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.

(Slate)   A half-naked witch doctor is why creationism is still being taught in Louisiana schools. No, really   (slate.com) divider line 379
    More: Stupid, Education Act, Thomas B. Fordham Institute, Bobby Jindal  
•       •       •

9018 clicks; posted to Politics » on 05 May 2013 at 4:02 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



379 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-05 05:08:58 PM  

SkinnyHead: Mrtraveler01: SkinnyHead: So because you believe those things are settled, based on thousands of Fark threads, students should not be allowed to use logic or critical thinking skills in addressing those topics? Isn't that an anti-logic position?

Riddle me this (because I'm bored).

Why should creationism be taught in a science class in a public school? It's not a scientifically valid theory.

Louisiana Science Education Act does not provide for the teaching of creationism. It promotes critical thinking skills, logical analysis, and open and objective discussion of scientific theories.


What "theories" exactly?
 
2013-05-05 05:09:13 PM  

SkinnyHead: So because you believe those things are settled, based on thousands of Fark threads, students should not be allowed to use logic or critical thinking skills in addressing those topics? Isn't that an anti-logic position?


So, the bill does not allow for discussion of creationism/intelligent design in the classroom, because neither of those things use logic or critical thinking skills.

"Teacher, the Bible says god created life, can we discuss that?"
"No, because there is no scientific evidence that god exists, so it could not create life.  Prove god exists, scientifically, prove such a god could create life, scientifically, get it peer reviewed and published, then we will discuss it."

"Teacher, my pastor said that god intelligently designed humans, can we discuss that?"
"No, because there is no scientific evidence that the body is intelligently designed. The human body is full of flaws and weaknesses that no intelligent designer would allow to exist.  Logically,  it would be more likely to suppose that the body was designed by an unintelligent or or evil being.  But, unless you can scientifically prove the existence of even this piss-poor designer, we must discount their existence, as well."

Whelp, that's a waste of five minutes of class time.
 
2013-05-05 05:09:13 PM  

Infinity370: [freethoughtblogs.com image 720x480]


THat's the first time I've seen the second page of that test. I don't want to live on this planet any longer.
 
2013-05-05 05:11:40 PM  

SkinnyHead: Mrtraveler01: SkinnyHead: So because you believe those things are settled, based on thousands of Fark threads, students should not be allowed to use logic or critical thinking skills in addressing those topics? Isn't that an anti-logic position?

Riddle me this (because I'm bored).

Why should creationism be taught in a science class in a public school? It's not a scientifically valid theory.

Louisiana Science Education Act does not provide for the teaching of creationism. It promotes critical thinking skills, logical analysis, and open and objective discussion of scientific theories.


Were any of these things barred from the classroom before? Of course not. What was barred was the ability of a teacher to claim that the concept of a 6000 year old earth was something worth discussing in a science class. The bill is designed using "teach the controversy" language to give cover for proselytizers to undermine the science curriculum.
 
2013-05-05 05:13:11 PM  
What is annoying is that the Bible doesn't say the world is 6000 years old. Genesis just describes the end of the last ice age.

Read your own book, idiots.
 
2013-05-05 05:13:50 PM  

Mrtraveler01: SkinnyHead:

Louisiana Science Education Act does not provide for the teaching of creationism. It promotes critical thinking skills, logical analysis, and open and objective discussion of scientific theories.

...including, but not limited to, evolution, the origins of life, global warming, and human cloning."

So how is this not an open door to teach creationism again?


Creationism isn't mentioned.  And it would be contrary to the statute to teach the religious doctrine of creationism because the law prohibits the promotion any religious doctrine.
 
2013-05-05 05:13:54 PM  

A Dark Evil Omen: Bloody William: Why are you people responding to him?

Also, I farking loathe any state or politician that does this farking bullshiat. It's hurting us as a country.

I am shocked that there are people who don't have SkinnyDerp on ignore. He's not the most loathsome idiot troll we have around here but he may well be the stupidest.


Especially after he outted himself as an alt.
 
2013-05-05 05:15:17 PM  

devek: What is annoying is that the Bible doesn't say the world is 6000 years old. Genesis just describes the end of the last ice age.

Read your own book, idiots.


The YECs hate the OECs almost as much as they do the rest of is that accept scientific evidence.
 
2013-05-05 05:15:30 PM  

Stile4aly: What was barred was the ability of a teacher to claim that the concept of a 6000 year old earth was something worth discussing in a science class.


How do you know it's not 6000 years old. Were you there?
 
2013-05-05 05:16:30 PM  
TFA: "The repeal lost in a 3-2 vote. Senator Guillory's vote would've been enough to swing the decision the other way."

Louisiana has only 5 senators?
 
2013-05-05 05:16:56 PM  

FirstNationalBastard: Ooo eee ooo ahh ah.


I find myself strangely attracted to you.
 
2013-05-05 05:17:18 PM  

SkinnyHead: Mrtraveler01: SkinnyHead:

Louisiana Science Education Act does not provide for the teaching of creationism. It promotes critical thinking skills, logical analysis, and open and objective discussion of scientific theories.

...including, but not limited to, evolution, the origins of life, global warming, and human cloning."

So how is this not an open door to teach creationism again?

Creationism isn't mentioned.  And it would be contrary to the statute to teach the religious doctrine of creationism because the law prohibits the promotion any religious doctrine.


Stop. Just stop. This law is an embarrassment to the state of Louisiana. It was intended to and has opened the door to Creationism being taught in public schools here. Creationism is not science, it is a religious belief and it's one that's not even part of all of Christianity. At least use actual facts to troll.
 
2013-05-05 05:18:31 PM  

jaytkay: TFA: "The repeal lost in a 3-2 vote. Senator Guillory's vote would've been enough to swing the decision the other way."

Louisiana has only 5 senators?


I believe the repeal measure died in committee, not a floor vote. The article is unclear.
 
2013-05-05 05:19:03 PM  
I don't think schools should be teaching cretinism.
 
2013-05-05 05:19:49 PM  
How about we teach SCIENCE, in SCIENCE Class.

Creationism is not SCIENCE, Its not even a proper theory.

Besides, which creationism would you even teach.
This is just another bullshiat method to get a foot in the damn door to teach religion in Science class.

http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4082  - What Do Creationists Really Believe?

Creationism is not one set of beliefs - it is a battleground of dramatically conflicting world views.

tl;dr PodCast - http://skeptoid.com/audio/skeptoid-4082.mp3


http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4065 - How to Debate a Young Earth Creationist

Learn the basic arguments against science made by Young Earthers, and how to rebut them.

tl;dr Podcast - http://skeptoid.com/audio/skeptoid-4065.mp3


Aslo Pen And Teller Weigh in on this BULLshiat

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6Ii7pfcGzk  - Full Episode.
 
2013-05-05 05:19:49 PM  

SkinnyHead: Louisiana Science Education Act does not provide for the teaching of creationism. It promotes critical thinking skills, logical analysis, and open and objective discussion of scientific theories.


Let's ask Bobby Jindal, the man who signed this into law, what he thinks about that, shall we?

April 12 interview w/ NBC's Education Nation:

BJ: "We have what's called the Science Education Act, that says if a teacher wants to supplement those materials, if the school board's OK with that, if the State school board's OK with that, they can supplement those materials.

"I've got no problem if a school board, a local school board, says we want to teach our kids about creationism, that some people have these beliefs as well. Let's teach them about intelligent design. I think teach them the best science. Let them, give them the tools where they can make up their own mind, not only in science but as they learn and teach about other controversial issues, whether it's global warming or whether it's...climate change or these other issues. What are we scared of? Let's teach our kids the best facts and information that's out there. Let's teach them what people believe and let them debate and learn that. We shouldn't be afraid of exposing our kids to more information, more knowledge. Give them critical thinking skills, and as adults they'll be able to make their own and best decisions."


TL,DR?

Quit saying that.

http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/05/01/as-creationism-law-comes-up-for-rep eal- an-appeal-to-bobby-jindal/
 
2013-05-05 05:21:28 PM  
Please tell me why we spent billions to save the people in this state after Katrina and the BP oil spill?
 
2013-05-05 05:21:34 PM  

SkinnyHead: Mrtraveler01: SkinnyHead:

Louisiana Science Education Act does not provide for the teaching of creationism. It promotes critical thinking skills, logical analysis, and open and objective discussion of scientific theories.

...including, but not limited to, evolution, the origins of life, global warming, and human cloning."

So how is this not an open door to teach creationism again?

Creationism isn't mentioned.  And it would be contrary to the statute to teach the religious doctrine of creationism because the law prohibits the promotion any religious doctrine.


Student: Teacher, the textbook says the earth is 4.5 billion years old, but my pastor says it's much younger than that. Why is the book incorrect?

Teacher: Well, Timmy, it's a very controversial subject. Some scientists say the earth is old, but there's evidence on both sides. Your pastor might have some interesting material on the subject, so it might be worth talking to him.

This conversation sponsored by the Louisiana "critical thinking" law.
 
2013-05-05 05:22:07 PM  

SkinnyHead: Mrtraveler01: SkinnyHead:

Louisiana Science Education Act does not provide for the teaching of creationism. It promotes critical thinking skills, logical analysis, and open and objective discussion of scientific theories.

...including, but not limited to, evolution, the origins of life, global warming, and human cloning."

So how is this not an open door to teach creationism again?

Creationism isn't mentioned.  And it would be contrary to the statute to teach the religious doctrine of creationism because the law prohibits the promotion any religious doctrine.


It just changes the name to Intelligent Design, and now it is somehow okay. It is still not science. Period.
 
2013-05-05 05:23:27 PM  

bugontherug: Stile4aly: What was barred was the ability of a teacher to claim that the concept of a 6000 year old earth was something worth discussing in a science class.

How do you know it's not 6000 years old. Were you there?


In fact I was. I have existed for millions of years and I have watched your species from the time you came down from the trees.

Prove me wrong.
 
2013-05-05 05:23:34 PM  

NeverDrunk23: A Dark Evil Omen: Bloody William: Why are you people responding to him?

Also, I farking loathe any state or politician that does this farking bullshiat. It's hurting us as a country.

I am shocked that there are people who don't have [ThinCranium] on ignore. He's not the most loathsome idiot troll we have around here but he may well be the stupidest.

Especially after he outted himself as [elxxxx's] alt.


I don't have anybody on ignore.  Frankly, I don't see the point.

I don't let what trolls write get me exercised (usually, I just skim over their nonsense) and, it's possible they might occasionally say something interesting or, at least, mildly entertaining.  So why would I ignore them?  I'm a grown man, not a delicate flower.
 
2013-05-05 05:23:38 PM  

SkinnyHead: Creationism isn't mentioned. And it would be contrary to the statute to teach the religious doctrine of creationism because the law prohibits the promotion any religious doctrine.


Interviewed by NBC News (April 12, 2013), Louisiana's governor Bobby Jindal (R) explicitly stated that the so-called Louisiana Science Education Act permits the teaching of creationism, including "intelligent design." Jindal was asked (at around 9:00), "Should creationism be taught in schools?" He did not answer the question directly, although he implied that it would be up to private schools to decide whether to teach creationism, so the interviewer asked, "So you don't think so, you don't think that creationism should be taught in public schools?"


Responding, Jindal said in part, "We have what's called the Science Education Act that says that if a teacher wants to supplement those materials, if the school board is okay with that, if the state school board is okay with that, they can supplement those materials. ... Let's teach them - I've got no problem if a school board, a local school board, says we want to teach our kids about creationism, that people, some people, have these beliefs as well, let's teach them about 'intelligent design'." "What are we scared of?" he asked.


Huh, the guy who signed the bill says you are wrong.  Stop it, el chip.
 
2013-05-05 05:25:48 PM  

Stile4aly: bugontherug: Stile4aly: What was barred was the ability of a teacher to claim that the concept of a 6000 year old earth was something worth discussing in a science class.

How do you know it's not 6000 years old. Were you there?

In fact I was. I have existed for millions of years and I have watched your species from the time you came down from the trees.

Prove me wrong.


That was you?  I kept saying "hi" through the ages, and you just ignored me. Talk about antisocial.
 
2013-05-05 05:27:11 PM  

SkinnyHead: So because you believe those things are settled, based on thousands of Fark threads, students should not be allowed to use logic or critical thinking skills in addressing those topics? Isn't that an anti-logic position?



Those might be good topics for a History of Science course, or a Philosophy of Science course, should High Schools decide to teach those courses. Put that stuff in a Science course and it's only Republican Political Correctness. Throwing a bone to the fundies.

And, no, I don't believe things because of Fark threads. I was only pointing out that we've all argued this shiat before, at great length, over and over and over and over and over


Ned Stark: say what?



Maybe I'm not as well-informed as I should be on the origins of life, but I guess I've always assumed that the prevailing opinion was that given the laws of chemistry, some primordial soup and other favorable starting conditions, and a billion years, life likely just sort of popped out of the blue. And if the discussion is whether if it happened on Earth or flew in on an asteroid from someplace else, we would only be speculating on venues. I'll happily stand corrected if you have some good links handy for me to read...
 
2013-05-05 05:28:15 PM  

SkinnyHead: "...open and objective discussion of scientific theories being studied

..."

I don't remember there being any such thing until High School.   Kids are too unruly to have a discussion until they are at least 15 for the smart ones.
 
2013-05-05 05:29:36 PM  
I think that we should make anyone who is up for any public office, or anyone who would be in charge of education to take a test. It would be a simple test. "Do you believe the Earth is 6000 years old"? "Do you believe that Creationism is a scientific theory"? "Do you believe that what is in the Bible is literal truth"? If they answer yes to any of those questions, then they are not eligible for that job.

Before anyone yells that this is bias or discriminatory, most of the Christians I know will say no to all of these questions.
 
2013-05-05 05:30:19 PM  

Stile4aly: Student: Teacher, the textbook says the earth is 4.5 billion years old, but my pastor says it's much younger than that. Why is the book incorrect?

Teacher: Well, Timmy, it's a very controversial subject. Some scientists say the earth is old, but there's evidence on both sides. Your pastor might have some interesting material on the subject, so it might be worth talking to him.

This conversation sponsored by the Louisiana "critical thinking" law.


That's not a display of critical thinking skills or logical analysis.  Repeating the conclusions of others, whether it is a pastor or climate scientist, does not teach the student critical thinking skills or logical analysis.
 
2013-05-05 05:32:39 PM  

SkinnyHead: Stile4aly: Student: Teacher, the textbook says the earth is 4.5 billion years old, but my pastor says it's much younger than that. Why is the book incorrect?

Teacher: Well, Timmy, it's a very controversial subject. Some scientists say the earth is old, but there's evidence on both sides. Your pastor might have some interesting material on the subject, so it might be worth talking to him.

This conversation sponsored by the Louisiana "critical thinking" law.

That's not a display of critical thinking skills or logical analysis.  Repeating the conclusions of others, whether it is a pastor or climate scientist, does not teach the student critical thinking skills or logical analysis.


You are side-stepping the issue. Creationism is not science. Asking an opinion from someone is not science.
 
2013-05-05 05:33:12 PM  

phaseolus: the origins of life

Settled. No controversy.


What? No.

There's still a number of competing theories, from on-earth parthenogenesis to Panspermia (not "ALIENS" panspermia, more 'a  planet got fragged and some fragments had precursors").

Or possibley some weird combo (I think they've found some evidence of organic compounds on comets that occured naturally? Though I have no idea if those would survive entry).

Not, mind, to say that "THIS MEANS GOD DID IT", I'm just saying "Uh, no. I don't think that one's been settled yet?"
 
2013-05-05 05:33:21 PM  

Zeppelininthesky: I think that we should make anyone who is up for any public office, or anyone who would be in charge of education to take a test. It would be a simple test. "Do you believe the Earth is 6000 years old"? "Do you believe that Creationism is a scientific theory"? "Do you believe that what is in the Bible is literal truth"? If they answer yes to any of those questions, then they are not eligible for that job.


I'm pretty sure you'd need a constitutional amendment to make that happen...at least so that it sticks.

And, how likely is that?  Think, for a moment, how stupid the average person is.
 
2013-05-05 05:33:38 PM  
The proper application of both the endorsement and Lemon tests to the facts of this case makes it abundantly clear that the Board's ID Policy violates the Establishment Clause. In making this determination, we have addressed the seminal question of whether ID is science. We have concluded that it is not, and moreover that ID cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents.

Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al.,
 
2013-05-05 05:38:37 PM  
And another thread is ruined by people responding to Skinnyhead.
 
2013-05-05 05:46:21 PM  

Stile4aly: bugontherug: Stile4aly: What was barred was the ability of a teacher to claim that the concept of a 6000 year old earth was something worth discussing in a science class.

How do you know it's not 6000 years old. Were you there?

In fact I was. I have existed for millions of years and I have watched your species from the time you came down from the trees.

Prove me wrong.


Hope you know I was joking, bro. If you look at the last question on side two of that goddamn test, the final question is "what can you say if someone tries to tell you the Earth is billions of years old?" The answer, which was scored correctly, is "were you there."

They're teaching them to parrot moronic Fox talking points from an early age.

This country is doomed.
 
2013-05-05 05:47:15 PM  

Zeppelininthesky: I think that we should make anyone who is up for any public office, or anyone who would be in charge of education to take a test. It would be a simple test. "Do you believe the Earth is 6000 years old"? "Do you believe that Creationism is a scientific theory"? "Do you believe that what is in the Bible is literal truth"? If they answer yes to any of those questions, then they are not eligible for that job.

Before anyone yells that this is bias or discriminatory, most of the Christians I know will say no to all of these questions.


Well, we don't have an official test, but there's no rule against asking politicians those questions at a town hall or something.  I wish more people would do that with Republican candidates, especially in the primaries.
 
2013-05-05 05:49:21 PM  

RyogaM: SkinnyHead: Creationism isn't mentioned. And it would be contrary to the statute to teach the religious doctrine of creationism because the law prohibits the promotion any religious doctrine.

Interviewed by NBC News (April 12, 2013), Louisiana's governor Bobby Jindal (R) explicitly stated that the so-called Louisiana Science Education Act permits the teaching of creationism, including "intelligent design." Jindal was asked (at around 9:00), "Should creationism be taught in schools?" He did not answer the question directly, although he implied that it would be up to private schools to decide whether to teach creationism, so the interviewer asked, "So you don't think so, you don't think that creationism should be taught in public schools?"


Responding, Jindal said in part, "We have what's called the Science Education Act that says that if a teacher wants to supplement those materials, if the school board is okay with that, if the state school board is okay with that, they can supplement those materials. ... Let's teach them - I've got no problem if a school board, a local school board, says we want to teach our kids about creationism, that people, some people, have these beliefs as well, let's teach them about 'intelligent design'." "What are we scared of?" he asked.


Huh, the guy who signed the bill says you are wrong.  Stop it, el chip.


The Louisiana Science Education Act speaks for itself, and it does not mention anything about teaching creation science or intelligent design.  But if the scientific theory of intelligent design were to be discussed in the classroom, the students should be expected use critical thinking skills and logical analysis in assessing that theory as well.
 
2013-05-05 05:51:26 PM  

SkinnyHead: The Louisiana Science Education Act speaks for itself, and it does not mention anything about teaching creation science or intelligent design. But if the scientific theory of intelligent design were to be discussed in the classroom, the students should be expected use critical thinking skills and logical analysis in assessing that theory as well.


What's the  falsifiable hypothesis of intelligent design that makes it science?
 
2013-05-05 05:55:54 PM  

SkinnyHead: But if the scientific theory of intelligent design were to be discussed in the classroom


The only proper response from the teacher is that it is not science.

The proper application of both the endorsement and Lemon tests to the facts of this case makes it abundantly clear that the Board's ID Policy violates the Establishment Clause. In making this determination, we have addressed the seminal question of whether ID is science. We have concluded that it is not, and moreover that ID cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents.

Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al.,

 

SkinnyHead: The Louisiana Science Education Act speaks for itself


No, it clearly does not, because the guy who signed it says it would allow creationism/ID.   You are obviously wrong.
 
2013-05-05 05:57:18 PM  

SkinnyHead: the scientific theory of intelligent design


[hahaohwow]
 
2013-05-05 05:57:31 PM  

SkinnyHead: ut if the scientific theory of intelligent design were to be discussed in the classroom, the students should be expected use critical thinking skills and logical analysis in assessing that theory as well.


The problem is, there is no such theory.
 
2013-05-05 06:10:05 PM  
I love the sentence in which they describe the opposition to the bill:  78 Nobel Laureates, the City Council and Slate Magazine.

We all know that if you can't be persuaded by 78 Nobel Laureates that adding Slate to the opposition will usually change your mind.
 
2013-05-05 06:10:46 PM  
www.yoism.org
 
2013-05-05 06:14:27 PM  
sciencebasedpharmacy.files.wordpress.com

Again with this shiat, Louisiana? Edwards v. Aguillard was 1987, for fark's sake. You lost then but you just GOT to keep farking that chicken.
 
2013-05-05 06:15:21 PM  

Wolf_Blitzer: SkinnyHead: The Louisiana Science Education Act speaks for itself, and it does not mention anything about teaching creation science or intelligent design. But if the scientific theory of intelligent design were to be discussed in the classroom, the students should be expected use critical thinking skills and logical analysis in assessing that theory as well.

What's the  falsifiable hypothesis of intelligent design that makes it science?


The falsifiable hypothesis of intelligent design is that living things were designed by an intelligent agency.
 
2013-05-05 06:16:04 PM  
Skinny and TPoC in the same thread? The derp, the derp...
 
2013-05-05 06:19:53 PM  

SkinnyHead: The law they are trying to repeal states that: "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."

What's wrong with "critical thinking skills, logical analysis, and open and objective discussion of scientific theories."  Would they prefer a law that prohibits students from using critical thinking skills and logic?


You could use positive descriptive words for your agenda but it wouldn't change the effect.

Many of the schools here are using science class to teach a form of fundamentalist bible school lessons with the world created 6,453 years ago as dogma

But I forget I'm talking to skinnyhead
 
2013-05-05 06:19:56 PM  

phaseolus: SkinnyHead: So because you believe those things are settled, based on thousands of Fark threads, students should not be allowed to use logic or critical thinking skills in addressing those topics? Isn't that an anti-logic position?


Those might be good topics for a History of Science course, or a Philosophy of Science course, should High Schools decide to teach those courses. Put that stuff in a Science course and it's only Republican Political Correctness. Throwing a bone to the fundies.

And, no, I don't believe things because of Fark threads. I was only pointing out that we've all argued this shiat before, at great length, over and over and over and over and over


Ned Stark: say what?


Maybe I'm not as well-informed as I should be on the origins of life, but I guess I've always assumed that the prevailing opinion was that given the laws of chemistry, some primordial soup and other favorable starting conditions, and a billion years, life likely just sort of popped out of the blue. And if the discussion is whether if it happened on Earth or flew in on an asteroid from someplace else, we would only be speculating on venues. I'll happily stand corrected if you have some good links handy for me to read...


Deep ocean 'black smokers' is the best theory yet. The composition of the lava walls of the tubes is naturally foamy, which created li'l pockets of hot, chemically-rich fluids that have been shown to have the precursors of bio-chemistry going on in them.

While the auto-creation of a fully-functioning bacterium hasn't been observed, where and how life began is pretty clear.
 
2013-05-05 06:20:07 PM  
So would directed panspermia fall under intelligent design?

Since intelligent design is not just 'God did it" but the scientific evidence that proves a creator designed life on Earth they are going to show all the possible ways that could happen right?
 
2013-05-05 06:21:07 PM  

Serious Black: Fart_Machine: Is this a race to the bottom with Kansas?

God, I hope not. If Brownbackistan sinks any further, they'll plummet to the bottom of the ocean.


Save us, James Cameron!
 
2013-05-05 06:27:23 PM  

jcooli09: Infinity370: [freethoughtblogs.com image 720x480]

That picture really pisses me off.  The teacher, principal, and parents of that child should be prosecuted for child abuse.


FYI, the parents weren't happy about it, and the father stated the child would not be attending the school the following year.

Link
 
2013-05-05 06:27:46 PM  

SkinnyHead: Wolf_Blitzer: SkinnyHead: The Louisiana Science Education Act speaks for itself, and it does not mention anything about teaching creation science or intelligent design. But if the scientific theory of intelligent design were to be discussed in the classroom, the students should be expected use critical thinking skills and logical analysis in assessing that theory as well.

What's the  falsifiable hypothesis of intelligent design that makes it science?

The falsifiable hypothesis of intelligent design is that living things were designed by an intelligent agency.


Can you describe for the class a test that would falsify it?
 
Displayed 50 of 379 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


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