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 247
    More: Fail, Kansas, Kansas schools, faith groups, orthodoxy, creationisms, standards, Pacific Justice Institute  
•       •       •

3629 clicks; posted to Politics » on 27 Sep 2013 at 12:55 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-09-27 03:52:39 PM  
ME GO TOO FAR!
 
2013-09-27 03:54:24 PM  

theknuckler_33: SkinnyHead: AxiomJackson: Pants full of macaroni!!: SkinnyHead: "It has been the error of the schools to teach astronomy, and all the other sciences and subjects of natural philosophy, as accomplishments only; whereas they should be taught theologically, or with reference to the Being who is the author of them: for all the principles of science are of divine origin. Man cannot make, or invent, or contrive principles. He can only discover them; and he ought to look through the discovery to the Author."  ~ Thomas Paine.

Auditioning for the role of Bevets, are we?

I wonder what point is he trying to prove by quoting a political activist that has been dead for over 200 years.

Just pointing out that his views support the position asserted in this lawsuit. Paine believed that science should be taught in schools theologically.  He saw the effort to teach science as a form of materialism as an effort to promote atheism in schools:

"The evil that has resulted from the error of the schools in teaching natural philosophy as an accomplishment only, has been that of generating in the pupils a species of atheism. Instead of looking through the works of the creation to the Creator himself, they stop short, and employ the knowledge they acquire to create doubts of his existence. They labor with studied ingenuity to ascribe everything they behold to innate properties of matter; and jump over all the rest, by saying that matter is eternal."  ~ Thomas Paine.

Did Thomas Paine try to force those views on the schools via lawsuit? No?  STFU.


I also don't think Paine would have gone along with Christian creationism being taught in the first place.

Take away from Genesis the belief that Moses was the author, on which only the strange believe that it is the word of God has stood, and there remains nothing of Genesis but an anonymous book of stories, fables, and traditionary or invented absurdities, or of downright lies. [Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason]
 
2013-09-27 03:55:43 PM  

theknuckler_33: TheWhoppah: Me, Moog, say teaching fancy alphabet writing make hostile environment for traditional cavemen family faith in pictographs. How is babby formed?  Thank you, Fox, for keeping me infromed.

Oh please. That was only funny for about 100 posts or so even in that original thread. Let's not try to resurrect it.

/supposed to be all caps too


Yo Dawg, its Friday Friday fun fun fun.  Chill out and pour yourself a vodak and tonic.  You can have cheezburger.

/IANAL
//YMMV
 
2013-09-27 03:58:12 PM  
EWreckedSean:
You are confusing a theory with a scientific theory. They are not interchangeable.


I am talking about scientific theories because no other type of theory has any business being taught in a science classroom. I do not care about any other kinds of "theory" in this context; they are simply irrelevant.
 
2013-09-27 04:00:30 PM  

TheWhoppah: theknuckler_33: TheWhoppah: Me, Moog, say teaching fancy alphabet writing make hostile environment for traditional cavemen family faith in pictographs. How is babby formed?  Thank you, Fox, for keeping me infromed.

Oh please. That was only funny for about 100 posts or so even in that original thread. Let's not try to resurrect it.

/supposed to be all caps too

Yo Dawg, its Friday Friday fun fun fun.  Chill out and pour yourself a vodak and tonic.  You can have cheezburger.

/IANAL
//YMMV


Way ahead of you, buddy. That was not intended to come off the way I guess it did.

/who you callin' buddy, pal?
 
2013-09-27 04:05:41 PM  

SkinnyHead: "It has been the error of the schools to teach astronomy, and all the other sciences and subjects of natural philosophy, as accomplishments only; whereas they should be taught theologically, or with reference to the Being who is the author of them: for all the principles of science are of divine origin. Man cannot make, or invent, or contrive principles. He can only discover them; and he ought to look through the discovery to the Author."  ~ Thomas Paine.


Paine was a Deist, which was a fairly reasonable understanding of reality given the information available at that time.  You, however, are a disingenuous jackass.  Paine was not supporting the teachings of Christianity, per se, and if you read (ahahahahah!) The Age of Reason, you would see it spelled out quite clearly many times over.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism  is a nice jumping off point for you.  You should check it out.

Yeah, yeah, SkinnyHead is a troll.  I figured it was worth the time to reply anyways.  Someone else might actually learn from his mistakes.
 
2013-09-27 04:06:14 PM  

theknuckler_33: TheWhoppah: theknuckler_33: TheWhoppah: Me, Moog, say teaching fancy alphabet writing make hostile environment for traditional cavemen family faith in pictographs. How is babby formed?  Thank you, Fox, for keeping me infromed.

Oh please. That was only funny for about 100 posts or so even in that original thread. Let's not try to resurrect it.

/supposed to be all caps too

Yo Dawg, its Friday Friday fun fun fun.  Chill out and pour yourself a vodak and tonic.  You can have cheezburger.

/IANAL
//YMMV

Way ahead of you, buddy. That was not intended to come off the way I guess it did.

/who you callin' buddy, pal?



Relax, guy!
 
2013-09-27 04:11:15 PM  

give me doughnuts: theknuckler_33: who you callin' buddy, pal?

Relax, guy!


Right back atcha, chief!
 
2013-09-27 04:15:28 PM  

theknuckler_33: give me doughnuts: theknuckler_33: who you callin' buddy, pal?

Relax, guy!

Right back atcha, chief!



I'm not your 'chief', friend.
 
2013-09-27 04:18:28 PM  

give me doughnuts: theknuckler_33: give me doughnuts: theknuckler_33: who you callin' buddy, pal?

Relax, guy!

Right back atcha, chief!

I'm not your 'chief', friend.


I ain't your friend, asshole!
 
2013-09-27 04:21:03 PM  

super_grass: harleyquinnical: 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.

Is there any chance of me getting this huge serving of double standards with a side of pasta?

Of course, it's also paired with the White Whine.


The whine will not be served until the pastafarians weigh in on this, filing a lawsuit of their own in the name of satire with the same reasons listed.
 
2013-09-27 04:29:18 PM  

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


Yes, but as more and more states follow them, it gives my nieces a better chance of getting into more prestigious schools, getting better jobs, earning more money and helping poor Uncle Kierzan when I'm a drooling veggie.

Besides, someone has to wipe my bum and change the sheets when I poo the bed. I think Kansans fit that bill perfectly!
 
2013-09-27 04:38:03 PM  

FloydA: EWreckedSean:
You are confusing a theory with a scientific theory. They are not interchangeable.


I am talking about scientific theories because no other type of theory has any business being taught in a science classroom. I do not care about any other kinds of "theory" in this context; they are simply irrelevant.


I think what he is trying to claim is that a "theory" is an explanation of facts, and a "scientific theory" is a fact.

Blatantly wrong, even by his own wiki quote, but that's the most I can make sense of what he's trying to say.

/I am thoroughly amused by the use of wiki to try to show that two practicing scientists are wrong.
 
2013-09-27 04:40:28 PM  
It scares me that there is even a miniscule portion of the country, much less a sizable one, that has absolutely zero problem with ingraining ignorance and stupidity into the minds of children.  I went to private Catholic school from kindergarten through 12th grade, and I was never taught anything religiously oriented in science class.  I know the plural of anecdote is not data, and there might be other people here for whom that is not true, but the whole point of science or Biology class is to learn about science, not religion.  I mean, it says it right there in the name of the class.
 
2013-09-27 04:41:01 PM  

rinosaurus: I also don't think Paine would have gone along with Christian creationism being taught in the first place.


No, but Paine would have supported the scientific theory of Intelligent Design.  And he certainly would not approve of efforts to prohibit students from learning about Intelligent Design in schools.  He and Jefferson would insist that students should at least have the opportunity to learn of the controversy and of the differing views, so that they should be permitted to think and decide for themselves.  Most reasonable people think so too.
 
2013-09-27 04:41:03 PM  

unexplained bacon: Elzar: unexplained bacon: [www.creationism.org image 720x375]

[www.creationism.org image 720x375]

such wit simply could not have evolved from apes

"Man" Tracks has been debunked for years - only the most intellectually dishonest creationists still use this argument:  http://www.paleo.cc/paluxy/mantrack.htm

/ just saying...

probably by people with fancy diplomas

TRICKSTERS!

lets see em refudicate THIS!

[www.creationism.org image 504x720]



It is impossible to build a wooden ship with a 450 ft long keel.  It would simply break apart under its own weight.  Before we get to sea-worthiness, however, we need to talk about construction challenges and time management using iron-age tools.  A keel that size, out in the elements, will begin rotting the day you lay it.  By the time you had completed it several months later and were ready to start the hull you would discover the end you laid first is rotted beyond use.
 
2013-09-27 04:50:57 PM  

Coco LaFemme: It scares me that there is even a miniscule portion of the country, much less a sizable one, that has absolutely zero problem with ingraining ignorance and stupidity into the minds of children.  I went to private Catholic school from kindergarten through 12th grade, and I was never taught anything religiously oriented in science class.  I know the plural of anecdote is not data, and there might be other people here for whom that is not true, but the whole point of science or Biology class is to learn about science, not religion.  I mean, it says it right there in the name of the class.


All of us who went through Catholic school learned science without a religious slant. I'm sure the same is true of Lutherans, Methodists and other longstanding heretical churches.
 
2013-09-27 04:51:13 PM  
Tell you what.  All of the folks who think scientific theories are fallible and can often be wrong, perform this experiment.

Hold a bowling ball directly over your foot.  Now gravity is a theory, and its method of propagation is not directly known.  The theory could be wrong, if you just disbelieve hard enough!

OK, have that firmly in your mind?  OK, now let go.

Report your results.  Refine your theory for the next iteration of your experiment.
 
2013-09-27 04:53:26 PM  

praxcelis: Tell you what.  All of the folks who think scientific theories are fallible and can often be wrong, perform this experiment.

Hold a bowling ball directly over your foot.  Now gravity is a theory, and its method of propagation is not directly known.  The theory could be wrong, if you just disbelieve hard enough!

OK, have that firmly in your mind?  OK, now let go.

Report your results.  Refine your theory for the next iteration of your experiment.


I thought gravity was a law.
 
2013-09-27 04:55:58 PM  

SkinnyHead: rinosaurus: I also don't think Paine would have gone along with Christian creationism being taught in the first place.

No, but Paine would have supported the scientific theory of Intelligent Design.  And he certainly would not approve of efforts to prohibit students from learning about Intelligent Design in schools.  He and Jefferson would insist that students should at least have the opportunity to learn of the controversy and of the differing views, so that they should be permitted to think and decide for themselves.  Most reasonable people think so too.


If Paine somehow lived through the intervening two hundred years, had no access to any current information, you might be correct.  I like to think otherwise, but neither your theory nor mine are provable in any way, much like Intelligent Design.  However... Intelligent Design is not a scientific theory.  It is worth noting that students are not prohibited from learning about Intelligent Design in school, provided it is part of a larger study, such as world religions.  Intelligent Design is not included in science classes because it is NOT SCIENCE.  This is not controversy except in the minds of ignorant people.  Intelligent Design is not testable or falsifiable.

http://www.ucsusa.org/scientific_integrity/what_you_can_do/why-intel li gent-design-is-not.html   Read on!
 
2013-09-27 04:58:40 PM  

simplicimus: praxcelis: Tell you what.  All of the folks who think scientific theories are fallible and can often be wrong, perform this experiment.

Hold a bowling ball directly over your foot.  Now gravity is a theory, and its method of propagation is not directly known.  The theory could be wrong, if you just disbelieve hard enough!

OK, have that firmly in your mind?  OK, now let go.

Report your results.  Refine your theory for the next iteration of your experiment.

I thought gravity was a law.


As I understand it, the effects of gravity have, in all observed cases thus far, all behaved according to a mathematical principle known as the inverse-square law.  It's one of those things that is entirely empirical observation, and the actual mechanism of what attracts masses toward one another has not been discovered, only theorized.  I will, however, cast my lot with empirical observation.  Anyone who thinks that empiricism is not science is welcome to perform the above experiment and report any different results.
 
2013-09-27 05:16:09 PM  
beliefs are not being given more credence in science classes

Good.
 
2013-09-27 05:35:46 PM  

unexplained bacon: [www.creationism.org image 720x375]

[www.creationism.org image 720x375]

such wit simply could not have evolved from apes


I'm always amazed how they claim to disprove something they clearly know nothing about.
 
2013-09-27 05:43:17 PM  

TuteTibiImperes: FTFA: The suit alleges that the new standards will "promote religious beliefs that are inconsistent with the theistic religious beliefs of plaintiffs, thereby depriving them of the right to be free from government that favors one religious view over another."

On the contrary, teaching based on the science will not promote any religious beliefs at all.  Teaching creationism, on the other hand, would favor one religious view over others, as different religions have different creation stories.

Science class should be based on science.  If you want to teach creation stories, do it in Sunday School, or push for a comparative religions class where students can learn the history and beliefs of multiple faiths and how they've shaped society.


I support this, add a comparative religion course that they can take instead of science class and put an asterisk on their diploma that says that they took religion instead of science.  Watch them cease to be able to attend college outside of Bob Jones.  If parents want to sabotage their children, let them.  Turn science into some kind of renegade Footloose thing.
 
2013-09-27 05:43:39 PM  

TwistedIvory: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Next up: renaming Liberal

That town has always confused me. It's my mother's hometown and I've been there more times than I can count (I grew up in eastern KS). I remember at a young age asking my mom, "But WHY is it called 'Liberal?'"


From Wikipedia:
Early settler S. S. Rogers built the first house in what would become Liberal in 1872. Rogers became famous in the region for giving water to weary travelers. Reportedly, Liberal gained its name from the common response to his acts of kindness, "That's very liberal of you."

As for changing the name, that would also require changing the name of the town's famous baseball team, the Liberal Bee Jays.
 
2013-09-27 06:27:45 PM  
Humans were so intelligently designed, we needed Ben Franklin to invent the spectacles, wisdom teeth need to be removed from most people's mouths, and the appendix serves no function whatsoever.
 
2013-09-27 06:29:14 PM  

AxiomJackson: Pants full of macaroni!!: SkinnyHead: "It has been the error of the schools to teach astronomy, and all the other sciences and subjects of natural philosophy, as accomplishments only; whereas they should be taught theologically, or with reference to the Being who is the author of them: for all the principles of science are of divine origin. Man cannot make, or invent, or contrive principles. He can only discover them; and he ought to look through the discovery to the Author."  ~ Thomas Paine.

Auditioning for the role of Bevets, are we?

I wonder what point is he trying to prove by quoting a political activist that has been dead for over 200 years.


And who wasn't a Christian.


I believe in one God, and no more; and I hope for happiness beyond this life.


I believe the equality of man, and I believe that religious duties consist in doing justice, loving mercy, and endeavoring to make our fellow-creatures happy.

But, lest it should be supposed that I believe many other things in addition to these, I shall, in the progress of this work, declare the things I do not believe, and my reasons for not believing them.

I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of. My own mind is my own church.

All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian, or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.

I do not mean by this declaration to condemn those who believe otherwise; they have the same right to their belief as I have to mine. But it is necessary to the happiness of man, that he be mentally faithful to himself. Infidelity does not consist in believing, or in disbelieving; it consists in professing to believe what he does not believe.
 
2013-09-27 06:35:57 PM  

TwistedIvory: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Next up: renaming Liberal

That town has always confused me. It's my mother's hometown and I've been there more times than I can count (I grew up in eastern KS). I remember at a young age asking my mom, "But WHY is it called 'Liberal?'"


Well, if you must know...

What is now the town of Liberal used to be just a tiny little stop on the Santa Fe Trail. There was a woman who lived there who became well-known because she liberally gave away water from her well to thirsty travelers. So, it became known as Liberal.
 
2013-09-27 07:38:08 PM  

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


A key part of editing is reducing wordiness and replacing long strings of text with more concise phrases, or better yet, a single word.
 
2013-09-27 08:00:16 PM  

The Dog Ate My Homework: TwistedIvory: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Next up: renaming Liberal

That town has always confused me. It's my mother's hometown and I've been there more times than I can count (I grew up in eastern KS). I remember at a young age asking my mom, "But WHY is it called 'Liberal?'"

Well, if you must know...

What is now the town of Liberal used to be just a tiny little stop on the Santa Fe Trail. There was a woman who lived there who became well-known because she liberally gave away water from her well to thirsty travelers. So, it became known as Liberal.


That was the story I heard. "that's mighty liberal of you," etc.
 
2013-09-27 08:07:45 PM  

The Bananadragon: FloydA: 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?

I'd have laughed myself to death over that except it was the honest assertion of my friend's mom. (My friend, thankfully, is smart enough to think that's bugfark insane. But he's one of 7 kids in a rural PA homeschooled family, and everything you can possibly imagine about them is true) Instead I brought up the genetic bottleneck in cheetahs, which would have happened to every animal in the flood, and her response was that God fixed them all afterward. Letting that one slide, I asked her why the cheetahs didn't ge ...


This is very common in creationist contortions - at some stage they realize their attempt to reconcile Genesis with facts, has a huge hole somewhere.

Rather than saying "Oh my story must be wrong", they go "My story must be true, but I need a miracle to paper over this huge crack.Now who can do miracles? God must have done this!"

Thousands, not billions : challenging an icon of evolution : questioning the age of the Earth by  Don DeYoung.

This guy is a Discovery Institute shill. The book explains that radio carbon dating is wrong bc what happened was, God magically brought the half-lives of all the planet's minerals into alignment in the year of Noah's Flood. Well yes, I know that would have generated a lot of heat from the radioactive decay. In fact I calculate that it would make the surface of the Earth hotter than the surface of the Sun, which would have boiled off the seas and vitrified the top half-mile of the planet. Ok this is a big problem for my theory. But my theory must be right, so I need a miracle. God does miracles. God must have magically wicked all that heat off into space. Taa dah!
 
2013-09-27 08:21:51 PM  
I don't understand the desire for flat out denying science. I went to a private school and we learned science. Evolution, chemistry, geology, physics, and anatomy (insert Catholic molestation joke here). It was in religion class that we got the standard "Yeah, it's all true. God did it, see how awesome he is?" speech.

As a Deist, I find the scientific method the most concise and effective way to unlock the magnificence of a creator. Clearly he/she/it/they put this entire universe here to explore and study, because we wouldn't have developed a need to reason if we weren't supposed to do it.

I don't care if it's Zeus or Vishnu or the Apache moon god up there, but I like to think that I'm not the apex of evolution.
 
2013-09-27 08:28:26 PM  

mjjt: The Bananadragon: FloydA: 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?

I'd have laughed myself to death over that except it was the honest assertion of my friend's mom. (My friend, thankfully, is smart enough to think that's bugfark insane. But he's one of 7 kids in a rural PA homeschooled family, and everything you can possibly imagine about them is true) Instead I brought up the genetic bottleneck in cheetahs, which would have happened to every animal in the flood, and her response was that God fixed them all afterward. Letting that one slide, I asked her why the cheetahs didn't ge ...

This is very common in creationist contortions - at some stage they realize their attempt to reconcile Genesis with facts, has a huge hole somewhere.

Rather than saying "Oh my story must be wrong", they go "My story must be true, but I need a miracle to paper over this huge crack.Now who can do miracles? God must have done this!"


Ah yes, the old ad hoc/post hoc 1-2 combo.  A favorite of mine.
 
2013-09-27 10:15:30 PM  

FloydA: Evolution is as much a "fact" as anything in the sciences can ever be.


Ok, I'm as anti-creationism as anyone else, but incorrect statements like yours don't help the problem. Evolution is a theory (as in, "The Theory of Evolution") and theory is only the penultimate step in the scientific method. I don't know about everyone else, but the scientific method was covered pretty thoroughly in my junior high school science classes.
 
2013-09-27 10:18:11 PM  

praxcelis: simplicimus: praxcelis: Tell you what.  All of the folks who think scientific theories are fallible and can often be wrong, perform this experiment.

Hold a bowling ball directly over your foot.  Now gravity is a theory, and its method of propagation is not directly known.  The theory could be wrong, if you just disbelieve hard enough!

OK, have that firmly in your mind?  OK, now let go.

Report your results.  Refine your theory for the next iteration of your experiment.

I thought gravity was a law.

As I understand it, the effects of gravity have, in all observed cases thus far, all behaved according to a mathematical principle known as the inverse-square law.  It's one of those things that is entirely empirical observation, and the actual mechanism of what attracts masses toward one another has not been discovered, only theorized.  I will, however, cast my lot with empirical observation.  Anyone who thinks that empiricism is not science is welcome to perform the above experiment and report any different results.


In practice (looking at what scientists actually  do, as opposed to what they say they do), a scientific "law" is simply a special kind of theory that can be expressed in mathematical shorthand.

For example, Newton proposed the "law" that F=ma.  He proposed the theory that "the net force acting on the object,  m is the mass of the object and  a is the acceleration of the object."  "F=ma" is a law (a mathematical equation) that summarizes the theory about the relationship between force, mass, and acceleration.

Some theories are easily expressed in mathematical shorthand - Newton's second law is an example.  Einstein's relativity equation E=MC^2 is another example.  If we can express a theory in that most convenient way, we often call it a "law."

Using programming, IT, and/or cryptography terms, If you can "compress" the idea into an equation, you can call it a "law."

Some theories are not compressible. There is no way to squash plate tectonics, natural selection, or the idea that germs cause disease into mathematical shorthand.  That doesn't mean that those theories are "less true" than the maximally compressed ones, only that they have to be expressed in a different language in order to be fully understood.

"Laws" are neither more nor less believable than any other kind of theory.  All "laws" are theories, but not all theories are laws.  The difference between a "law" and any other kind of theory is solely the way that they are expressed.  If you can summarize all of the important parts of the idea in mathematical shorthand, you can call it a "law."  If the idea doesn't lend itself to that kind of compression for transmission, then it's not a "law," but it is no less believable for that.

(And don't get me started on the difference between theories and "empirical generalizations," or we'll be here all night! ;-)

Hope that helps.
 
2013-09-27 10:23:28 PM  

SkinnyHead: rinosaurus: I also don't think Paine would have gone along with Christian creationism being taught in the first place.

No, but Paine would have supported the scientific theory of Intelligent Design.  And he certainly would not approve of efforts to prohibit students from learning about Intelligent Design in schools.  He and Jefferson would insist that students should at least have the opportunity to learn of the controversy and of the differing views, so that they should be permitted to think and decide for themselves.  Most reasonable people think so too.


Problem 1: "Intelligent Design" is not a scientific theory. Insisting it is a theory doesn't mean anything, it clearly does not fit any form of accepted criteria for science in any way, shape, or form. There is no debating this and if you try you are wrong, without any question whatsoever. No, your "GED in law" (LOL, whatever that is) doesn't qualify you to debate this.

Problem 2: You're presuming that a man noted for his ability to think would discard the vast evidence before him and so arrive at the same conclusion as the ignoramuses that are backing this action, or that attempt to defend it, because he is so hung up on the need to cling to the belief system defined by the semi-literate musings of bronze age mystics.

Problem 3: You claim a controversy that doesn't exist. This so-called controversy exists in the deranged minds of pathological liars and charlatans. It does not exist in the minds of anyone that has the ability to form coherent thought and apply reason and logic to a problem.

Keep working it dude, eventually you'll get your own entry for dumbfark in the Urban Dictionary like Bevets did.
 
2013-09-27 10:31:34 PM  

ImpendingCynic: FloydA: Evolution is as much a "fact" as anything in the sciences can ever be.

Ok, I'm as anti-creationism as anyone else, but incorrect statements like yours don't help the problem. Evolution is a theory (as in, "The Theory of Evolution") and theory is only the penultimate step in the scientific method. I don't know about everyone else, but the scientific method was covered pretty thoroughly in my junior high school science classes.



Are you absolutely, completely identical in DNA to both of your parents?  If not, the gene pool of your population has evolved in a measurable, observable, detectable way, and that makes evolution as much a "fact" as anything in the sciences can ever be.

The theory of evolution is a collection of ideas that is intended to explain the fact that gene pools are evolving.  If you want to argue that evolution is not a "fact," you will have to give me evidence that you, personally, are genetically and phenotypically identical to both of your parents.

(I am actually very interested in the philosophy of science, especially as it pertains to evolution, and it might be just personal hubris, but I rather suspect that I have a little bit more insight into the subject than is generally taught in junior high science classes.  I may be wrong, and perhaps you're the person who can demonstrate that.  If so, I look forward to learning whatever you can teach me.)
 
2013-09-27 10:41:32 PM  

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

they live Kansas

To be fair, some areas of western Kansas does look like some areas of Afghanistan.
 
2013-09-27 10:46:23 PM  
bnw4.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-09-27 11:25:16 PM  
Article: "...give equal weight to the Christian creation myth."

Ok - Then I want equal weight given to the Celtic, Inuit, and Salish creation myths as well as the Norse creation myth. (Ok, I give preference to my own ancestors and where I live.)  They have exactly as much validity as the Christian belief.
 
2013-09-28 12:53:57 AM  

Flappyhead: unexplained bacon: [www.creationism.org image 720x375]

[www.creationism.org image 720x375]

such wit simply could not have evolved from apes

I'm always amazed how they claim to disprove something they clearly know nothing about.


Dunning-Kruger.
 
2013-09-28 02:20:25 AM  

theknuckler_33: 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.

You know, there are many millions of Christians in this country who don't force their views on others and don't agree with this kind of education nonsense. They just go about their business and go to church on Sunday's. They have plenty to offer society, not due to their faith, but due to the fact that they are human beings that have lives that are not solely about their faith. I'm an atheist, but I think it is very important to make a clear distinction between the people that do things like these groups from TFA and many millions of others who don't do anything to bother anyone. Just outright calling anyone who 'believes' a whacko isn't helping.


Except that all those millions of Christians who go about their business also vote for Ted Cruz and Michele Bachman and Jim Demint. fark 'em.
 
2013-09-28 04:01:58 AM  

FloydA: 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.


The thing is that most Jewish Sects and at least Catholism treats it as just a story. Every mythology has a flood story as every society has had a giant flood that wiped out a lot of them. The Colorado and Duluth Floods would be seen as great world ending floods if it wasn't for mass media.
 
2013-09-28 10:06:18 AM  
My god, I have to leave here soon before I cannot escape. Kansas is a pit of banality from which there is no ladder.
 
2013-09-28 12:11:53 PM  
thatboyoverthere:

The thing is that most Jewish Sects and at least Catholism treats it as just a story. Every mythology has a flood story as every society has had a giant flood that wiped out a lot of them. The Colorado and Duluth Floods would be seen as great world ending floods if it wasn't for mass media.

You're right; the overwhelming majority of religious people agree that Genesis is best understood metaphorically as a story about the relationship between a "chosen people" and their god.  Creationists are biblical "literalists" (or rather, they claim to be) who interpret Genesis as an accurate historical account.  Anyone who looks at it objectively realizes that this is completely crazy, but creationists are not typically very rational.

Of course some societies do not have any flood stories.  As far as I know, there is no account of a global flood in Japanese mythology, for instance (anyone with more knowledge of Japanese mythology, please feel free to correct me).
 
2013-09-28 01:56:11 PM  
Humans, half a chromosome away from the chimpanzee, and it shows.
 
2013-09-28 05:47:00 PM  

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


Because anybody with half a brain doesn't need to be explicitly told that about science. And if the science teacher is worth their salt, they will explain this to students who don't already know that science is a collection of theories and laws that are based on the best available knowledge and are supported by empirical observations.
 
Displayed 47 of 247 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is 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