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.

(The Raw Story)   Christian groups sue to keep Kansas schools from teaching science as if it's true   (rawstory.com ) divider line
    More: Fail, Kansas, Kansas schools, faith groups, orthodoxy, creationisms, standards, Pacific Justice Institute  
•       •       •

3636 clicks; posted to Politics » on 27 Sep 2013 at 12:55 PM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-09-27 01:10:55 PM  

qorkfiend: but is there an accepted standard for the courts?


Put your left hand on the bible and raise your right hand.
You you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god?

Yes

GTFO.
 
2013-09-27 01:11:18 PM  

super_grass: Luckily for them, the hard core post-modernists are also starting to reject empiricism because of "privilege" and "social constructs".

Looks like all derp converges at the top.


Starting?  That crap was going on in the early 90s during the heyday of Political Correctness in education.
 
2013-09-27 01:11:35 PM  

FloydA: Nurglitch: What if they just teach it as "mostly, contingently, and as far as we knew, kinda true," rather than TRUTH?

What if they each religious beliefs in church, and science in science classes?

Evolution happens.  Evolution has happened.  Evolution will continue to happen as long as there are organisms that reproduce.  If the creationists can't deal with that simple fact, that's their problem.


Well, we think it happens, and it kinda looks like it happened, and it's a really good, useful explanation for things happening, but calling it a 'fact' is kind of antithetical to the point of science.
 
2013-09-27 01:12:59 PM  

vudukungfu: Schools are like polling places. And religion is like a penis. It's OK to have one. It's OK to be proud of it.It is NOT OK to wave it around in public.


Oh I don't know, sometimes it's amusing to see someone waving their religion-penis around for us to all point to and laugh at.
 
2013-09-27 01:13:00 PM  

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Everyone knows that Atun masturbated onto the ground creating the other gods.

Why won't the Kansas school board teach this?

DAMMIT WEENER!


Ned Flanders: We want you to teach alternative theories to Darwinian evolution.

Principal Skinner: You mean, Lamarckian evolution?
 
2013-09-27 01:14:27 PM  

vudukungfu: qorkfiend: but is there an accepted standard for the courts?

Put your left hand on the bible and raise your right hand.
You you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god?

Yes

GTFO.

Suppose the Bible they hand you to swear on is upside-down. Or backward. Or both! And you swear to tell the truth on an upside-down backward Bible. Would that count? Suppose the Bible they hand you is an old Bible and half the pages are missing. Suppose all they have is a Chinese Bible-in an American court. Or a braille Bible, and you're not blind! Suppose they hand you an upside-down backward Chinese braille Bible with half the pages missing. At what point does all of this stuff just break down and become just a lot of stupid shiat that somebody made up? - George Carlin

 
2013-09-27 01:15:27 PM  
the real question: why did Jesus put water on Mars?
 
2013-09-27 01:15:28 PM  

Quasar: cameroncrazy1984: Weaver95: These people are embarrassingly stupid and weirdly proud of it.

And also really non-self-aware: FTFA:

"The statement went on to say that "teaching the materialistic/atheistic ideas to primary school children whose minds are susceptible to blindly accepting them as true" is unconstitutional and dangerous, and therefore the new science standards must be stopped. "

And yet apparently teaching primary school children about religion is not dangerous at all.

My brain wanted to climb back into the primordial soup when I read that.


Don't be silly. The primordial soup from which we emerged has been gone for 6,000 years.
 
2013-09-27 01:16:31 PM  

pacified: the real question: why did Jesus put water on Mars?


that's was SATAN

/TRICKSTER!
 
2013-09-27 01:17:04 PM  

FloydA: Nurglitch: What if they just teach it as "mostly, contingently, and as far as we knew, kinda true," rather than TRUTH?

What if they each religious beliefs in church, and science in science classes?

Evolution happens.  Evolution has happened.  Evolution will continue to happen as long as there are organisms that reproduce.  If the creationists can't deal with that simple fact, that's their problem.


I thought they kinda sorta believed in evolution, that a little bit happened cause Noah couldn't fit two of EVERYTHING on the ark, and just brought a sampling and what we have now evolved from that? Or did I dream it?
 
2013-09-27 01:18:07 PM  
they-tried-to-teach-my-baby-science.jpg

/for some reason i am no longer able to post pictures - when i click the icon, it greys the screen but does not pop up the box
 
2013-09-27 01:19:23 PM  

haolegirl: FloydA: Nurglitch: What if they just teach it as "mostly, contingently, and as far as we knew, kinda true," rather than TRUTH?

What if they each religious beliefs in church, and science in science classes?

Evolution happens.  Evolution has happened.  Evolution will continue to happen as long as there are organisms that reproduce.  If the creationists can't deal with that simple fact, that's their problem.

I thought they kinda sorta believed in evolution, that a little bit happened cause Noah couldn't fit two of EVERYTHING on the ark, and just brought a sampling and what we have now evolved from that? Or did I dream it?


right most will concede micro-evolution.
it's the big picture, evolution of new species, they can't believe because it would take hundreds of millions of years and the earth only a few thousand years old.
 
2013-09-27 01:19:43 PM  
For those interested in the legal cray-cray, Plaintiff filing from the COPE website.
 
2013-09-27 01:20:50 PM  

NutWrench: vudukungfu: qorkfiend: but is there an accepted standard for the courts?

Put your left hand on the bible and raise your right hand.
You you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god?

Yes

GTFO.

Suppose the Bible they hand you to swear on is upside-down. Or backward. Or both! And you swear to tell the truth on an upside-down backward Bible. Would that count? Suppose the Bible they hand you is an old Bible and half the pages are missing. Suppose all they have is a Chinese Bible-in an American court. Or a braille Bible, and you're not blind! Suppose they hand you an upside-down backward Chinese braille Bible with half the pages missing. At what point does all of this stuff just break down and become just a lot of stupid shiat that somebody made up? - George Carlin


In a similar vein:   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYchB7Kxuvs">http://www.youtube.com/wa tch?v=sYchB7Kxuvs
 
2013-09-27 01:20:53 PM  
The Wizard of Oz was just another name for Jesus after all...
 
2013-09-27 01:21:10 PM  

Nurglitch: FloydA: Nurglitch: What if they just teach it as "mostly, contingently, and as far as we knew, kinda true," rather than TRUTH?

What if they each religious beliefs in church, and science in science classes?

Evolution happens.  Evolution has happened.  Evolution will continue to happen as long as there are organisms that reproduce.  If the creationists can't deal with that simple fact, that's their problem.

Well, we think it happens, and it kinda looks like it happened, and it's a really good, useful explanation for things happening, but calling it a 'fact' is kind of antithetical to the point of science.



Not really.  In the sciences, the word "fact" refers to something that we have observed.  We have observed evolution happening, so it is a fact.  There is no sense of the term "fact" that does not pertain to evolution.  Evolution is as much a "fact" as anything in the sciences can ever be.

You might argue that natural selection, drift, mutation, recombination, and migration are not "facts," and I'd be willing to accept  that argument.

Put it this way; the theory of universal gravitation explains why we see things falling down.  Things falling down are facts.  The theory explains why it happens.

The theory of evolution by means of natural selection explains why populations of organisms evolve the way that they do.  The evolution of gene pools is an observation that the theory attempts to explain.

Nobody teaches the theory as fact, because it's not.  A theory is an explanation of facts.  We do teach the facts as facts, because they are.  One generation's gene pool does not contain the same relative abundances of variant alleles as the next generation - this is a fact, and that is what "evolution" is.

What the creationists want is for us to teach something that is patently and obviously false as though it was equally reasonable as real things.  This is not a good idea.
 
2013-09-27 01:21:18 PM  
This is stupid. But it seems you let the teacher teach science, and then sometime during the year the teachers says "Also, Christians believe God created the universe and all living creatures. There is no proof of this. A pastor and the church of your choice can expand upon these ideas. Now, onto ionic bonding."
 
2013-09-27 01:22:32 PM  
peakwatch.typepad.com

Pants full of macaroni!!: they-tried-to-teach-my-baby-science.jpg

/for some reason i am no longer able to post pictures - when i click the icon, it greys the screen but does not pop up the box


here you go...
 
2013-09-27 01:24:11 PM  

unexplained bacon: [peakwatch.typepad.com image 313x400]

Pants full of macaroni!!: they-tried-to-teach-my-baby-science.jpg

/for some reason i am no longer able to post pictures - when i click the icon, it greys the screen but does not pop up the box

here you go...


You, sir, are a gentleman and a scholar.  Cheers.
 
2013-09-27 01:25:38 PM  
Off the subject, but saying science is true is a bit of a misnomer too. Scientific theories, which are the strongest of scientific facts, are often shown to be not 100% accurate (e.g. special relativity to general relativity).
 
2013-09-27 01:26:55 PM  

Pants full of macaroni!!: they-tried-to-teach-my-baby-science.jpg

/for some reason i am no longer able to post pictures - when i click the icon, it greys the screen but does not pop up the box


I thought it was just me.
 
2013-09-27 01:28:48 PM  

EWreckedSean: Off the subject, but saying science is true is a bit of a misnomer too. Scientific theories, which are the strongest of scientific facts, are often shown to be not 100% accurate (e.g. special relativity to general relativity).



Exactly: The more facts we learn, the more data we collect, the more our theories get refined, or replaced.
 
2013-09-27 01:29:11 PM  

R.A.Danny: The world needs ditch diggers too.


The State of Kansas appears to be poised to be the world's supplier of ditchdiggers. I suppose it beats importing them from Mexico.
 
2013-09-27 01:30:53 PM  
God bless their poor, dear sweet hearts, but they try so very hard...
 
2013-09-27 01:31:09 PM  
haolegirl:

I thought they kinda sorta believed in evolution, that a little bit happened cause Noah couldn't fit two of EVERYTHING on the ark, and just brought a sampling and what we have now evolved from that? Or did I dream it?


Not all of them, but some creationists make that claim.  What's amazing about it is that, in order for the claim to make even a tiny bit of sense, they have to propose that evolution can happen a whole hell of a lot faster than even the most extreme PunkEek fan would propose, AND that nobody noticed at the time that a pair of generic deer gave birth to white tails, mule deer, elk, moose, red deer, and caribou all in one litter,  AND that this process of hyper-evolution stopped as soon as we started looking.
They make that argument in an effort to preserve the ark story.

Other creationists just sort of bypass the ark story and assume that God crammed the animals into that small space by magic, or the ark was bigger than it is described, as though it was a Tardis or something.
 
2013-09-27 01:32:14 PM  

EWreckedSean: Off the subject, but saying science is true is a bit of a misnomer too. Scientific theories, which are the strongest of scientific facts, are often shown to be not 100% accurate (e.g. special relativity to general relativity).


They're testable and repeatable. Sometimes the test gets better and what was once promoted to theory gets washed away based on new evidence. Sometimes it is just new discovery that better explains a process.

That's the thing, though. Testable and repeatable. Wilingness to change accepted theories based on new evidence; these are how we get science. Religion just 'is' because they believe it. Of the two choices here, one is more "true" than the other.
 
2013-09-27 01:33:40 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: Weaver95: These people are embarrassingly stupid and weirdly proud of it.

And also really non-self-aware: FTFA:

"The statement went on to say that "teaching the materialistic/atheistic ideas to primary school children whose minds are susceptible to blindly accepting them as true" is unconstitutional and dangerous, and therefore the new science standards must be stopped. "

And yet apparently teaching primary school children about religion is not dangerous at all.


That is just amazing beyond words.
 
2013-09-27 01:34:34 PM  

NeverDrunk23: Religion and people like this turn people off from religion.


Yup.

Funny picture time:

i457.photobucket.com

i457.photobucket.com


Anecdote time:  I was driving back from a job site in Northern California yesterday, and was flipping through the radio stations when I heard a preacher say "Take one of these tracts, wrap a rubber band around it a few times like it's a roll of money, and toss it to the homeless.  That's one more soul saved"

//North California is weirder than Southern California
 
2013-09-27 01:35:04 PM  

busy chillin': This is stupid. But it seems you let the teacher teach science, and then sometime during the year the teachers says "Also, Christians believe God created the universe and all living creatures. There is no proof of this. A pastor and the church of your choice can expand upon these ideas. Now, onto ionic bonding."


No.  Never give them a millimeter.  There is no reason to poison education with their nonsense.
 
2013-09-27 01:35:27 PM  

dr_blasto: EWreckedSean: Off the subject, but saying science is true is a bit of a misnomer too. Scientific theories, which are the strongest of scientific facts, are often shown to be not 100% accurate (e.g. special relativity to general relativity).

They're testable and repeatable. Sometimes the test gets better and what was once promoted to theory gets washed away based on new evidence. Sometimes it is just new discovery that better explains a process.

That's the thing, though. Testable and repeatable. Wilingness to change accepted theories based on new evidence; these are how we get science. Religion just 'is' because they believe it. Of the two choices here, one is more "true" than the other.


You mean to tell me that whole walking on water thing is not repeatable?
 
2013-09-27 01:35:44 PM  

FloydA: Other creationists just sort of bypass the ark story and assume that God crammed the animals into that small space by magic, or the ark was bigger than it is described, as though it was a Tardis or something.


The five-and-a-half-minute Lido deck!
 
2013-09-27 01:36:38 PM  

FloydA: Nurglitch: FloydA: Nurglitch: What if they just teach it as "mostly, contingently, and as far as we knew, kinda true," rather than TRUTH?

What if they each religious beliefs in church, and science in science classes?

Evolution happens.  Evolution has happened.  Evolution will continue to happen as long as there are organisms that reproduce.  If the creationists can't deal with that simple fact, that's their problem.

Well, we think it happens, and it kinda looks like it happened, and it's a really good, useful explanation for things happening, but calling it a 'fact' is kind of antithetical to the point of science.


Not really.  In the sciences, the word "fact" refers to something that we have observed.  We have observed evolution happening, so it is a fact.  There is no sense of the term "fact" that does not pertain to evolution.  Evolution is as much a "fact" as anything in the sciences can ever be.

You might argue that natural selection, drift, mutation, recombination, and migration are not "facts," and I'd be willing to accept  that argument.

Put it this way; the theory of universal gravitation explains why we see things falling down.  Things falling down are facts.  The theory explains why it happens.

The theory of evolution by means of natural selection explains why populations of organisms evolve the way that they do.  The evolution of gene pools is an observation that the theory attempts to explain.

Nobody teaches the theory as fact, because it's not.  A theory is an explanation of facts.  We do teach the facts as facts, because they are.  One generation's gene pool does not contain the same relative abundances of variant alleles as the next generation - this is a fact, and that is what "evolution" is.

What the creationists want is for us to teach something that is patently and obviously false as though it was equally reasonable as real things.  This is not a good idea.


See, what you're not getting is that scientists and lay-people use the term "fact" differently, and that some people take the notion of fact as Fact, as in something universal and absolute. In other words, literally, you're talking about different things using the same words and although it looks like you're having a conversation (hence the appearance of disagreement), you're actually not talking about the same thing at all.

Secondly, if it was "patently and obviously false" then there wouldn't be a disagreement, because it would be patent and obvious that your theory isn't in conflict with their myth. Something science communicators (and most 'experts') often fail to do is to assess their audience, and adapt their language appropriately to make things clear to their audiences as well as to themselves.

What creationists want is their myths promulgated by the state, which I believe is illegal by your country's constitution.
 
2013-09-27 01:36:39 PM  

EWreckedSean: Off the subject, but saying science is true is a bit of a misnomer too. Scientific theories, which are the strongest of scientific facts, are often shown to be not 100% accurate (e.g. special relativity to general relativity).


Depends on what people intend when they say "true".

Science is about creating models which best describe reality. Some aspect of the model might turn out to be flawed (indeed, this is almost a certainty), but that does not preclude the general conclusions of the model from being what the average person would consider "fact" or "true".

Newtonian physics is a flawed model that can still generate conclusions we would consider to be factual/true.
 
2013-09-27 01:36:45 PM  

Nurglitch: What if they just teach it as "mostly, contingently, and as far as we knew, kinda true," rather than TRUTH?


But that's what science does now.

Science doesn't claim to know "The Truth."  Observations are either true or falsified, and the theories developed from observations and experiments are only claimed to be the best explanation that we have so far.

Scientists believe that by assiduously applying the scientific method we can develop a more predictive understanding of the universe.  Ultimate truth is the purview of religion, not science.
 
2013-09-27 01:36:59 PM  

Weaver95: These people are embarrassingly stupid and weirdly proud of it.


From another thread (but more on-topic here):

img.fark.net
 
2013-09-27 01:38:45 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2013-09-27 01:39:02 PM  

dletter: Speaker2Animals: Brad Dachus of Pacific Justice complained that is a violation of a child's rights to teach them that Creationism isn't the truth.

Which f*cking religion are you talking about, moran? I went to a Catholic high school and learned about evolution in freshman biology, and was taught the creation story in Genesis was allegory.

Evangelicals.... Catholics are practically athiests compared to them.


And hell, it's not like Jews take a literal interpretation of the Old Testament.
 
2013-09-27 01:40:16 PM  

vudukungfu: We need to start treating Christians just like their ululating wacko babby raping worshiper counterparts that squat in the desert.
They are 100% the same kind of ignorant philistine schizospiritual terrorists andthey havenothing to offer society or civilizationexcept for patented fear and prejudice.
There is no place for them on this earth but an insaneasylum.
And whenarmed, they are a clear and present danger to all around.
Period.


I disagree, there are also work camps.
 
2013-09-27 01:40:35 PM  
I wish I had a response for this.
 
2013-09-27 01:40:52 PM  
Can someone explain to me how these peoples are that different from the Talibans?
 
2013-09-27 01:42:01 PM  

boue67: Can someone explain to me how these peoples are that different from the Talibans?


they live Kansas
 
2013-09-27 01:42:11 PM  
"How can I help from believing what is in my own heart? Two plus two are five."
"Sometimes, Winston, sometimes they are four. You must try harder. It is not easy to become sane."
 
2013-09-27 01:42:26 PM  

boue67: Can someone explain to me how these peoples are that different from the Talibans?


They don't worship a Pagan Moon God?  *ducks*
 
2013-09-27 01:43:16 PM  

boue67: Can someone explain to me how these peoples are that different from the Talibans?


They are white, duh
 
2013-09-27 01:44:32 PM  

boue67: Can someone explain to me how these peoples are that different from the Talibans?


because they worship the right god, duh.  ;)

/snark
 
2013-09-27 01:45:01 PM  

ArcadianRefugee: Weaver95: These people are embarrassingly stupid and weirdly proud of it.

From another thread (but more on-topic here):

[img.fark.net image 819x416]


I've got a one-eyed serpent she can have a conversation with.
 
2013-09-27 01:46:56 PM  
"The group maintained that questions like "Where do we come from?" can only be answered honestly by religious dogma."

So, you're going to honestly answer questions using only dogma, which is itself based on a set of un-provable assumptions.

/morans
 
2013-09-27 01:49:41 PM  

EWreckedSean: Off the subject, but saying science is true is a bit of a misnomer too. Scientific theories, which are the strongest of scientific facts, are often shown to be not 100% accurate (e.g. special relativity to general relativity).


The bold is blatantly false.  Theories are explanations of facts, they are not just "stronger facts."
 
2013-09-27 01:51:53 PM  

R.A.Danny: The world needs ditch diggers too.


At least my kids will have less competition out there in the real world.
 
2013-09-27 01:52:20 PM  
Scopes Trial part 2: Scientific Denial Boogaloo
 
Displayed 50 of 247 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
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