Quake3World

SplishSplash wrote:I don't understand what problem those crazy yanks have with evolution.

Is it not acceptable that GOD used some pretty elaborate and very elegant mechanism to create species instead of doing it all by himself?

Geebs wrote:

Bdw3 wrote:There is also an extra muscle in the arm and one in the leg that some people have and others do not.

Palmaris longus

Cool Blue wrote:

tnf wrote:Nothing more depressing than seeing the fact that almost 50% or more of your students come in to the class completely opposed to the idea - and completely closed to listening to the MOUNTAINS of evidence supporting it.

I guess it took awhile for the Copernican revolution to really take hold...so hopefully one day, one gloriously fine day, I will be able to use the "E" word without invoking the rage of parents and students alike...

I made a big distinction between "grown up science" vs. "intelligent design" (which I called the strategy of intelletual surrender) and "creation science" (which I called an oxymoron).

But I did make a dent, I think...most of the kids had no idea that the Church had such a history of stifling intellectual progress...some were a bit surprised to hear the stories of Galileo and Copernicus - things like believing Galileo's telescope was possessed by the devil because it showed craters on the moon.

Anyway, the little red light on my office phone will probably be flashing tomorrow morning when I come in from angry parents. Oh well.

Fuck the church. The theory of evolution is based off of inexact sciences such as geology. Mountain of proof my ass.

They deduce that a layer of bedrock is XX years old therefore fossils in it are XXX years old, but can't verify the age of the bedrock because they use other layers dated off of other layers dated off of other layers to date that. It's all guess work. They like to think it's exact but it's not. Hell, even carbon dating is weak. They get a result they dont' like and they come up with a million reasons to toss the results and stick with the results they wanted.

I have friend to studied geology at Uni for a few years, he dropped out because he couldnt' respect it as a science.

The theory of evolution is weak and cannot explain some very fundamental problems with itself. sys0p made a prime example, where's all the half evolved species? Where's the fossils of these half evolved species?

We already know it's impossible for a race to exist if the gene pool is too small, therefore for evolution work each succesfull 'mutation' would have had to create a large enough gene pool to sustain itself. Where's the evidence of that?

Next, the time line doesn't make sense, in fact it's totally off. If species mutatated at the rate required by evolution, we would have seen some fucked up changes in our (relatively) short human existance to support this. But we haven't. Not a single species has spontaneously mutated since we began documenting. Why?

Add to that the fact that they date all their fossil records on inexactly dated bedrock and you've got a theory. A best guess. FAR from what science is supposed to accept as fact.

Relating this to copernicus is a huge insult btw. Copernicus could PROVE without doubt his findings, not merely speculate. THAT is science. I'm sorry if I sound annoyed but I am. You're supposed to be SCIENCE teacher.

In the months ahead, the state Senate Committee on Education will consider a bill that pretends to strike a blow for intellectual honesty, truth and freedom, but in reality poses a profound threat to academic freedom in the United States.

.....

Professors should "not take unfair advantage of their position of power over a student by indoctrinating him or her with the teacher's own opinions before a student has had an opportunity fairly to examine other opinions upon the matters in question."

.....

Reading lists should "respect the uncertainty and unsettled character of all human knowledge." Speakers brought to campus should "promote intellectual pluralism," and faculty should eschew political, religious or "anti-religious" bias.

.....

"Why should we, as fairly moderate to conservative legislators, continue to support universities that turn out students who rail against the very policies their parents voted us in for?" asks the Republican sponsor of the Ohio version of the bill.

Backers of the Florida bill would like to empower students to sue professors with whom they disagree on the theory of evolution.

Massive Quasars wrote:http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050505/NEWS03/105050005/-1/news

We've been over this, it never ends.

losCHUNK wrote:evolution lol... who believes in that shit really

Hannibal wrote:The real kick in the shorts---the kind of kick that drives your testicles into your brain stem-- is that the media implicitly validates the retarded terms in which the debate is typically played out...they get a group of half-educated partisan 'strategists' with little or no training in science or philosophy to engage in shouting matches. It is a fucking disgrace.

Mogul wrote:Teach it? Sure. Shouldn't be taught as an end-all-be-all fact, though. Evilutionists are just as "I'm right, period" as creationists are -- why not just be sensible and call it what it is? It's a theory, right or wrong, good or bad -- that's just what it is. Teach that. What could that possibly hurt?

Billy Bellend wrote:why is it so important for you to convert all the kids to your personal opinions?

seems overly-personal for a public servant.