Quake3World

In the past, he's sidestepped the issue - obviously he isn't into evolution (it's science you know), but he has never outright said that
ID or the like should be part of the school curriculum....until now.

"I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought,” Bush said. “You’re asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, the answer is yes.”

So who is the judge of what schools of thought we teach? If a theory as factually and observationally bankrupt as ID gets in, what next?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8792302/

I love how they call it 'intelligent design.' They give it a snappy name to make it sound more pallatable.

Like changing the slogan "Global War on Terror' to 'Global Struggle Against Extremism.'

s01e08 of "Penn & Teller - Bullshit" deals with this issue. Worth watching.

Dubya's power-grabbing is getting scarier by the day.... Time to leave this country.

time to take back the country maybe..

StormShadow wrote:time to take back the country maybe..

Yeah but I'm just a guest here.... Good luck my American friends!

lol, that was very funny for some reason.

Like a pc way of saying "I'm getting the fuck out of here, you're on your own!" :lol:

Exactly I've been here for ten years now and I love this country and all the great friends I have made. But yeah.... one can only take so much.

StormShadow wrote:time to take back the country maybe..

:icon14:

StormShadow wrote:
Like changing the slogan "Global War on Terror' to 'Global Struggle Against Extremism.'

Did you see Jon stewart talk about this on the Daily Show? Hi-fuckin-larious!

while i agree with the "different schools of thought", it shouldnt be taught as science

mojon wrote:

StormShadow wrote:time to take back the country maybe..

Yeah but I'm just a guest here.... Good luck my American friends!

:lol:

.and stormshadow's right too.

"I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought,” Bush said. “You’re asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, the answer is yes.”

so long as they're different in a certain way

Hrrmmppphh, we might as well talk about Julia Childs in European History 101, or the advantages of the cross-stitch in Calc I.

By Zeus's butthole, I stab at thee.

The problems of evolutionary theory should be introduced (if not exhaustively discussed) in high school science classes. There is a massive literature on this topic...published in peer reviewed SCIENTIFIC journals. IT HAS NOTHING WHATEVER TO DO WITH A 'GOD'S HAND' HYPOTHESIS. The only rationale for injecting ID shit into a science class is as a religious/cultural move to make religious conservatism/literalism more palatable for a 21st century audience of young impressionable minds.

If you want to introduce ID theory (as a hypothesis) into a religious studies or anthropology class, fine. But leave the science classes to this crazy thing called 'science', you knuckle dragging assjackers.

hold on just a moment; Bush was asked by reporters for his opinion on ID. He answered. He's allowed to haev an opinion. He didn't say he is introducing legislation to force schools to teach ID or anything like that.

And we're allowed to criticize the uneducated opinion of our president.

and i'm allowed to criticize the uneducated opinion of your president

even the label "intelligent design" concedes ground to science by the conscious attempt to make what is really just the book of genesis sound like science. in much the same way as ghosts could be reclassified as 'intentional paraphysical phenomena', or delusions as 'user-specific reality'...

I thought this was about Freud LOL

not about carmack & co?

mojon wrote:

StormShadow wrote:time to take back the country maybe..

Yeah but I'm just a guest here.... Good luck my American friends!

This made me laugh as well. Lol.

Hannibal wrote:Hrrmmppphh, we might as well talk about Julia Childs in European History 101, or the advantages of the cross-stitch in Calc I.

By Zeus's butthole, I stab at thee.

The problems of evolutionary theory should be introduced (if not exhaustively discussed) in high school science classes. There is a massive literature on this topic...published in peer reviewed SCIENTIFIC journals. IT HAS NOTHING WHATEVER TO DO WITH A 'GOD'S HAND' HYPOTHESIS. The only rationale for injecting ID shit into a science class is as a religious/cultural move to make religious conservatism/literalism more palatable for a 21st century audience of young impressionable minds.

If you want to introduce ID theory (as a hypothesis) into a religious studies or anthropology class, fine. But leave the science classes to this crazy thing called 'science', you knuckle dragging assjackers.

You're foaming at the mouth sir.

Unfortunately, these articles won't put your mind at ease.

Read on:
http://www.reason.com/rb/rb071905.shtml
http://www.reason.com/rb/rb072005.shtml
http://www.reason.com/rb/rb072105.shtml

Massive Quasars wrote:
You're foaming at the mouth sir.

Unfortunately, these articles won't put your mind at ease.

Read on:
http://www.reason.com/rb/rb071905.shtml
http://www.reason.com/rb/rb072005.shtml
http://www.reason.com/rb/rb072105.shtml

Sure, you're trying to give me a heart attack. I won't forget this.

This whole 'flight from reason' thing just really burns my britches...it doesn't help that the man at the head of this idiot filled conga line is our president. #$*#@%&#($&#$!!

Intelligent Design is the new word for Creationism? Why isn't evolution an intelligent design?

shut it Krack0

This made me chuckle:

Christian musician (and dinosaur sculptor) Buddy Davis even sings a praise song in the evening that sums up the situation [about .

from http://www.reason.com/rb/rb071905.shtml.

For some reason I had a vision of a quantum physics conference where one of the attending scientists starts singing a praise song about the wonderful world of quarks...

The so-called scientific conference spoken of in that article is more like a church service than anything else.