Evolution Debate in Kansas Prompts Attacks
-
Massive Quasars
- Posts: 8696
- Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 8:00 am
-
Massive Quasars
- Posts: 8696
- Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 8:00 am
-
Massive Quasars
- Posts: 8696
- Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 8:00 am
-
SplishSplash
- Posts: 4467
- Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2000 8:00 am
http://www.ksde.org/commiss/bdmem.html
Have at 'em. Hmmm. 2 elementary teachers with ZERO science training and a veterinarian who has apparently lost his marbles (to Jesus) drafted the new standards. This will turn out well.
edit: there's a PDF form of the "Science Standards Working Document of June 9, 2005" located here:
http://www.ksde.org/outcomes/sciencestd.html
all it seems to say is that there are debates WITHIN the scientific community about different aspects of contemporary evolutionary theory (duh) and that "intelligent design" per se is not explicitly a part of the standards. So it's not clear what's really going on.
Have at 'em. Hmmm. 2 elementary teachers with ZERO science training and a veterinarian who has apparently lost his marbles (to Jesus) drafted the new standards. This will turn out well.
edit: there's a PDF form of the "Science Standards Working Document of June 9, 2005" located here:
http://www.ksde.org/outcomes/sciencestd.html
all it seems to say is that there are debates WITHIN the scientific community about different aspects of contemporary evolutionary theory (duh) and that "intelligent design" per se is not explicitly a part of the standards. So it's not clear what's really going on.
-
Pooinyourmouth_needmerge
- Posts: 181
- Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2005 3:55 am
- GONNAFISTYA
- Posts: 13369
- Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 8:20 pm
Because they choose to ignore it. Much like religion has tried to ignore science for hundreds of years.riddla wrote:How in the fuck do creationists rationalize dinosaurs and fossil records into religious dogma and keep a straight face?
The problem with religion and ID is that the religious nutjobs have realized they can't compete AT ALL with science so they try to incorporate it somehow into their bullshit about the great flood, Moses parting the Red Sea and that Jesus was somehow concieved without Mary getting her tight, little snatch pounded by cock.
Their rationale is "if you can't beat em, join em...but the instant they can't explain something complex jump on it like it's the biggest fallacy in the universe that proves ID right...and when science finally does explain it...go back to ignoring science".
That's the only way these people can function....otherwise their heads would explode.
- GONNAFISTYA
- Posts: 13369
- Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 8:20 pm
One sad scenario that I can't prove but I'm positive will happen is this:
In 1000 - 2000 years when all religion is finally looked upon as a hoax and a myth...when science unconditionally explains the universe without a need for a "hand of God".....when that time comes....there's gonna be a whole lot of suicides. Millions of them.
I say it's a great way to cleanse the gene pool.
In 1000 - 2000 years when all religion is finally looked upon as a hoax and a myth...when science unconditionally explains the universe without a need for a "hand of God".....when that time comes....there's gonna be a whole lot of suicides. Millions of them.
I say it's a great way to cleanse the gene pool.
:lol:
Evolution hasn't been observed, only speculated.
Show me one study that has and can repeatedly cause a favorable mutation in a genetic line that creates such a large increase in the survival rate ensuring its (the desired trait) is passed on.
I haven't found one yet. And to me, like with String theory, if you can't reproduce or prove something conclusively via tests in a labratory, it's merely a theory. This one seems to be a well thought out theory, but it's still just a theory. And until someone can recreate evolution on demand (or even a portion thereof) it hasn't been 'observed' either.
Evolution hasn't been observed, only speculated.
Show me one study that has and can repeatedly cause a favorable mutation in a genetic line that creates such a large increase in the survival rate ensuring its (the desired trait) is passed on.
I haven't found one yet. And to me, like with String theory, if you can't reproduce or prove something conclusively via tests in a labratory, it's merely a theory. This one seems to be a well thought out theory, but it's still just a theory. And until someone can recreate evolution on demand (or even a portion thereof) it hasn't been 'observed' either.
-
Massive Quasars
- Posts: 8696
- Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 8:00 am
It's not a fault of the theory that the timescales involved in generating the 'appreciable' change that people "want" to see are too long to devise more traditional experiments.Cool Blue wrote::lol:
Evolution hasn't been observed, only speculated.
Show me one study that has and can repeatedly cause a favorable mutation in a genetic line that creates such a large increase in the survival rate ensuring its (the desired trait) is passed on.
I haven't found one yet. And to me, like with String theory, if you can't reproduce or prove something conclusively via tests in a labratory, it's merely a theory. This one seems to be a well thought out theory, but it's still just a theory. And until someone can recreate evolution on demand (or even a portion thereof) it hasn't been 'observed' either.
And for the first one - antibiotic resistance.
And here are some observed instances of speciation.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html
And for your 'just a theory' stuff - gravity is 'just a theory.' The nature of light is 'just a theory.'
BTW - EVERYTHING IS A FUCKING THEORY.Cool Blue wrote::lol:
Evolution hasn't been observed, only speculated.
Show me one study that has and can repeatedly cause a favorable mutation in a genetic line that creates such a large increase in the survival rate ensuring its (the desired trait) is passed on.
I haven't found one yet. And to me, like with String theory, if you can't reproduce or prove something conclusively via tests in a labratory, it's merely a theory. This one seems to be a well thought out theory, but it's still just a theory. And until someone can recreate evolution on demand (or even a portion thereof) it hasn't been 'observed' either.
-
Guest
No, because not all Christians are involved or engaged in this debate. in fact, I would be willing to bet that a great proportion of us have no problem with evolution at all. We just tend not to be the vocal voice of the religion, because we are the types who aren't out hold society back with dogmatic fascist style beliefs.Kracus wrote:Erm well... if you're a Christian doesn't that mean they've sortof won whether they're right or wrong?tnf wrote:I'm not even going to engage any further discussion about evolution here. Show me a time in the past 1000 years where religion has "won" the debate in the long run. And I am a Christian.
The almost-empty box always rattles the loudest, regardless of the area you are in.