to take place during a tiny window of opportunity 10-17 seconds long.

It is what it is. So what?

Now my question is this: Should this be forbidden from being taught in school? There is nothing about God mentioned, just fact. What have we become when FACT is FORBIDDEN from being taught in science class?

No problem with any of this. The problem is when people, perhaps even you, look at this and say "Aha! This shows that there must be some dude on a giant golden throne with lightning bolts in his hand behind all of this." Sorry, but that has no place in the public classroom and is nothing but pure unadulterated gobbledygook. Such teachings belong elsewhere.

770 Killgore Trout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 7:49:35pm

re: #754 yehoshua

Bullshit.

771 Slumbering Behemoth  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 7:50:42pm

re: #763 ArcherB

Cry bigot, and let slip the meme of Lefty!

772 sparrowlake  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 7:50:43pm

re: #764 littleO

I believe in states' rights and the rights of voters!

States Rights to teach religion in science class! LOLOLOL.

773 pingjockey  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 7:51:48pm

re: #754 yehoshua
You are full of shit!

774 mfarmer1  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 7:52:46pm

re: #754 yehoshua

Every person who believes in global warming believes in evolution. Every member of the ACLU believes in evolution.
Every member of PETA believes in evolution. Every person who voted for Obama believes in evolution.
This is evidence enough, IMHO, that the theory of evolution is a hoax.

Oh brother. This has to be a joke. If not, wow, you would be so much fun to face in debate class.

775 Killgore Trout  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 7:53:57pm

I'm sorry to break it to you guys but "state's rights" is a crock of shit used for slavery, segregation, creationism and other assorted bullshit. It has become the refuge for insanity.

776 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 7:55:47pm

re: #772 sparrowlake

States Rights to teach religion in science class! LOLOLOL.

Yeah. About as unfortunate as arguing "state's rights" to justify institutionalized racism back in the 50's. The 10th Amendment doesn't need friends like littleO.

777 ArcherB  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 7:56:28pm

re: #756 Lizard by the Bay

Great! Answer this for me.

Evolution states we all come from the same source. Some single celled organism lived on earth, multiplied, mutated into a new species, wash, rinse, repeat. That is correct, right? Please, correct me if that is wrong.

The problem I have so far is this. Take away any component in a cell, and it ceases to function. You take away the Mitochondria and it can't process energy and dies. You take away the nucleus and the cell can't reproduce. Without the nuclear membrane, all the nucleus stuff just floats about the cell and is completely unusable. You take away the cell wall or membrane and the cell just floats apart. Also consider that no part of a cell can live on its own. So, how did the first cell form if all the parts were required? How could some "pre-cell" creature "evolve" into a cell without all the required parts?

Either way this process of the better adapted creatures living and reproducing led to more complicated organisms, each generation better adapted that the last. Drastic changes in the environment caused change to happen more rapidly. But always, beneficial traits were passed down as those that had beneficial traits survived. Which makes me wonder... and here is my primary questions...

Given that all life forms are either plant or animal: Why can't animals make food from the sun? Why can't animals grow leaves. When we are hungry, we could just eat some dirt, drink some water and sit out in the sun. When did the ability to make food from light become a non-beneficial trait? What made the first cell that couldn't photosynthesize better adapted than those around it that could?

Why can't plants move? Seems like a pretty beneficial trait to me. Why would the first generation that couldn't move reproduce better than those around it that could? Since when did getting rooted to a single spot become a beneficial trait over moving out of shadow and into the sun and vice-versa?

Anyway, there are the questions that Darwin can't seem to answer. Now don't get me wrong, I believe in evolution, but to say that the "theory" is complete is just wrong.

778 hillbilly geek  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 7:57:08pm

OK, all you non-religionists: if you don't like what's being taught in the public schools, you can always homeschool, like we've had to do for the last 23 years! Welcome to my world.
heh.
/ironic snark off

779 tgibson1962  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 7:58:19pm

re: #533 buzzsawmonkey

Apparently you did not read the entire post to which you are replying, and did not comprehend what you did read--or are pretending not to.

No, counselor I read your explanation, comprehended it, and am not pretending I don't.

Again, Kennedy used a phrase which related to language used in other case on the same topic; his use of it, which is what you were talking about before you moved the goalposts, has nothing whatever to do with "appropriating scientific language," but with continuing a pattern of Supreme Court jurisprudence. Period.

And the language you're referring to is, I suppose, Warren's use of the phrase “the Amendment must draw its meaning from the evolving
standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society”
(Trop v. Dulles, 356 U.S. 86, 101 (1958)) in reference to the Eighth Amendment. In your view, Kennedy is following Warren's lead, correct? So, progression toward maturity is the explanation of evolving, in Warren's view and thus in Kennedy's.

So, Warren, followed by Kennedy, used a term (evolving) with an explanation of the term (progression toward maturity) that appeared de novo with no reference to the scientific theory. In other words the word evolving was used divorced from any historical context, or apparently, any content.

Your attempt to make something else of his language is a phony construct, exactly like the mendacious use of "theory" to mean "idle speculation" which is a hallmark of ID and creationism proponents.

It's not a phony construct; it's simply assuming his words have some meaning. Otherwise, he could have just said "farking standards of decency."

BTW, isn't it pusillanimous to call people mendacious from behind a computer?

780 jaunte  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 7:58:56pm

[Link: www.msnbc.msn.com...]

LAWRENCE, Kan. - Creationism and intelligent design are going to be studied at the University of Kansas, but not in the way advocated by opponents of the theory of evolution.
A course being offered next semester by the university religious studies department is titled “Special Topics in Religion: Intelligent Design, Creationism and other Religious Mythologies.”

An Introduction to Intelligent Design
Edited by Peter Gegenheimer
Associate Professor, Section of Biochemistry & Biophysics, Department of Molecular Biosciences, The University of Kansas-Lawrence.
[Link: rnaworld.bio.ku.edu...]

781 Salamantis  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 8:02:40pm

Let me try to lie like yehoshua:

Every person who killed an abortion doctor or destroyed a clinic believed in creationism.
Every person who has assaulted a gay person believed in creationism.
Every person who was a member of the racist organizations Ku Klux Klan, Christian Identity, or The Covenant, The Sword, and The Arm of The Lord (CSA) believed in creationism.
Timothy McVeigh, who blew up the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City, Bob Mathews, who killed cops while robbing armored cars to bankroll antigovernment neofascists, and Eric Rudolph, who bombed the Atlanta Olympics, all believed in creationism.
This is evidence enough, IMHO, that creationism appeals to racist, sexist, homophobic, violent neonazi antigovernment types.

Of course this is not true. And neither is what yehoshua said.

782 jc59  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 8:09:29pm

re: #781 Salamantis

Are you sure about Timothy McVeigh? I was under the impression he was an atheist.

783 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 8:10:29pm
Evolution states we all come from the same source. Some single celled organism lived on earth, multiplied, mutated into a new species, wash, rinse, repeat. That is correct, right? Please, correct me if that is wrong.

The answer is, "not necessarily". Life on Earth is highly diverse, and could have had multiple start points.

The problem I have so far is this. Take away any component in a cell, and it ceases to function. You take away the Mitochondria and it can't process energy and dies. You take away the nucleus and the cell can't reproduce. Without the nuclear membrane, all the nucleus stuff just floats about the cell and is completely unusable. You take away the cell wall or membrane and the cell just floats apart. Also consider that no part of a cell can live on its own. So, how did the first cell form if all the parts were required? How could some "pre-cell" creature "evolve" into a cell without all the required parts?

You're treading into abiogenesis territory here, for which there are multiple theories, from primordial soup to deep sea vent. The answer is, we can't know since we weren't there. We can only try to replicate it in a laboratory to prove that it is possible. Much work has been done in this field, although it's been quiet for awhile.

Given that all life forms are either plant or animal:

Whoops. Bad given. There are other forms of life, like virii.

Anyway, there are the questions that Darwin can't seem to answer. Now don't get me wrong, I believe in evolution, but to say that the "theory" is complete is just wrong.

Who is claiming the theory is complete? Our knowledge of evolution is far from complete. For that matter, our knowledge of atomic theory is far from complete (certainly at the subatomic level), but that's no justification to stop teaching chemistry or handing out bibles along with science textbooks.

784 jc59  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 8:12:56pm

re: #783 Lizard by the Bay


3. Are all species related?

Yes. Just as the tree of life illustrates, all organisms, both living and extinct, are related. Every branch of the tree represents a species, and every fork separating one species from another represents the common ancestor shared by these species. While the tree's countless forks and far-reaching branches clearly show that relatedness among species varies greatly, it is also easy to see that every pair of species share a common ancestor from some point in evolutionary history. For example, scientists estimate that the common ancestor shared by humans and chimpanzees lived some 5 to 8 million years ago. Humans and bacteria obviously share a much more distant common ancestor, but our relationship to these single-celled organisms is no less real. Indeed, DNA analyses show that although humans share far more genetic material with our fellow primates than we do with single-celled organisms, we still have more than 200 genes in common with bacteria.

[Link: www.pbs.org...]

785 sparrowlake  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 8:13:20pm

re: #777 ArcherB

So, how did the first cell form if all the parts were required?

Maybe trillions of the parts were just floating around and a few of them just happened to come together in just the right way in a random event. And maybe that random act has been repeated trillions of trillions of times since then with trillions of different cells resulting.
Or maybe God created the first cell(s).
Either way, could evolution not have followed from there?

786 sparrowlake  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 8:15:34pm

re: #782 jc59

Are you sure about Timothy McVeigh? I was under the impression he was an atheist.

I think he believed in States Rights.

787 Yelnats  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 8:18:02pm

re: #777 ArcherB

Great! Answer this for me.

Given that all life forms are either plant or animal: Why can't animals make food from the sun? Why can't animals grow leaves. When we are hungry, we could just eat some dirt, drink some water and sit out in the sun. When did the ability to make food from light become a non-beneficial trait? What made the first cell that couldn't photosynthesize better adapted than those around it that could?

Why can't plants move? Seems like a pretty beneficial trait to me. Why would the first generation that couldn't move reproduce better than those around it that could? Since when did getting rooted to a single spot become a beneficial trait over moving out of shadow and into the sun and vice-versa?

Good questions. Plants move a lot! It just takes more than one generation to do so. I am pretty sure that staying in one spot uses a lot less energy than moving around, so plants don't need as much energy. Most of these questions you asked are pretty easy to answer if you put a bit of thought and research into it. Some of them aren't quite as easy.

Anyway, there are the questions that Darwin can't seem to answer. Now don't get me wrong, I believe in evolution, but to say that the "theory" is complete is just wrong.

The theory of evolution isn't complete, and never will be. On the other hand, the "theory" of Creationism just takes one page to describe, and the "theory" of ID just takes one sentence.

788 jc59  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 8:21:26pm

I'm curious, why are anti-ID posters so resistant to the idea of "common descent", a fundamental principle of evolutionary theory?

I mentioned it in some previous threads and was shouted down.

789 Salamantis  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 8:21:45pm

re: #777 ArcherB

All that is necessary to call something life is that it can make copies of itself. Viruses and prions can do that, without many of the components that you cite, and it is quite reasonable to view single-celled organisms as products of prior evolution.

There are some mobile organisms that nevertheless perform photosynthesis, such as paramecia and slime molds, but mobility allowed organisms to search for and consume other organisms as food. Plants (with some exceptions) cannot do this, since they are not mobile, so if they were to exist, another mechanism for producing the calories required had to happen. There are also nonmobile organisms that do not engage in photosynthesis, such as fungi, that have evolved other ways.

790 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 8:22:24pm

re: #788 jc59

Uh- it's the pro-ID people who oppose evolution.

791 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 8:23:57pm

re: #777 ArcherB

Why can't plants move?

Forgot to address this obvious one. Plants DO MOVE. Ever seen a house plant slowly turn towards a sunny window? I have. Or a venus flytrap eat? That's movement. Of course, most plants cannot uproot themselves and move, but some forms of sea plant can move to more beneficial locales. Google tropism.

792 freetoken  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 8:24:50pm

re: #754 yehoshua

Every person who believes in global warming believes in evolution that the sky is blue.

Every member of the ACLU believes in evolution that the sky is blue.

Every member of PETA believes in evolutionthat the sky is blue.

Every person who voted for Obama believes in evolution that the sky is blue.

This is evidence enough, IMHO, that the theory of evolution idea that that the sky is blue is a hoax.

/fixed it for you.

793 jc59  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 8:25:16pm

re: #790 Sharmuta

Common descent has nothing to do with ID; it is mainstream evolutionary theory. But when it's brought up on LGF, some anti-ID poster will claim it is not necessarily so.

Why?

794 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 8:26:45pm

re: #788 jc59

Who says we resist it? I said it's "not necessarily" the basis for all life on earth, not that it isn't.

795 Salamantis  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 8:28:01pm

re: #782 jc59

Are you sure about Timothy McVeigh? I was under the impression he was an atheist.

[Link: www.time.com...]

Excerpt:

TIME: Are you religious?

MCVEIGH: I was raised Catholic. I was confirmed Catholic (received the sacrament of confirmation). Through my military years, I sort of lost touch with the religion. I never really picked it up, however I do maintain core beliefs.

TIME: Do you believe in God?

MCVEIGH: I do believe in a God, yes. But that's as far as I want to discuss. If I get too detailed on some things that are personal like that, it gives people an easier way alienate themselves from me and that's all they are looking for now.

796 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 8:29:48pm

re: #793 jc59

How the hell should I know what other people are thinking?

797 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 8:31:43pm

By the way, thank you jc59 for the PBS link. It has the best explanation to those getting hung up on the word theory:

In science, a theory is a rigorously tested statement of general principles that explains observable and recorded aspects of the world. A scientific theory therefore describes a higher level of understanding that ties "facts" together. A scientific theory stands until proven wrong -- it is never proven correct. The Darwinian theory of evolution has withstood the test of time and thousands of scientific experiments; nothing has disproved it since Darwin first proposed it more than 150 years ago. Indeed, many scientific advances, in a range of scientific disciplines including physics, geology, chemistry, and molecular biology, have supported, refined, and expanded evolutionary theory far beyond anything Darwin could have imagined.

Says it all, pretty much. Nothing in ID can touch that.

As for my "resisting" common descent, I'm just leaving open the possibility that there could be life on earth that came from extra-planetary sources.

798 jc59  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 8:35:41pm

At other times he (Timothy McVeigh) supposedly said: "Science is my religion".

[Link: findarticles.com...]

799 jc59  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 8:37:08pm

re: #797 Lizard by the Bay

I'm not hung up on the word "theory".

800 ArcherB  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 8:38:07pm

re: #766 Salamantis

That's great, except that I'm not so much concerned with the odds of finding intelligent life or the odds that WE would become intelligent life.

I'm more interested in the universe itself. There are very few laws that make the universe the way it is. Those laws are set by constants. Gravity has a certain amount of force. The electromagnetic force has a certain attracting, repelling force. Why does lead weight what it does? Why is lead not heavier? Why does rubbing your feet on the carpet generate so much electricity... why not more? Why not less?

For example, if gravity were just a tiny fraction stronger than it is, the universe would have collapsed on itself a few million years after forming. An even slighter change would caused stars collapse in on themselves shortly after creation. A slightly weaker gravitational force would mean that "stars" would not create enough heat to cause hydrogen to fuse to helium and become stars at all.

Now, keep in mind that there is not good reason why these constants are what they are, other than they just are. It's not like evolution where it can be explained by natural selection. These laws of nature were a one shot thing. The universe threw numbers out and those values are final.

How narrow are the thresholds from these numbers?
From HERE:

Not only must the universe be fine-tuned to get enough nucleons, but also a precise number of electrons must exist. Unless the number of electrons is equivalent to the number of protons to an accuracy of one part in 10^37, or better, electromagnetic forces in the universe would have so overcome gravitational forces that galaxies, stars, and planets never would have formed.

One part in 10^37 is such an incredibly sensitive balance that it is hard to visualize. The following analogy might help: Cover the entire North American continent in dimes all the way up to the moon, a height of about 239,000 miles. (In comparison, the money to pay for the U.S. federal government debt would cover one square mile less than two feet deep with dimes.) Next, pile dimes from here to the moon on a billion other continents the same size as North America. Paint one dime red and mix it into the billion piles of dimes. Blindfold a friend and ask him to pick out one dime. The odds that he will pick the red dime are one in 10^37. And this is only one of the parameters that is so delicately balanced to allow life to form.


From HERE:

he relative magnitude of the gravity force and the electromagnetic force has been found to be crucial for multiple reasons. Note from Table 2 that the electromagnetic force is 10^38 times stronger than the gravity force. It is the force of gravity that draws protons together in stars causing them to fuse together with a concurrent release of energy. The electromagnetic force causes them to repel. Because the gravity force is so weak by comparison to the electromagnetic force, the rate at which stars "burn" by fusion is very slow, allowing the stars to provide a stable source of energy over a very long period of time. If this ratio of strengths had been 10^32 instead of 10^38 (i.e., gravity were much stronger), stars would be a billion times less massive and would burn a million times faster.

So, it's not so much the "Can intelligent life" argument. I go a bit before that. The odds of intelligent life forming in our universe are much greater than the odds of our universe existing at all.

801 Lizard by the Bay  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 8:38:11pm

re: #799 jc59

I'm not hung up on the word "theory".

I never said you were. I was merely thanking you for giving me the link so that I could share it with those who are. Don't be so sensitive.

802 Sharmuta  Fri, Jun 27, 2008 8:40:59pm

re: #800 ArcherB

You're confusing the hell out of me. Do you support teaching science in science classrooms, or would yo