Absolutely un-***** believable!

someone who doesn't even have a comprehension of what a scientific theory is, like 007, Dixie and PiMP

silly little fuck....just because you passed a test that proved you knew how to mix agar doesn't mean you understand scientific theory......you've been hiding from legitimate argument about scientific issues since I arrived here......
 
I see, so you would, based on your dissent on the consensus built around an emperical observation on anthropogenic climate change, permit scientifically illiterate loonies like 007 and Dixie to undermine science education? Particularly in important and foundational concepts in biology, geology, cosmology and physics?

actually, the empirical evidence regarding climate change shows that the current cycle is no different from the previous three when there inarguably was no anthropogenic impact......
 
It's a great idea, dude. Why are you so upset? Let's get all ideas out on the table. Or are you too narrow minded for that kind of thing?

Religion doesn't belong in silence class, it is that easy.

If you wish to discuss it in a comparative religion class I am all for it. How close the story of Genisis is to all the other creation myths, Joseph Campbell's material would be great for the class.
 
But evolution isn't quite an exact science, is it? I think the instructors should consider all ideas until they know something for certain.

Besides, it's more than that for Lowaicue. I believe the man truly hates all things religious ... especially all things Christian. It's like he's on some kind of crusade against Jesus Christ.

It is why science is so awesome it is open to new ideas! It is always changing, advancing human thoughts! It is why there are very few "laws" in science!
 
But evolution isn't quite an exact science, is it? I think the instructors should consider all ideas until they know something for certain.

Besides, it's more than that for Lowaicue. I believe the man truly hates all things religious ... especially all things Christian. It's like he's on some kind of crusade against Jesus Christ.

I think a lot of people are moving from religions, be it moving towards spirituality or non belief. Religion is having a hard time keeping the faithful and acquiring new members and it is because religion uses mythos as fact instead of the allegorical lessons they were meant to be.
 
It is why science is so awesome it is open to new ideas! It is always changing, advancing human thoughts! It is why there are very few "laws" in science!
Science should be used to discover the truth, not to pass human speculation off as fact. Evolution is speculative. There is no harm in introducing the Divine into this subject.
 
Last edited:
I think a lot of people are moving from religions, be it moving towards spirituality or non belief. Religion is having a hard time keeping the faithful and acquiring new members and it is because religion uses mythos as fact instead of the allegorical lessons they were meant to be.
I think there a lot more religious people than you think. Secularism is aggressive, and wishes to blow religion off the map. It's just taking most of the faithful some time to internalize what the atheists are trying to do.
 
I think there a lot more religious people than you think. Secularism is aggressive, and wishes to blow religion off the map. It's just taking most of the faithful some time to internalize what the atheists are trying to do.

There are under 25% of those who attend church on a regular basis. It Ida very small percentage of tose who lim to be religious.
 
How did I change the subject?
I have yet to see convincing evidence of many scientific theories.
There is a scientific theory that claims to prove the biblical story of genesis!
I am sceptical about that as well as the belief that climate change is caused by human activity.

You asked me about scientific theory, and then come back with this crap about climate change being manmade. I have not seen the scientific evidence of this climate change being either manmade or natural. And I have not stated my support of either. But you, in your infinite honesty, have wildly proclaimed what I believe and what I will push.

A scientific theory that proves Genesis is accurate? No, I doubt that. There may be some bullshit papers claiming to be scientific, but I doubt they are even remotely that.

That you have not seen evidence of the scientific theory may well have more to do with your knowledge of science than it does with any flaws in the theories.
 
But evolution isn't quite an exact science, is it? I think the instructors should consider all ideas until they know something for certain.

Besides, it's more than that for Lowaicue. I believe the man truly hates all things religious ... especially all things Christian. It's like he's on some kind of crusade against Jesus Christ.

Without being able to control all the variables, you can never have an exact science. The Theory of Evolution is far more than just a few guesses about fossils. There are huge volumes of data to back it up.

But the point is, if you are teaching science you should ONLY teach things that fit certain scientific criteria.

As for Low, I am not really concerned.
 
This is staggering.. and people have the bloody cheek to talk about Islamists wanting to take the world back to the 7 Century.

Four US states considering laws that challenge teaching of evolution

Critics charge 'academic freedom' legislation in Colorado, Missouri, Montana and Oklahoma is just creationism in disguise

Paul Harris in New York

guardian.co.uk, Thursday 31 January 2013 16.31 GMT

Jump to comments (227)

Four US states are considering new legislation about teaching science in schools, allowing pupils to to be taught religious versions of how life on earth developed in what critics say would establish a backdoor way of questioning the theory of evolution.

Fresh legislation has been put forward in Colorado, Missouri and Montana. In Oklahoma, there are two bills before the state legislature that include potentially creationist language.

A watchdog group, the National Center for Science Education, said that the proposed laws were framed around the concept of "academic freedom". It argues that religious motives are disguised by the language of encouraging more open debate in school classrooms. However, the areas of the curriculum highlighted in the bills tend to focus on the teaching of evolution or other areas of science that clash with traditionally religious interpretations of the world.

"Taken at face value, they sound innocuous and lovely: critical thinking, debate and analysis. It seems so innocent, so pure. But they chose to question only areas that religious conservatives are uncomfortable with. There is a religious agenda here," said Josh Rosenau, an NCSE program and policy director.

In Oklahoma, one bill has been pre-filed with the state senate and another with the state house. The Senate bill would oblige the state to help teachers "find more effective ways to represent the science curriculum where it addresses scientific controversies". The House bill specifically mentions "biological evolution, the chemical origins of life, global warming and human cloning" as areas that "some teachers are unsure" about teaching.

In Montana, a bill put forward by local social conservative state congressman, Clayton Fiscus, also lists things like "random mutation, natural selection, DNA and fossil discoveries" as controversial topics that need more critical teaching. Meanwhile, in Missouri, a bill introduced in mid-January lists "biological and chemical evolution" as topics that teachers should debate over including looking at the "scientific weaknesses" of the long-established theories.

Finally, in Colorado, which rarely sees a push towards teaching creationism, a bill has been introduced in the state house of representatives that would require teachers to "respectfully explore scientific questions and learn about scientific evidence related to biological and chemical evolution". Observers say the move is the first piece of creationist-linked legislation to be put forward in the state since 1972.

The moves in such a wide range of states have angered advocates of secularism in American official life. "This is just another attempt to bring creationism in through the back door. The only academic freedom they really want to encourage is the freedom to be ignorant," said Rob Boston, senior policy analyst at Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

Over the past few years, only Tennessee and Louisiana have managed to pass so-called "academic freedom" laws of the kind currently being considered in the four states. Barbara Forrest, a philosophy professor at Southeastern Louisiana University and close observer of the creationism movement, said that the successes in those two states meant that the religious lobby was always looking for more opportunities.

She said that using arguments over academic freedom was a shift in tactic after attempts to specifically get "intelligent design" taught in schools was defeated in a landmark court case in 2005. Intelligent design, which a local school board in Dover, Pennsylvania, had sought to get accepted as legitimate science, asserts that modern life is too complex to have evolved by chance alone. "Creationists never give up. They never do. The language of these bills may be highly sanitized but it is creationist code," she said.

The laws can have a direct impact on a state. In Louisiana, 78 Nobel laureate scientists have endorsed the repeal of the creationist education law there. The Society of Integrative and Comparative Biology has even launched a boycott of Louisiana and cancelled a scheduled convention in New Orleans. Louisiana native and prominent anti-creationist campaigner in the state Zack Kopplin said that those pushing such bills in other states were risking similar economic damage to their local economies. "It will hurt economic development," Kopplin said.

There is also the impact on students, he added, when they are taught controversies in subjects where the overwhelming majority of scientists have long ago reached consensus agreement. "It really hurts students. It can be embarrassing to be from a state which has become a laughing stock in this area," Kopplin said.

Others experts agreed, arguing that it could even hurt future job prospects for students graduating from those states' public high schools. "The jobs of the future are high tech and science-orientated. These lawmakers are making it harder for some of these kids to get those jobs," said Boston.


I've read and re-read the op and can't separate LoIQ's opinions from what these 4 states are in fact proposing.....he extrapolates
to conclusions that are far from what I see is proposed.
Backdoor way, potentially creationist, creationist-linked, another attempt to bring creationism in through the back door ?.....What does all this conjecture mean in reality ?

A bill has been introduced in the state house of representatives that would require teachers to "respectfully explore scientific questions and learn about scientific evidence related to biological and chemical evolution".
So is there something dangerous about "respectfully exploring scientific questions and learning about scientific evidence related to biological and chemical evolution ?
Seems to me that is the purpose of academics......

No one I know is in favor of teaching "religious dogma" as science in a public school unless the purpose of the class IS to examine religious beliefs as a separate subject....no different than
a class on classical music or modern poetry.
If the purpose of a class is "The Origin of Man"....then all theories need to be examined.....from evolution to space invaders...

Maybe LoIQ is just shouting fire and spreading fear to further some agenda of his.....I think a lot more detailed information is needed before we start a panic.
 
Relax Bravo. It is 3 retard states and Colorado. No one really gives a shit, it is just funny to talk about.
 
I see, so you would, based on your dissent on the consensus built around an emperical observation on anthropogenic climate change, permit scientifically illiterate loonies like 007 and Dixie to undermine science education? Particularly in important and foundational concepts in biology, geology, cosmology and physics?
How is the philosophy of questioning everything undermining science?

Emperical observations can only explain a small amount of what impacts our daily lives and existence in general.
An open mind is now considered to be undermining education?
 
How is the philosophy of questioning everything undermining science?

Emperical observations can only explain a small amount of what impacts our daily lives and existence in general.
An open mind is now considered to be undermining education?
No being a creationist tard does!
 
But evolution isn't quite an exact science, is it? I think the instructors should consider all ideas until they know something for certain.

Besides, it's more than that for Lowaicue. I believe the man truly hates all things religious ... especially all things Christian. It's like he's on some kind of crusade against Jesus Christ.
You obviously don't understand evolutionary theory. It is indeed a very exact science. Your ad hom on Low is pathetic and a strawman. Just because he correctly believes in nonoverlapping magisteria doesn't make him hostile towards religion. There is simply no place for religion in the science class room because all science is based on natural causation. The fact that you can't except this most fundamental and age old ground rule of science doesn't make Low hostile towards religion. That's psychological projection on your behalf as it's proof of your hostility towards science.
 
silly little fuck....just because you passed a test that proved you knew how to mix agar doesn't mean you understand scientific theory......you've been hiding from legitimate argument about scientific issues since I arrived here......
Oh god....here comes PiMP a scientifically illiterate neophyte talking in circles again. Blah, blah, blah.
 
Relax Bravo. It is 3 retard states and Colorado. No one really gives a shit, it is just funny to talk about.

Have no fear pRune....it won't bother me one way or another......who writes the textbooks that ignores and distorts history bothers me more.
 
Back
Top