For I am well aware that scarcely a single point is discussed in this volume on which facts cannot be adduced, often apparently leading to conclusions directly opposite to those at which I have arrived. ~ Charles Darwin

Creationists will have to speak louder. I continue to support those who would like to have their voices heard in biology classes. I encourage the effort to limit the teaching of evolutionary biology until such time as evolutionists encourage a more inclusive participation of students. The very idea of the American Civil Liberties Union conspiring with evolutionary biologists to limit the free speech of the majority of the high school students in this county is grotesque. ~ William Provine

Citing Darwin as a source for modern evolution theory is no more valid than citing a 19th century doctor about modern day medicine.

They're trying to find something really controversial. They want to vote on it just to draw attention away from their incredibly arrogant and self-pleasuring vote granting themselves a 300% salary increase augmented by new staff, increased perdiem and yearly "inflation" increases. FARK: Beginning July 1st. Double FARK: Why not wait for the next election? Because the term-limited legislators want the substantial increase in pension before they go.

Representative democracy at its ugliest.

Maybe we are neo-Darwinists today, but let us spell neo with a very small n! Our neo-Darwinism is very much in the spirit of Darwin himself. ~ Richard Dawkins

So... there were three people who outright rejected critical thinking?

I do not understand this.

Bevets boobies!

Anyway..
This isn't the first time these numbskulls have tried this crap. It hasn't worked yet.

Bevets: For I am well aware that scarcely a single point is discussed in this volume on which facts cannot be adduced, often apparently leading to conclusions directly opposite to those at which I have arrived."

Neat, huh? That's called science.

If you'd like to have a discussion about it, I'd be happy to. But I know you won't. Enjoy your game.

Start taxing religion, just like any other business.

I'm not kidding. A lot of these 'arguments' would disappear like a snowball in a blast furnace ;)

Bevets: Maybe we are neo-Darwinists today, but let us spell neo with a very small n! Our neo-Darwinism is very much in the spirit of Darwin himself. ~ Richard Dawkins

Whoa. Who the hell sponsored you back to TF?

I have GOT to spend more time here! Welcome back, man! and I really do mean that in a good way ;)

'The Louisiana House has voted 94-to-3 in favor of 'critical thinking' about evoluton and origins of life. This should end well'

I'd rather they stop focusing on science and work on spelling.

bevets, just try to stay in a thread like this and post your OWN thoughts, not copy/paste quotes.

The Louisiana House voted overwhelmingly in favor of a bill on Wednesday that would promote "critical thinking" by students on topics such as evolution, the origins of life, global warming, and human cloning.

Mindless criticism is not the same as "critical thinking."

This is a great way to get Scientology in science classes.

You know Bevets is out to lunch when he's on the side of the Louisiana state legislature.

Not like we didn't know that already though.

I would just like to point out that this may be the first time that anyone in a Louisiana public school has ever been asked to think critically about something. This is a happy day.

Yeah, I got the heads-up on this from Barbara Forrest herself, one of the Heroes of Dover. I wrote about it on my blog, with the most appropriate titles I could: Louisiana: Epically Doomed (new window), and Louisiana's doom, now with video! (new window).

I've been fighting this creationist garbage for some time, and even so I was rather surprised at how slimy LA State Senator Nevers was in the video. He doesn't lie, really, but what he says is so misleading that it certainly doesn't represent reality.

Thinking? In Louisiana?

I love how the Creationists are evolving to meet a changing environment.

SpinStopper: Start taxing religion, just like any other business.

I'm not kidding. A lot of these 'arguments' would disappear like a snowball in a blast furnace ;)

Yes! Religion should be taxed in the way that any other business is taxed. Even more so, actually, consider it a "stupidity" tax.

CDP: i132.photobucket.com

now if someone put up the pic of the Dominionist douchebag with his quote about "dominion".

The alleged purpose of the bill is redundant if it was written honestly (which it almost certainly was not) and shameful if it was written with an ulterior motive (which is almost certainly the case). If we are not automatically teaching students how to critically evaluate scientific ideas, principles, concepts and theories, then our science standards are so far in the sh*tter that no wonder the rest of the world is laughing at us. By selectively targeting scientific theories that are politically controversial and not scientifically controversial, that sends a strong message that it is perfectly acceptable in the United States (or at least as far as TFA goes, in Louisiana) to question the validity of some of the most important and well-established scientific theories and ideas of all time. And again, no wonder the worldwide scientific community is laughing at us.

Bevets: For I am well aware that scarcely a single point is discussed in this volume on which facts cannot be adduced, often apparently leading to conclusions directly opposite to those at which I have arrived. ~ Charles Darwin

Creationists will have to speak louder. I continue to support those who would like to have their voices heard in biology classes. I encourage the effort to limit the teaching of evolutionary biology until such time as evolutionists encourage a more inclusive participation of students. The very idea of the American Civil Liberties Union conspiring with evolutionary biologists to limit the free speech of the majority of the high school students in this county is grotesque. ~ William Provine

Did you ever get a around to correcting that out of context Darwin quote on your web site?

And putting A little (dispute) beside it is still using the quote out of context. It is misleading and creating a deliberate falsehood.

The "Christian" thing to do would be to either remove it or post it in the correct context.

Here is the quote from your web site:


To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree. Origin of Species (1859) p.186 And the link
Link (new window)

Here is the quote in the correct context.

To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree. When it was first said that the sun stood still and the world turned round, the common sense of mankind declared the doctrine false; but the old saying of Vox populi, vox Dei, as every philosopher knows, cannot be trusted in science. Reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a simple and imperfect eye to one complex and perfect can be shown to exist, each grade being useful to its possessor, as is certainly the case; if further, the eye ever varies and the variations be inherited, as is likewise certainly the case; and if such variations should be useful to any animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, should not be considered as subversive of the theory. How a nerve comes to be sensitive to light, hardly concerns us more than how life itself originated; but I may remark that, as some of the lowest organisms in which nerves cannot be detected, are capable of perceiving light, it does not seem impossible that certain sensitive elements in their sarcode should become aggregated and developed into nerves, endowed with this special sensibility. Charles Darwin, On the Origin of Species, 6th Edition
And the link Link (new window)

So by deliberately omitting part of this quote you are misleading people as to Darwins intent, and that is bearing false witness.

To the Christian, a lie is a deliberate falsehood yet you deliberately use out of context quotes on your web site.

This certainly looks like sin according to your own rules.

Or is it OK to lie as long as it is for God?

CDP: Or is it OK to lie as long as it is for God?

If you're a follower of Martin Luther it is.

If they truly taught "critical thinking" in schools, then the kids would clearly see that the creationists are full of crap.

Critical thinking = Evolution is just a "theory"

There's nothing wrong with critical thinking, and there are still questions centered around and touching on evolution (or, more accurately developmental and molecular biology) but I have a feeling this legislation won't end in, or doesn't have as its ends, answering and exploring these questions.

Critical thinking about evolution can't happen in the light of intelligent design and creationism - rather only in the light of deeper scientific understanding and knowledge.

CDP: The "Christian" thing to do would be to either remove it or post it in the correct context.

What you're trying to do is somewhat noble, but do you really think he's interested in the "Christian" thing to do? How many Christians are?

Bevets: Maybe we are neo-Darwinists today, but let us spell neo with a very small n! Our neo-Darwinism is very much in the spirit of Darwin himself. ~ Richard Dawkins



I found another example of an out of context quote on your web site.

Here is the quote from your web site:


If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down. Origin of Species (1859) p.189

And the link: Link (new window)

Here is the quite in the correct context along with some additional commentary.


If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down. But I can find out no such case. No doubt many organs exist of which we do not know the transitional grades, more especially if we look to much-isolated species, round which, according to my theory, there has been much extinction. Or again, if we look to an organ common to all the members of a large class, for in this latter case the organ must have been first formed at an extremely remote period, since which all the many members of the class have been developed; and in order to discover the early transitional grades through which the organ has passed, we should have to look to very ancient ancestral forms, long since become extinct."

Fomrner scientist Michael Behe quotes this in Chapter two of his book. Well not exactly; Behe quotes only the first sentence, leaving his readers in the dark about the fact that Darwin answered his own question, and that he realized evidence might be irretrievably buried in the ash heap of history. This is a dishonest practice known as "quote mining."And the link: Link (new window)

So far I am two for two when reviewing the quotes on your web site for proper context.

You need to be careful now, some people might start to get the idea that you're a purposely trying to mislead or bear false witness.

Isn't there something in The Ten Commandments about bearing false witness?

bugenhagen: Evolution is just a "theory"

Too true. Now all we need is widespread awareness of what "theory" signifies in science.

You would hope that with the dawn of the 21st century that we would start moving past the mental disorder that is religion and its medieval mindset. It would appear though that the world wants a Dark Ages II.
`I daresay you haven't had much practice,' said the Queen. `When I was your age, I always did it for half-an-hour a day. Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.'

zeph`: CDP: The "Christian" thing to do would be to either remove it or post it in the correct context.

What you're trying to do is somewhat noble, but do you really think he's interested in the "Christian" thing to do? How many Christians are?

I am not doing it for him. I am doing this for the people who might be persuaded by his out of context quotes.

We must shine a light on his dishonesty.

We have to refute these lies for the good of our children.

My ex-wife has my son on one of these religious schools that is trying to pass this ID/Creationist stuff off as science.

I have been forced to research this in order to give my son a decent chance of getting into a real school with out being to far behind in real science.

CDP, while it is a good effort, trying to debate with Bevets that doesn't include him copying/pasting quotes is like trying to discuss philosophy with a brick. He'll just ignore you or just 'answer' you with another quote.

/Wouldn't it be funny if it was Bevets submitting all the evolution articles?

great! critical thinking is awesome! in fact, it's a crucial part of science. it teaches us that to even be considered as "science," a theory must be both testable and falsifiable. "intelligent design" is neither of those things, therefore it is not science and should not be mentioned anywhere near a public science classroom. QED.

critical thinking: 1, creationism: 0

CDP: My ex-wife has my son on one of these religious schools that is trying to pass this ID/Creationist stuff off as science.

I have step-brothers and step-sisters in a Catholic school - earlier this evening one of them explained to me how premarital sex, birth control, and abortion were "moral sins". I know where you're coming from.

NeverDrunk23: /Wouldn't it be funny if it was Bevets submitting all the evolution articles?

It would be mildly ironic, yes.

CDP: I am doing this for the people who might be persuaded by his out of context quotes.

Maybe this is thinking too highly of the average Farker - but I have a feeling Bevets's quotes aren't going to persuade anybody.

CDP: zeph`: CDP: The "Christian" thing to do would be to either remove it or post it in the correct context.

What you're trying to do is somewhat noble, but do you really think he's interested in the "Christian" thing to do? How many Christians are?

I am not doing it for him. I am doing this for the people who might be persuaded by his out of context quotes.

We must shine a light on his dishonesty.

We have to refute these lies for the good of our children.

My ex-wife has my son on one of these religious schools that is trying to pass this ID/Creationist stuff off as science.

I have been forced to research this in order to give my son a decent chance of getting into a real school with out being to far behind in real science.

Good point, but I believe we are at a point where nobody here takes a word he says seriously. And there's enough users here debunking him in a blink of an eye to deter new users from siding with him.

But I fully understand your intentions and plan.

bugenhagen: Critical thinking = Evolution is just a "theory"

Is Evolution only a theory?



Creationists argue that evolution is "only a theory and cannot be proven."

As used in science, a theory is an explanation or model based on observation, experimentation, and reasoning, especially one that has been tested and confirmed as a general principle helping to explain and predict natural phenomena.

Any scientific theory must be based on a careful and rational examination of the facts. A clear distinction needs to be made between facts (things which can be observed and/or measured) and theories (explanations which correlate and interpret the facts.
A fact is something that is supported by unmistakable evidence. For example, the Grand Canyon cuts through layers of different kinds of rock, such as the Coconino sandstone, Hermit shale, and Redwall limestone. These rock layers often contain fossils that are found only in certain layers. Those are the facts.

It is a fact is that fossil skulls have been found that are intermediate in appearance between humans and modern apes.

It is a fact that fossils have been found that are clearly intermediate in appearance between dinosaurs and birds.

Facts may be interpreted in different ways by different individuals, but that doesn't change the facts themselves.
Theories may be good, bad, or indifferent. They may be well established by the factual evidence, or they may lack credibility.

Before a theory is given any credence in the scientific community, it must be subjected to "peer review."

This means that the proposed theory must be published in a legitimate scientific journal in order to provide the opportunity for other scientists to evaluate the relevant factual information and publish their conclusions.

Creationists refuse to subject their "theories" to peer reviews, because they know they don't fit the facts. The creationist mindset is distorted by the concept of "good science" (creationism) vs. bad science" (anything not in agreement with creationism).

Creation "scientists" are biblical fundamentalists who can not accept anything contrary to their sectarian religious beliefs.


Link (new window)

zeph`: bugenhagen: Evolution is just a "theory"

Too true. Now all we need is widespread awareness of what "theory" signifies in science.

Agreed. My point was, this was what we could expect to hear as "critical thinking" regarding evolution.

CDP: bugenhagen: Critical thinking = Evolution is just a "theory"

Is Evolution only a theory?

Yeah, see above ^^^

bugenhagen: CDP: bugenhagen: Critical thinking = Evolution is just a "theory"

Is Evolution only a theory?

Yeah, see above ^^^

I know just wanted to get that in before Mr GED in law shows up and starts spreading his "special" kind of disinformation

Church, please stay the kindly fark away from my State- deal?

CDP: bugenhagen: CDP: bugenhagen: Critical thinking = Evolution is just a "theory"

Is Evolution only a theory?

Yeah, see above ^^^

I know just wanted to get that in before Mr GED in law shows up and starts spreading his "special" kind of disinformation

Got it.

Jon Snow: Church, please stay the kindly fark away from my State- deal?

No deal - we need to establish a state religion.

Creationism is the death of Republic. Period.

Bevetsed in the boobies I see.

They should pass laws requiring "critical thinking" about the theory of gravity and germ theory. i mean, they're JUST THEORIES

are there any other scientific theories that require a legislative fiat for critical thinking?

So they're attempting to keep their state economically depressed by keeping their children educationally disadvantaged.

Nice job guys.

"The truth shall set you free." - Jesus

Hey Bevets, as far as I am concerned you are allied with the Devil himself.

Quick, to the Bevetsmobile!



Seriously, Bevets, your shiat is very old and monotonous. There are many, many websites you can go to and spout your nonsense without being challenged. You know you're not going to convince anyone - you're just here because you're Fark's biggest attention whore and it's time for a new schtick.

Bevets: For I am well aware that scarcely a single point is discussed in this volume on which facts cannot be adduced, often apparently leading to conclusions directly opposite to those at which I have arrived. ~ Charles Darwin

Creationists will have to speak louder. I continue to support those who would like to have their voices heard in biology classes. I encourage the effort to limit the teaching of evolutionary biology until such time as evolutionists encourage a more inclusive participation of students. The very idea of the American Civil Liberties Union conspiring with evolutionary biologists to limit the free speech of the majority of the high school students in this county is grotesque. ~ William Provine

Bevets, you're sure the rusty edge of the wedge (new window)

This is precisely our strategy. If we view the predominant materialistic science as a giant tree, our strategy is intended to function as a "wedge" that, while relatively small, can split the trunk when applied at its weakest points. The very beginning of this strategy, the "thin edge of the wedge," was Phillip ]ohnson's critique of Darwinism begun in 1991 in Darwinism on Trial, and continued in Reason in the Balance and Defeatng Darwinism by Opening Minds. Michael Behe's highly successful Darwin's Black Box followed Johnson's work. We are building on this momentum, broadening the wedge with a positive scientific alternative to materialistic scientific theories, which has come to be called the theory of intelligent design (ID). Design theory promises to reverse the stifling dominance of the materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions.

DarnoKonrad: Creationism is the death of Republic. Period.

Seems a little... melodramatic. I'd say that the rejection of rational thought for ideology and the tolerance of extremism is the death of Republic, but that's just me.