Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Salt Lake Tribune)   Utah Board of Education rejects Flying Spaghetti Monsterism. "Invoking the supernatural can explain anything, and hence explains nothing."   (sltrib.com) divider line 445
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

18054 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Sep 2005 at 2:40 PM (9 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



445 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2005-09-03 04:06:50 PM  
Not saying I agree with Weaver95, just that it's obnoxious when others suggest abscense = admitting defeat.

I always get a little tickled when I see someone post about a "defeat" or a "victory" on an internet message board (not you, just in general). Like it's some epic duel, thrust and parry, all that jazz.

Read Weaver's inane posts again. Then read the smug responses again. It's not exactly friggin Waterloo, here. It's barely even "Dueling Banjos."
 
2005-09-03 04:08:45 PM  
alto_reed_on_a_tenor_sax: It's barely even "Dueling Banjos."

Hardly that, either. Dueling Banjos is hard to play.

How about "Patty Cake?"
 
2005-09-03 04:09:06 PM  
 
2005-09-03 04:11:09 PM  
Im a christian who thinks that intelligent design in the classroom is a really, really bad idea. Not that evolution is perfect, its not. In fact, I personally believe that even a cursory examination of the evidence shows that evloution requires just as much faith as creationism. But anyways, intelligent design IS NOT in the bible and I believe that you cant take some parts of the bible literally and some figuratively. If youre going to buy into it, then you take it at face value. So instead of teaching an idea contrary to the bible and passing it off as christian, why not take just ONE freakin day out of a six week chapter in the science book to address a few of the many, many problems with Darwin.

I cant think of any other scientific THEORY which is taken and defended as FACT and freakin refuses to even listen to any discussion about it.

Refusing to even discuss it is no better then telling Galileo "you 'tard, the sun moves around the earth. shut up and deal with it."

/first ever posting
//swear im not trying to be a troll
///already a slash whore
 
2005-09-03 04:11:42 PM  
MrNeutron: We the "chosen people" who worship ONLY the great FSM, who are members of the Ortodox FSM movement, will continue to eat our unlevened pasta on fridays.

Saint Boyardee give me strength. I, as a Fourth Day Adventist (LMAO yotta, I'm using that from now on) know that your sinful ways shall not permeate into my sect. You probably don't even use a red sauce, you heathen bastard.
 
2005-09-03 04:12:00 PM  
-I bet they rejected it cuz the Mormons have their own wacky origin theory and don't want any competition...
 
2005-09-03 04:13:05 PM  
History has shown us many things, one of the greatest being that whenever real science and religion go head to head, science always wins. Science will win this fight too, though it's going to take some time and hard work. The best thing to do is to catch the wolves in sheep's clothing in their own lies. Once they are outed for being liars and obfuscaters of truth, they will crumble. Kick a fundamentalist's ass today!
 
2005-09-03 04:15:42 PM  
There is a lot of evidence for evolution.
I have yet to see God's fingerprint on anyone's ass...
 
2005-09-03 04:16:23 PM  
So instead of teaching an idea contrary to the bible and passing it off as christian, why not take just ONE freakin day out of a six week chapter in the science book to address a few of the many, many problems with Darwin.

Perhaps you could offer up one of these "many, many problems with Darwin" to start the discussion?

And while we're at it, why not also present some of the "many, many problems" with atomic theory, relativity theory or any of the other scientific theories taught in high school?
 
2005-09-03 04:18:37 PM  
[image from strk3.com too old to be available]
 
2005-09-03 04:20:03 PM  
sixdays

-I think the phrase cursory examination is the key there. Scientific theories can of course be wrong. Anything that is the product of flawed and fallible human beings can and often is wrong. The world didn't just wholesale accept Darwin's idea; there was plenty of skepticism and challenges just like any other new concept. Evolution has stood the test of time and many attempts to tear it down. Does that make it the Truth? Of course not, but it certainly is more than scientific 'faith' holding it up...
 
2005-09-03 04:26:36 PM  
I cant think of any other scientific THEORY which is taken and defended as FACT and freakin refuses to even listen to any discussion about it.

The theory of Gravitation, Electromagnetic Theory, Cellular Theory. If I am not mistaken, these are all theories which are accepted as fact.

The problem with the ID argument is that it is not an alternative. If there was a viable alternative to Evolutionary Theory, it would be debatable. But, for all the problems many claim Evolutionary Theory has, they cannot put forth a viable alternative that works in the paradigm of science.

If you said "An Intelligent Designer created the world in 6 days 5k yrs ago", people can offer evidence that says, "Well, the 5k part of that is wrong because I have evidence of rocks dating back to 4 billion yrs." At this point, even if you disprove the dating method, you have not shown the age of the earth to be 5k yrs. Where is the evidence?

All people who do not like Evolution have been able to do is try to poke holes in the theory. But this does not not provide a positive argument for ID. It's basically saying "The current theory is incorrect, so god or aliens must have done it."
 
2005-09-03 04:26:37 PM  
No Such Agency:

The point is that there's just as much scientific proof for the FSM as for the Christian God. I.e. NONE, so neither should be taught in science class. The point is to call the Christian fundamentalists on their hypocrisy when they dismiss FSM as nonsense.

I don't know if I'd say that there is no evidence of God. There are numerous historical references to him which say he exists. Why arn't first-hand accounts from texts accepted as evidence?(however questionable it may be) I believe Julius Caesar existed, but what proof do we really have?

The main point of your explanation still comes through though, the idea that by examining a ridiculous recently made-up monster we can gain new insight on a more serious issue.
 
2005-09-03 04:26:56 PM  
 
2005-09-03 04:27:44 PM  
Good news. I was starting to think that every state school board had been overrun by people who can't even define science.
 
2005-09-03 04:28:47 PM  
Sorry, ignore the second link. They've moved it into the subscriber only section.
 
2005-09-03 04:29:42 PM  
Mugato:

A theory must be both testable and falsifiable. Intelligent design is neither of those.

I've never seen that simple point addressed in any serious fashion.


and you never will.
 
2005-09-03 04:30:22 PM  
The argument Weaver made has nothing to do with ID. It had everything to do with the way the media reports stories.

That may be, but the fact of the matter is, this is the only story I have heard of where a special interest group is trying to debunk science for its own gain. There is no doubt that ID arguments are unscientific - and this is the main point. A secondary point is that Christian groups are pushing it.

I don't know of any cases where the Theory of Gravitation was called into question because there is an opposing idea that suits the needs of a communist activist group, for example.

Except for maybe the food suppliments market...
 
2005-09-03 04:30:57 PM  
EvilHamster:
I don't know if I'd say that there is no evidence of God. There are numerous historical references to him which say he exists. Why arn't first-hand accounts from texts accepted as evidence?

Why aren't salt stains on the underpass, or a face in a grilled cheese sandwich considered evidence? There is no evidence of God. Maybe even less than none, given the events of the past week. I keep watching people praise the Lord for saving them, then wonder why they can't make the next logical leap to causation.
 
2005-09-03 04:31:41 PM  
Xaxor: /GIS for 'Intelligent Design'

Jesus under fire, calls in close air support, an artillery barrage and the marines.
 
2005-09-03 04:31:52 PM  
EvilHamster:
Well, if refrences are all youre looking for, let me tell you about Batman, the savior of gotham......
 
2005-09-03 04:32:33 PM  
Hunh, Utah, of all places. Good for them.

This should come up on ballot measures in all 50 states so it can be soundly defeated everywhere. The three or four states that implement it can watch their test scores drop precipitously for a while until they come back to their senses.

This whole argument is just political pandering from the Pharisees on the religious right. They have no interest in anything but expanding their own political power, they'll use whatever means available to do so. If it means snookering sincere Christians and filling their heads with nonsense, so be it.

Jesus would probably agree with the theory of evolution, he was a pretty smart, reasonable guy by all accounts.

Creationism is built on a myth. Myth has a very strong, necessary role in human culture and development, but by trying to impose it upon reality you're robbing it of it's power and cheating society out of the expansion of learning and knowledge.
 
2005-09-03 04:32:34 PM  
"SETI is an attempt to identify intelligent design in radio signals from outer space, signals with an intelligent origin rather than a natural origin," he said. "If we can try to detect intelligent design in signals we receive from outer space, why can't we detect intelligent design in genetic codes we see in biology?"

That has to be one of the stupidest comparisons I've seen these creationists use yet.

"[Evolution] is not a fact . . . We're dealing with censorship here. If we only taught Shakespeare in English class, that wouldn't be fair."

Now that's number 2.

I've often wanted to ask these morons if they advocate teaching the theory that the Holocaust never happened and was actually a Jewish conspiracy in high-school histroy classes. Because you know, alot of people believe that theory as opposed to the recognized one of gas chambers, Nazis, etc.

Creationism (AKA ID) does not hold up to scrutiny using fundamental scientific testing and analysis. Creationists argue that the reason it doesn't is because of bias by scientists "brainwashed" by evolutionist teaching. So instead, they are trying to worm their way into schools using school boards they have stacked with like-minded fundamentalists. This is not news. It was reported early back in the 90's that fundie churches were instructing their members to run for local offices, school boards, etc.
 
2005-09-03 04:32:38 PM  
RoachAC

You must not frequent many threads, Weaver makes himself look the fool almost daily.
 
2005-09-03 04:33:03 PM  
There are numerous historical references to him which say he exists. Why arn't first-hand accounts from texts accepted as evidence?

Science cannot study what cannot be observed and repeated. If someone did indeed observe god, it is reeally useless to us unless we can get him to repeat whatever it is he does so we can observe it and study it.
 
2005-09-03 04:33:57 PM  
-Has any other scientific 'theory' begun its life by having a bunch of non-scientist supporters barnstorm the country and try to force into elementary schools? That tells me all I really need to know anout it...
 
2005-09-03 04:34:18 PM  
EvilHamster:

I don't know if I'd say that there is no evidence of God. There are numerous historical references to him which say he exists. Why arn't first-hand accounts from texts accepted as evidence?(however questionable it may be) I believe Julius Caesar existed, but what proof do we really have?

Cause people lie? Cause people see things that aren't there? Cause mental problems didn't get real treatments until what 1960's?

First hand accounts are barely even good enough for court, and given witness error rates maybe they shouldn't be, they are no where good enough for science.
 
2005-09-03 04:34:28 PM  
openfry: But at the end of the day the easiest way to deal with them is to point out that their entire religion is founded by a mass muderer

What's this mass murderer bit? I knew Mormonism is a total ruse made up by a con man to fool idiots, but I never heard the mass murder part. Got a reputable link?
 
2005-09-03 04:35:47 PM  
spelunking_defenestrator:

Jesus would probably agree with the theory of evolution, he was a pretty smart, reasonable guy by all accounts.

Hmmm, reasonable? I heard he had one hell of a temper, got it from his father, and was impotent.
 
2005-09-03 04:37:40 PM  
No Such Agency: Yeah, he just vanished. Can't say I blame him.

That's his M.O. - dump some quick garbage (usually bible quotes) and is not seen again.

/no need for a "repel Bevets" card - he's never here long enough
 
2005-09-03 04:42:23 PM  
Gin_Fueled_Farking
What's this mass murderer bit? I knew Mormonism is a total ruse made up by a con man to fool idiots, but I never heard the mass murder part. Got a reputable link?

I think he's talking about the whole "killing indians" thing.
 
2005-09-03 04:43:40 PM  
Have you been touched by His Noodly Appendage?

Can you show me on the dolly where it touched you?
 
2005-09-03 04:43:53 PM  
Where's the HERO tag?
 
2005-09-03 04:44:25 PM  
Isn't it ironic? Conservatards love to throw the "you don't have an alternative" argument at liberals, but this time they're getting the argument thrown head on at them.

/Alanis surrenders
//also Alanis sucks
 
2005-09-03 04:45:18 PM  
helix400:

/Not saying I agree with Weaver95, just that it's obnoxious when others suggest abscense = admitting defeat.

problem is, with him, it's a pattern
 
2005-09-03 04:47:25 PM  
Perhaps you could offer up one of these "many, many problems with Darwin" to start the discussion?

And while we're at it, why not also present some of the "many, many problems" with atomic theory, relativity theory or any of the other scientific theories taught in high school?


just going by my highschol science text book, we're currently teaching outdated and disproven information.

such as...

1) the Miller Experiment

Im willing to bet a bunch of people have seen the famous picture. Its a black and white of a dude in scientist garb in front of a glass tube with goo in it. Brother figured out that if you took the early earth atmospehere and shot electricity thru it, you get amino acids. Problem is he was wrong. He used a mixture of methane, ammonia, and water vapor (cause back in the 60's that what they thought it was like). Problem is geologist since then have figured out that the early earth atmosphere was actually carbon-dioxide, nitrogen, and water vapor. In 1995, Science magazine even said "the early atmosphere looked nothing like the Miller-Urey" simulation."

Interestingly enough, if you repeat the experiment using the real gasses, you know what you get? Formaldehyde and cyanide. Some current text books explain this away by calling these "organic molecules." You know what you get when you combine those two lovely little cocktails? Embalming fluid. Not exactally conducive to live.

And yet its still taught.

2)Darwin's Tree of Life
Darwin's specifically said nautral selection would work "slowly, by accumulating slight, successive, favorable variations" and that "no great or sudden modifications were possible." But the fossil record doesnt show this. Around 540 million years there was the Cambrian Explosion, the "biologial big bang." In the geologic sense, we went from jellyfish to mammals overnight. In football terms - if one endline is single celled organisms and the other goal line is humans, you start walking from one end to the other, and up until the 97 yard line theres nothing, then bang, in one stride, you have animals. This contridicts darwin's idea. Further fossil discoveries do nothing to help him out. In fact, they hurt.

3) Haeckel's Embryos
Ernst was the dude who made those little drawings showing that in the embroynic stage, animals look alike, thus we're decandants of the same papa animals. The problems with this guys are insane (really interesting stuff, if youre interested in that sort of thing). He cherry picked his animals so they intentionally looked alike and then he fudged the details. He was first accused of fraud by his collegues in 1860's. When some creationists tried to publish this information, that Haeckel pretty much made it up, Stephen Jay Gould (harvard professor, ardent evloutionist) said this was nothing new, everyones known about this for 20 years. He even said text book writeres shoudl be ashamed of what theyre still printing.

Look, im not trying to say "screw youre new fangled "science" and screw you!" Im just saying that text books pass off outdated theory as fact. It gets personally when, from what ive read, the single biggest cause of people turning from religion is high school and college level biology classes. And im not saying dont teach evloution - its a big deal and should definately be taught. But its passed off as factual, flawless, and undisputed. Antheists love to tout how they embrace "critical thinking." So what wrong with critical thinking here? Isnt that the whole point to science?

And with respects to einstein - his ideas are still being debated - so that they can be proven. Remember that story a while back where NASA made a perfect little ping pong ball and shot it into space to see if ol' Al was right? If we accept Einstein as fact, why'd we blow millions on that? Its because its good science not to be complaceant or just assume ideas are given. Lets just teach kids not to accept things at face value. In anything.

/again, not trolling, answering a question
// if you wanna call me out on sources, let me know. after work tonite (which im happily late for), i'll back anything up
 
2005-09-03 04:49:17 PM  
"Whenever anyone challenges the evolution people, they go berserk,"

That line was my personal favorite.
 
2005-09-03 04:50:08 PM  
ImJustaTroll: FSM doesn't care about white people!


FSM doesn't care if you're red or alfredo. He loves us all.
 
2005-09-03 04:51:32 PM  
LocalCynic:

Conservatards love to throw the "you don't have an alternative" argument at liberals, but this time they're getting the argument thrown head on at them.

You owe me a new keyboard for my new favorite word, CONSERVATARD.
 
2005-09-03 04:52:56 PM  
BlueGargoyle :

>> He also refutes the crazy notion that AIDS is caused by HIV.
>>Oh yeah, that's a hard core scientist there.

Ummm - actually there are real some scienists (with real degrees) who think it possible that HIV is a MARKER rather than the cause of AIDS. Partially because the correlation between HIV detection and active AIDS symptoms in less than 100% - partially because we havn't yet nailed down the mechanism the HIV virus uses to attack the immune system. They may be wrong - but they're not neccesarily crazy.
 
2005-09-03 04:54:43 PM  
sixdays: Im just saying that text books pass off outdated theory as fact. It gets personally when, from what ive read, the single biggest cause of people turning from religion is high school and college level biology classes. And im not saying dont teach evloution - its a big deal and should definately be taught. But its passed off as factual, flawless, and undisputed. Antheists love to tout how they embrace "critical thinking." So what wrong with critical thinking here? Isnt that the whole point to science?

So why not just either a) include evidence that certain experiments or theories were flawed, or b) cease teaching experiments that were proven wrong?

Both solutions would address your concern without the need to include intelligent design as an "alternative theory." And for that matter if intelligent design was included, evidence disputing it should be included as well. None of this nonsense about it being included as the last word that can't be challenged or "just a side note."

Lets just teach kids not to accept things at face value. In anything.

Great idea. "Hey kids, scientists assume that HIV causes AIDS but there's no proof of that. So why don't you go hump to test the hypothesis?" The kind of radical skepticism that you advocate is dangerous because it amounts to little more than nihilism. Scientific positivism encourages a level of informed skepticism, but we shouldn't aim to create generations of Descartes who sit around and cogito all day.
 
2005-09-03 04:55:39 PM  
Mass murderer would probably be Saul of Tarsus...otherwise known as Paul.

According to the bible he was "reborn" in Christ on the road to Damascus. Previously, he was responsible for the deaths of thousands of the early Christians.

Once converted, his letters to the early sects of christianity (ie the Thesselonians) had a major impact on the progression of the religion. Funny though how he never wrote about his conversion experience.

It was Pauls' concept that Jesus died for our sins...yadda yadda yadd... and that salvation only comes by accepting Christ.

Personally, I believe his actions were more political than anything....AND distorted the teachings of Jesus.
 
2005-09-03 04:56:06 PM  
LocalCynic, DaveDawg2000

Please, stop mixing conservatism with republicans

It makes real conservatives cry
 
2005-09-03 04:56:45 PM  
findthefish: It was Pauls' concept that Jesus died for our sins...yadda yadda yadd... and that salvation only comes by accepting Christ.

In other words, evangelicalism is essentially Paulianism rather than Christianity.
 
2005-09-03 04:56:49 PM  
Not saying I agree with Weaver95, just that it's obnoxious when others suggest abscense = admitting defeat.

What he'll do is swagger into a thread, shooting from his hip and sending people running before someone notices- hey, he's kind of, well, WRONG, let's see what can be done about this. Then it will start, his argument will start to get chewed up. If the thread has the benefit of someone who knows how to handle him (and his many dodges) around, his argument will begin to get disassembled.

If he starts really getting taken to school, he'll say "OMG, I just got some really important work stuff to do."

If he's hanging around and just flaming people and winning arguments against people that can't handle him, he'll stay on a thread all day. If someone comes in and starts giving him gut punches, he'll...uh...OH MY GOD! LOOK AT THAT CRAZY DOG!

*scram*

I personally don't mind losing arguments, because it means I've learned something. Weaver looks at discourse more as a tactical assault strategy, which is sad.
 
2005-09-03 04:57:02 PM  
bmasso:

Ummm - actually there are real some scienists (with real degrees) who think it possible that HIV is a MARKER rather than the cause of AIDS. Partially because the correlation between HIV detection and active AIDS symptoms in less than 100% - partially because we havn't yet nailed down the mechanism the HIV virus uses to attack the immune system. They may be wrong - but they're not neccesarily crazy.

Well, this may or may not be true. The only thing I'm sure of is...

YOU'VE GOT THE AIIIIIIDS!

[image from img391.imageshack.us too old to be available]
 
2005-09-03 04:58:10 PM  
bmasso

Saying HIV virus is kinda like saying IBM machine.
 
2005-09-03 04:58:59 PM  
3rdLostPassword: bmasso

Saying HIV virus is kinda like saying IBM machine.



Your age is showing
 
2005-09-03 05:00:49 PM  
Smallberries: Your age is showing

/rimshot +1
 
2005-09-03 05:01:10 PM  
DaveDawg2000: You owe me a new keyboard for my new favorite word

You know, you too can make these words up. Just take your favourite slang/derogatory phrases, then combine them with whatever label you want to "totally owninate". Examples include, but are not limited to:

Republicraps
Retardicans
Lieburals

And the list goes on, limited only by your ability to come up with childish insults. And for that, you can just hang around elementary schools, and take notes! Enjoy.
 
Displayed 50 of 445 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report