Woe may the ignorant and dim
Come before his noodly greatness
And smiting each upon the head
With great starchy appendages
May they know the truth and see the way

Blessed be his meatballs
And delicious his sauce
Amen

Board member Tim Harris was quick to say that he had no "agenda" to insert ID/creationism into the curriculum. "My personal opinion and how I vote don't always jibe,"

Wow!

And this gem:
And board member Fields, who started the controversy, tried to blame - big surprise here - the media! Fields told the Tribune, via e-mail, that she didn't realize there would be a story "on the front page of the Ledger indicating that I opposed evolution." Yes, it's definitely the Ledger's fault for letting the public know what a publicly elected school official told the newspaper, on record, about a public education issue.

There's a whole lot of stupid coming out of Polk county.

I hope the dimwits here in Pinellas County are taking note.

I'm glad we're finally getting to a point where we can shout down and ridicule these backward nutcases running our public schools.

Sketchy unprovable beliefs based solely on a system of faith should be kept strictly to oneself whenever possible. You never know who might be listening.

Code_Archeologist: Woe may the ignorant and dim
Come before his noodly greatness
And smiting each upon the head
With great starchy appendages
May they know the truth and see the way

Blessed be his meatballs
And delicious his sauce
RAmen

FTFY

Bravo! May the church of the FSM continue its righteous fight to be included in any teaching of alternative non-scientific theories.

If I ever meet Bobby Henderson, I'll happily buy him a few beers and a huge plate of tasty pasta for his efforts.

Keep fighting the good fight Pastafarians! You make me proud.

Ramen!

I like this:

FTA: - Last week, police arrested a high school teacher in Polk County Public Schools for telling a female student he could raise her grade in exchange for sex.

- Two days later, police arrested a elementary school principal in Polk County Public Schools for using photos of his students to create child pornography.

Holy crap these FSM prayers are hilarious

Man, I thought intelligent design was an art class ...

If you aren't familiar with the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, it asserts that an omnipotent, airborne clump of spaghetti intelligently designed all life with the touch of its "noodly appendage," and that He appears in "full pirate regalia."

What? As far as I know, FSM is naked.

A priest of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster wears the full pirate regalia.

Yeah, because if you are a scientist you absolutely, positively, must believe without question, that there is no God, and that it is impossible that any intelligent entity had any part in shaping the events of the universe. Atheism is the ultimate answer, we know everything about the universe and we should not question the theories of quasi-theoretical physicists who made up a theory about the foundation of the universe that did not jive with the laws of physics and then invented new laws that have never been observed in any way whatsoever to explain how it happened. Thats not religion at all and we should accept their words on authority. Plus, you can't have both a God and evolution in the same universe, so kids must be taught that it is impossible for any intelligence to have had any part in the development of the universe. I guess that makes sense, since no intelligence went into the crafting of the current atheistic curriculum.




The Founder of the Human Genome Project disagrees, guess he's crazy as well, and as usual I don't expect anyone to actually address his argument but rather just yell "Consensus" at me, but thats ok, everyone agreeing on something makes it right, right? Masters and Johnson and all that.

eh, but how did the FSM figure into the Florida argument? It sounds like a bunch of people just got mad at the board and wrote letters about being seen as Hillbillies, not invoking the FSM.

I just came in here to say YAY!!!11

Whats sad is this; in about 6000 years, there are going to be people who actually BELIEVE in the FSM, and think that the world is only 6000 years old.
/believe it.
//or not.

hetheeme: Yeah, because if you are a scientist you absolutely, positively, must believe without question, that there is no God, and that it is impossible that any intelligent entity had any part in shaping the events of the universe. Atheism is the ultimate answer, we know everything about the universe and we should not question the theories of quasi-theoretical physicists who made up a theory about the foundation of the universe that did not jive with the laws of physics and then invented new laws that have never been observed in any way whatsoever to explain how it happened. Thats not religion at all and we should accept their words on authority. Plus, you can't have both a God and evolution in the same universe, so kids must be taught that it is impossible for any intelligence to have had any part in the development of the universe. I guess that makes sense, since no intelligence went into the crafting of the current atheistic curriculum.

The Founder of the Human Genome Project disagrees, guess he's crazy as well, and as usual I don't expect anyone to actually address his argument but rather just yell "Consensus" at me, but thats ok, everyone agreeing on something makes it right, right? Masters and Johnson and all that.

I don't care if you teach religion but don't teach it in science class. God can not be tested and is not natural so scientists don't consider the god factor when researching.

You can keep religion in the philosophy class where it belongs.

No Hero tag?

hetheeme

The point is not what COULD exist but what we can test and have evidence for. The schools don't teach "there is no God", they teach evolution, and if you think God set it into motion, fine. If you don't believe evolution happened, fine, but you have to learn how it may have happened and what its mechanisms are.

Despite my internet-fu, I just learned about the RAmen joke this afternoon.

Hysterical and awesome.

hetheeme:

False dichotomy (new window)

Ryan2065: hetheeme: Yeah, because if you are a scientist you absolutely, positively, must believe without question, that there is no God, and that it is impossible that any intelligent entity had any part in shaping the events of the universe. Atheism is the ultimate answer, we know everything about the universe and we should not question the theories of quasi-theoretical physicists who made up a theory about the foundation of the universe that did not jive with the laws of physics and then invented new laws that have never been observed in any way whatsoever to explain how it happened. Thats not religion at all and we should accept their words on authority. Plus, you can't have both a God and evolution in the same universe, so kids must be taught that it is impossible for any intelligence to have had any part in the development of the universe. I guess that makes sense, since no intelligence went into the crafting of the current atheistic curriculum.

The Founder of the Human Genome Project disagrees, guess he's crazy as well, and as usual I don't expect anyone to actually address his argument but rather just yell "Consensus" at me, but thats ok, everyone agreeing on something makes it right, right? Masters and Johnson and all that.

I don't care if you teach religion but don't teach it in science class. God can not be tested and is not natural so scientists don't consider the god factor when researching.

You can keep religion in the philosophy class where it belongs.

this.

/theistic astrophysicist

I said it in another thread:

ID is a sophisticated strategy run by morons. It will only work if they temporarily deny God, but they can't bring themselves to do that. It's like watching Wile E. Coyote strap on the rocket skates.

hetheeme

Now I'm inclined to think you're trolling.

Science does NOT say "there is no God."

Science is silent on the subject, as it cannot be tested. It is unknowable and a matter of faith.

I'm an occasional substitute teacher at two local school districts, and the latest kerfluffle here is the "moment of silence" law that was passed this year. All public schools start the day with a moment of silence for individual reflection, and it's really up to the students to reflect in whatever manner they desire.

One of these days, if I ever get fed up with the job too much, I'm going to insist that my religion requires that I "reflect" by making armpit farts.

Donald_McRonald: If you aren't familiar with the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, it asserts that an omnipotent, airborne clump of spaghetti intelligently designed all life with the touch of its "noodly appendage," and that He appears in "full pirate regalia."

What? As far as I know, FSM is naked.

Christian Bale
chard
Ryan2065

The problem with your arguments is that we are not merely teaching the mechanisms, which I have no problem with, we are teaching them devoid of any other instruction about the larger picture. My problem is not that it is not taught in science class, but that there is not required teaching of philosophy or anything of the like in schools pre-college and in scientific fields it does extend into most colleges.

By not teaching or even opening up for discussion the ideas of philosophy, theistic or not, the you ARE giving them a philosophy lesson, one in Nihilism. When you tell students that all that matters is that you know the mechanism and that the study of anything that makes sense of the whole universe and mankind and morality, then what your are teaching them is that we are merely the result of the mechanisms and that there is no meaning and that people who study meaning and purpose are wasting their time, but that doesn't matter because we are all worm food.

I'm a science teacher, and I agree, I don't teach philosophy in science class, but I do teach it in my homeroom class because there is no other time that they will get it in school, and since we as a nation have turned over our children's education totally to the school system, they won't be getting that at home either on the whole, not in any substantive. When my students are in science time, they get pure science, devoid of meaning and philosophy, but I stress to them in my homeroom time that there is more than merely the mechanism, not necessarily God, I would not use the school house as a church, but I will not let them be given nothing but nihilism, which is at its core what we think as a society today, that nothing has meaning and philosophy is worthless.

mrmopar5287: One of these days, if I ever get fed up with the job too much, I'm going to insist that my religion requires that I "reflect" by making armpit farts.

If you're going to get fired, go for the real thing.

Those who worship this false religion will be smote.

Poopspasm

But telling kids that understanding science is vital but understanding philosophy is worthless and largely a joke, is telling them that there is no meaning beyond the mechanism, which is Atheism and nihilism.

Nietzsche would be proud of us.

hetheeme: but I stress to them in my homeroom time that there is more than merely the mechanism, not necessarily God,

When you say there is more than merely the mechanism, do you mean you are saying there is more than just the natural world?

If so you should really stop.

hetheeme: Christian Bale
chard
Ryan2065

The problem with your arguments is that we are not merely teaching the mechanisms, which I have no problem with, we are teaching them devoid of any other instruction about the larger picture. My problem is not that it is not taught in science class, but that there is not required teaching of philosophy or anything of the like in schools pre-college and in scientific fields it does extend into most colleges.

By not teaching or even opening up for discussion the ideas of philosophy, theistic or not, the you ARE giving them a philosophy lesson, one in Nihilism. When you tell students that all that matters is that you know the mechanism and that the study of anything that makes sense of the whole universe and mankind and morality, then what your are teaching them is that we are merely the result of the mechanisms and that there is no meaning and that people who study meaning and purpose are wasting their time, but that doesn't matter because we are all worm food.

I'm a science teacher, and I agree, I don't teach philosophy in science class, but I do teach it in my homeroom class because there is no other time that they will get it in school, and since we as a nation have turned over our children's education totally to the school system, they won't be getting that at home either on the whole, not in any substantive. When my students are in science time, they get pure science, devoid of meaning and philosophy, but I stress to them in my homeroom time that there is more than merely the mechanism, not necessarily God, I would not use the school house as a church, but I will not let them be given nothing but nihilism, which is at its core what we think as a society today, that nothing has meaning and philosophy is worthless.

I just wanted to point out that every one of your complaints is a failure of the parents, not the school board.

Schools are there to educate your children, not to raise them.

Besides, teaching them philosophy alongside evolution makes about as much sense as teaching chemical engineering alongside art history (after all, they need to know where those paints came from). There are whole other classes dedicated to the subject (although, in fairness, most of them are voluntary).

hetheeme

That's not what the controversy is about. You can believe God controls the flow of water, but its arbitrary in science class. For some reason, they want this as an alternative to evolution, and, yes, most atheists acknowledge a lot of religious scientists.

hetheeme

Plus, you can't have both a God and evolution in the same universe

I do not recall any theory of science that precludes any faith in the divine. Perhaps you should educate yourself properly about the issues before jumping to nonsensical conclusions.

hetheeme: Yeah, because if you are a scientist you absolutely, positively, must believe without question, that there is no God, and that it is impossible that any intelligent entity had any part in shaping the events of the universe. Atheism is the ultimate answer, we know everything about the universe and we should not question the theories of quasi-theoretical physicists who made up a theory about the foundation of the universe that did not jive with the laws of physics and then invented new laws that have never been observed in any way whatsoever to explain how it happened. Thats not religion at all and we should accept their words on authority. Plus, you can't have both a God and evolution in the same universe, so kids must be taught that it is impossible for any intelligence to have had any part in the development of the universe. I guess that makes sense, since no intelligence went into the crafting of the current atheistic curriculum.
The Founder of the Human Genome Project disagrees, guess he's crazy as well, and as usual I don't expect anyone to actually address his argument but rather just yell "Consensus" at me, but thats ok, everyone agreeing on something makes it right, right? Masters and Johnson and all that.

What Priest can't handle spreading the word of God, we need teachers to do it?

hetheeme: But telling kids that understanding science is vital but understanding philosophy is worthless and largely a joke, is telling them that there is no meaning beyond the mechanism, which is Atheism and nihilism.

Then don't tell them this. The school kids are fairly bright and some even realize that they will not learn everything they need to learn in school.

Plus you cannot get away from philosophy in English or History class if you have a good teacher.

hetheeme:
I'm a science teacher, and I agree, I don't teach philosophy in science class, but I do teach it in my homeroom class because there is no other time that they will get it in school,

See you just hit it. Teach the appropriate subject in the appropriate class.
Evolution -> Biology Class,
Nihilism -> Philosophy class,
ID -> Sunday school.

hetheeme: But telling kids that understanding science is vital but understanding philosophy is worthless and largely a joke, is telling them that there is no meaning beyond the mechanism, which is Atheism and nihilism.

Nietzsche would be proud of us.

Again, then let them take a philosophy class. Absent any interest in philosophy, let their parents raise them to be decent and inquisitive human beings. The schools exist to educate children, not to raise them (as I mentioned before). If a kid graduates high school with no moral compass, that isn't a failure of his science teacher.

ReaverZ: Evolution -> Biology Class,
Nihilism -> Philosophy class,
ID -> Sunday school.

I would actually say that ID could be taught in philosophy class. Ultimately it's an epistemological topic.

There are whole other classes dedicated to the subject (although, in fairness, most of them are voluntary).

This is my point. What the schools make mandatory and what they do not sends a clear message to the kids, and creates a culture where they are told that meaning is non-existent. if you say they should get philosophy at home, then why not rely on their parents to teach science as well, unless you don't trust the parents to be able to teach effectively, which shows that you think that the subjects that are really important should be taught in school and everything else taught at home, and that makes science important and philosophy worthless. This gets into the culture, and we have a generation that does not understand philosophy, religious or not.

We are ingraining that idea into their heads, and English classes do not come close to teaching philosophy, they give the building blocks for understanding philosophy, Language is to philosophy as math is to science.

And I'll even go up and blame some of this on Bush, and the NCLB acct has removed history and social studies from the needed curriculum for schools to be studied under.

hetheeme: if you say they should get philosophy at home, then why not rely on their parents to teach science as well, unless you don't trust the parents to be able to teach effectively, which shows that you think that the subjects that are really important should be taught in school and everything else taught at home, and that makes science important and philosophy worthless. This gets into the culture, and we have a generation that does not understand philosophy, religious or not.

It's not a matter of importance, it's a matter of competency. Plenty of parents are intelligent and intellectually curious enough to engrain an appreciation of philosophy into even the youngest child. Effectively explaining evolutionary biology takes a bit more of a background in the field. That's all.

hetheeme:

Okay seriously, what is your farking point, that we should be teaching philosophy? Fine, what does that have to do with ID? Do you think it has a place in the school curriculum, if so where?

hetheeme: When you tell students that all that matters is that you know the mechanism and that the study of anything that makes sense of the whole universe and mankind and morality, then what your are teaching them is that we are merely the result of the mechanisms and that there is no meaning and that people who study meaning and purpose are wasting their time, but that doesn't matter because we are all worm food.

And you say nihilism... Sheesh. Even Nietzsche spoke that you can create your own meaning. Heck, that was pretty much one of the core themes of his writings. That's what the entire existentialism movement was all about, dude. So what if science has no sayings regarding the "meaning of life" or any of that? Does that mean if someone or something hasn't given you a pre-boxed meaning for your life that you are unable to create one for yourself? That speaks more towards your failings than science's.

hetheeme: This is my point. What the schools make mandatory and what they do not sends a clear message to the kids, and creates a culture where they are told that meaning is non-existent. if you say they should get philosophy at home, then why not rely on their parents to teach science as well, unless you don't trust the parents to be able to teach effectively, which shows that you think that the subjects that are really important should be taught in school and everything else taught at home, and that makes science important and philosophy worthless. This gets into the culture, and we have a generation that does not understand philosophy, religious or not.

Wait, let me get my violin.

Yes, the topics in science ARE more important than philosophy. Most philosophy is just some purile form of mental masturbation, predicated on tenuous assumptions for which there is no evidence. The very little philosophy that actually makes sense in the real world, from Socrates on to today's jobless wonders, gets taught implicitly.

Science brings us cures for diseases, and computers and the internet that we can use to b*tch about the lack of mandatory philosophy online. Philosophy contributes to society, but nowhere near as important as the contributions of science. I mean, god man, we faked putting a man on the moon thanks to science. According to Descartes, we can't even be sure the moon exists!

When you tell students that all that matters is that you know the mechanism and that the study of anything that makes sense of the whole universe and mankind and morality, then what your are teaching them is that we are merely the result of the mechanisms and that there is no meaning and that people who study meaning and purpose are wasting their time, but that doesn't matter because we are all worm food.

There is the physical material world. If that's what you call "the mechanism" then welcome to reality.There is no specific implied meaning, make your own.Make your own purpose and your own meaning. Do not force your views on meaning and purpose on other people.

hetheeme: But telling kids that understanding science is vital but understanding philosophy is worthless and largely a joke, is telling them that there is no meaning beyond the mechanism, which is Atheism and nihilism.

Nietzsche would be proud of us.

Haven't you figured out that school is mostly focused on making kids employable? Philosophy is abstract enough to miss the cut. they used to teach Greek and Latin in middle & high school too. Good luck finding that these days. There are few philosophers to teach kids anyway. Doesn't make it right or wrong. It is what it is.

/Reading philosophy (and is learning Greek) on my own, Fark is the only group discussion I have about it.

averZ
hetheeme:

Okay seriously, what is your farking point, that we should be teaching philosophy? Fine, what does that have to do with ID? Do you think it has a place in the school curriculum, if so where?

I think that ID does not have a place in the science room, as it is not a theory about how the mechanism works, but about how an outside influence manipulated things to get the impossible odds required for life and intelligent life to develop, all of which go against the flow of entropy, and possibly started everything since all the big bang physics are counter to everything in normal physics.

However, the questions of philosophy are just this, questions of origin, meaning, purpose, and destiny. But what many people object to is that when evolution is taught alone in schools, and science is presented outside a presentation of thinking about these questions of human existence it is an endorsement of nihilism and atheism, because we start looking for meaning even if none is presented, so we find meaning in the mechanics alone, which is no meaning.

So, yes, I think ID should be taught, but in Philosophy class, but that is a topic that should be in schools from the beginning, go over everything from Aristotle to Kant to Voltaire, to Nietzsche to Lewis. If can be shown in comparison to atheism there fairly, and for what they are, philosophies. It is something that should be taught apart from the scientific method because it lies outside the scientific method, but that doesn't mean it is not worth addressing and that the issues involved are trivial.

Philosophy is not about teaching people what to believe, but about teaching people about how to come to conclusions about such matters on their own, just as science does with matters of the natural world. we are telling them that they need to know the method for understanding the natural world is vital but the method for understanding themselves is trivial.

Teach ID in philosophy, yes, but FOR THE LOVE OF (insert deity or great thinker here) TEACH PHILOSOPHY AS WELL.

get them thinking about those questions so that nihilism and atheism is not taught by fiat, and our students will become better rounded individuals, understanding both the mechanisms and are thinking about how those fit into life, meaning and everything, rather than just teaching that the mechanism is all that matters.

Ryan2065: You can keep religion in the philosophy class where it belongs.

Right next to Nietzsche!

/Yeah, your God is Dead
//or is it religion?
///read the book!
////until you realize it's 'Anti-Christ'
//silly Christians