SkinWalker Posted February 4, 2004 Share Posted February 4, 2004 Okay... they don't want to stop teaching evolutionary theory. They just want to remove the word. http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/news.aspx?id=12557 Apparently, they feel that if they substitute “biological changes over time,” there will be less flak from the ignorant since evolution is a buzz-word that means "anti-religion." I say poppycock. Georgia is about to become the laughing-stock of the country if they do that. Ignorance is taking over this country and replacing good science in the classrooms and it shows in our workforce. Go to any medical or dental complex and look at the names on the list. Look at the engineering departments of our universities. Look at the chemistry departments. We are importing smart people. Science programs in public schools need to be expanded and augmented, not made politically correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toms Posted February 4, 2004 Share Posted February 4, 2004 it's religious correctness gone mad!!!!!!! as the sun would say.... shouldn't they then refer to religious studies as "Study of Hypothetical and highly unlikely Overarching Beings who provide comfort to those who are confused and unsure about their place in the world, and the beurocratic structures that exploit said unfortunates" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MennoniteHobbit Posted February 5, 2004 Share Posted February 5, 2004 Originally posted by toms it's religious correctness gone mad!!!!!!! as the sun would say.... shouldn't they then refer to religious studies as "Study of Hypothetical and highly unlikely Overarching Beings who provide comfort to those who are confused and unsure about their place in the world, and the beurocratic structures that exploit said unfortunates" lol Okay, at least they're not stopping teaching about the theory of evolution... but still, removing the word is still stupid... I mean, it's A word, I don't think there's any harm in a single word that happens to be "evolution." Oh, and something like this, i remember from earlier about a book somebody published, and how some radical people wanted to remove the term "Founding Fathers" because it was "gender-biased," and so on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET Warrior Posted February 5, 2004 Share Posted February 5, 2004 There are no words.... The only advantage I see to this is the ability for me to make fun of the guy on my hall who is from Georgia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obi Posted February 5, 2004 Share Posted February 5, 2004 I live in Georgia, Born and raised. If I read ANY remarks about how stupid Georgians are, There will be a price to be paid. Remember that as you reply. I think it SHOULD be removed. Altogether. Here's why: No one knows exactly how we got here. No one was around to see it. So, how do we know it is true? There are no documentations to represent it. The Evolution Theory has a severe lack of evidence to prove it's case. Granted, so does the religious point of view, but it isn't tought in school at all. It's only fair. Oh yea- Don't call us ignorant because we do not believe the same things you do. That's proposterous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET Warrior Posted February 5, 2004 Share Posted February 5, 2004 Originally posted by obi-wan13 Oh yea- Don't call us ignorant because we do not believe the same things you do. That's proposterous. It's spelled preposterious :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obi Posted February 5, 2004 Share Posted February 5, 2004 Originally posted by ET Warrior It's spelled preposterious :p Actually, it's spelled preposterous. +1 obi =P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinWalker Posted February 5, 2004 Author Share Posted February 5, 2004 Originally posted by obi-wan13 I think it SHOULD be removed. Altogether. Here's why: No one knows exactly how we got here. No one was around to see it. So, how do we know it is true? There are no documentations to represent it. Come on Obi... you're better educated than that! There is a preponderance of evidence to support the theory of evolution. In fact, evolution is a entire set of theories. If the word "evolution" is removed based on the idea that it cannot be directly observed (as many have postulated as a criticism of evolution) and therefore cannot be "proved," then we must also remove germ and atomic theories from school curricula as well. Or at least the words. Originally posted by obi-wan13 The Evolution Theory has a severe lack of evidence to prove it's case. No. There is not a "severe lack of evidence." You had to know I was going to respond to this one, Obi Evolution is, and has been, a testable theory. The fact that it has attained the status of "theory" is telling of that. Originally posted by obi-wan13 Oh yea- Don't call us ignorant because we do not believe the same things you do. That's proposterous. But you have to admit, "ignorance" is the main driving factor in many beliefs. Whether it applies to this case or not is but a hypothesis, but one that can be tested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wassup Posted February 5, 2004 Share Posted February 5, 2004 Mixing together different ideals and theories only results in a jumbled mess. Let the school system do its job and teach purely scientific theories, and let the church teach their religious ideals. It is up to the student which one to incorporate into their lives. School is only a part of a student's education experience, and frankly, I don't think religious beliefs have any place in the present school system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kain Posted February 5, 2004 Share Posted February 5, 2004 Why do southern states always want to make dumb laws? I swear, those senators and represenatives are SOOOOO whacked, its not even funny. And I know why they want to remove it, or atleast I have a good theory(HA! Theres that word again). Some bloody hell on mom got upset because her son/daughter was reading science for homework and asked their mom on help with EVOLUTION and mom said 'BLASPHEMY IN THE SCHOOLS!!!' and here we stand... If your going to be upset about what they teach, send your child to a Christian school. Otherwise, shut up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rccar328 Posted February 5, 2004 Share Posted February 5, 2004 Apparently, they feel that if they substitute “biological changes over time,” there will be less flak from the ignorant since evolution is a buzz-word that means "anti-religion." But you have to admit, "ignorance" is the main driving factor in many beliefs. Whether it applies to this case or not is but a hypothesis, but one that can be tested. Personally, I believe that this law is absurd. However, as much as I would like to discuss the stupidity of political/religious correctness, I've got a bone to pick with you, SkinWalker. I find these comments to be offensive, and they show a total ignorance on the concept of faith. Religious beliefs and faith do not amout to ignorance, they amount to a belief, possibly even a psychological longing or understanding that there is a greater power out there. That this belief is not always founded on cold, hard facts does not amount to base ignorance, it shows a person's willingness to submit to a higher standard and to a higher power that we cannot prove or obviously percieve, but can feel, can sometimes hear, and can sometimes see the effects of. As a Christian, I believe that there is a Creator and that He plays an active part in our lives if we allow him to. This is not ignorance on my part - I have seen things in my life that cannot be explained by science. I have seen a woman who was crippled for life walk without the assistance of a cane after a simple prayer was said over her. I have seen a boy deaf since childhood hear again after prayer. I have heard the vioce of God pull me out of a low depression, save my life and motivate me to continue on. My faith is not based on ignorance, it is based on what I have seen and heard. It is true that many believe that evolution theory is contrary to religion - I believe that the two may go hand-in-hand, but seeing as I am not a scientist and have not studied this at all, and am not God that I would have seen such things first-hand, I cannot say for sure. I acknowledge that your comment may have been an innocent generalization, and while I will not dissillusion myself into thinking that I have given you anything slightly resembling an understanding of faith, I hope you realize that we don't all believe out of ignorance, and that faith is by no means synonymous with ignorance. Anyway, a religious debate is for different thread. My statements have told you my opinion on this issue. Also, I reccomend that you read a book called The Language Police. It details a list of words and terms that have been removed and are being removed from textbooks and curriculum due to political correctness in an effort to enforce the mythical right not to be offended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrion Posted February 5, 2004 Share Posted February 5, 2004 Originally posted by obi-wan13 I live in Georgia, Born and raised. If I read ANY remarks about how stupid Georgians are, There will be a price to be paid. Remember that as you reply. I think it SHOULD be removed. Altogether. Here's why: No one knows exactly how we got here. No one was around to see it. So, how do we know it is true? There are no documentations to represent it. The Evolution Theory has a severe lack of evidence to prove it's case. Granted, so does the religious point of view, but it isn't tought in school at all. It's only fair. Oh yea- Don't call us ignorant because we do not believe the same things you do. That's proposterous. Well, I have a different basis to say that Georgians are stupid. Mainly that they havent driven you out of the state yet. Anyway, I think the Evolution theory should still be taught. It's a scientific theory, relying primarily on scienftific facts to explain it. It is also just a theory, and can be explained via fossils and laboratory studies, unlike religion which relies solely on belief. Someone who thinks that Evolution is absolute is just a fool in my book. We dont have nearly enough basis to prove it. However, I still think that it happend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET Warrior Posted February 5, 2004 Share Posted February 5, 2004 Originally posted by obi-wan13 Actually, it's spelled preposterous. +1 obi =P NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. Crap. I was so close to winning the georgians are dumb argument right there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toms Posted February 5, 2004 Share Posted February 5, 2004 if we stop teaching Evolution as it can't be conclusively proved, we need to stop teaching most of newtionian based physics, a large part of our "theories" about planets, gravity, how light works and almost any other scientific subject. WHen i got to university i discovered that EVERYTHING i had been taught in physics class at school was a theory, nothing could be conclusively 100% proved. But they aren't talking about no teaching it i guess, just rephrasing it in an attempt to get the southern religious nutjobs off their back. I'm torn on whether it would work or not, but from what i have seen it would probably confuse them enough to buy the school system a few years of peace.... I blame air conditioning, before it was invented these guys were too hot to cause any trouble, but now they are attempting to interfere in the way the country is run, not realising they are about 100 years behind the times. Its knid of worrying to have the most powerful country on earth slowly becoming more and more southern. :ewok: :ewok: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted February 5, 2004 Share Posted February 5, 2004 Originally posted by toms if we stop teaching Evolution as it can't be conclusively proved, we need to stop teaching most of newtionian based physics, a large part of our "theories" about planets, gravity, how light works and almost any other scientific subject. WHen i got to university i discovered that EVERYTHING i had been taught in physics class at school was a theory, nothing could be conclusively 100% proved. But they aren't talking about no teaching it i guess, just rephrasing it in an attempt to get the southern religious nutjobs off their back. I'm torn on whether it would work or not, but from what i have seen it would probably confuse them enough to buy the school system a few years of peace.... I blame air conditioning, before it was invented these guys were too hot to cause any trouble, but now they are attempting to interfere in the way the country is run, not realising they are about 100 years behind the times. Its knid of worrying to have the most powerful country on earth slowly becoming more and more southern. :ewok: :ewok: I guess the north only won the battle Well I'm glad I'm going to move someday soon. Away from america. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime Posted February 5, 2004 Share Posted February 5, 2004 Originally posted by obi-wan13 The Evolution Theory has a severe lack of evidence to prove it's case. But this isn't true. Evolution and natural selection has been observed in action in the lab with various species. If evolutoin is a myth, how do you explain these observations? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obi Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 Originally posted by toms Its knid of worrying to have the most powerful country on earth slowly becoming more and more southern. What is wrong with something being southern? I'm southern, and if you don't like me because of that, I feel very sorry for you. Really. @Prime- Most of these observations are done in controlled labs, sparking "evolution" of certain animals. But that is what the labs where designed to do- spark it. @ rccar328- I love you. =) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinWalker Posted February 6, 2004 Author Share Posted February 6, 2004 Originally posted by obi-wan13 @Prime- Most of these observations are done in controlled labs, sparking "evolution" of certain animals. But that is what the labs where designed to do- spark it. What about the bacteria that are only left to their own devices and a suitable environment that mutate and evolve almost right before the eyes of those looking through the microscope. Because of the nature of the bacterial lifespan and reproduction periods, many generations can be observed in a few hours, many, many more in a few days. Then you have the fruit fly, where many experiments have been conducted that show an adaptation through generations to changing environments. It's true that human evolution cannot be observed directly, but it is easily inferred through the fossil record as is that of other species of animals. Evolution is as much a fact as atomic theory or germ theory and as much a reality as landing people on the Moon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_PerfectAgent_ Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 However, mutation is not good. The only suitable environment is one controlled by humans. There are no mutated bacteria outside of laboratories. It shows that the mutated bacteria is at a disadvantage when it does not have antibiotics. Mutating flies take longer to develop and therefore is less fit than the original strain. The "evolved" strain is infact inferior to the original. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wassup Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 The observations and experiencts conducted upon the theory of evolution are from a human point of view. How do we know that perhaps some alien species might have an entirely different theory about life AND more evidence backing it up? We don't. However, in our current perspective and society, evolution is the most plausible and credible explanation, and until we discover and learn more about the mysteries of life, the universe, and everything, we have to be content with what we have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinWalker Posted February 6, 2004 Author Share Posted February 6, 2004 Originally posted by _PerfectAgent_ However, mutation is not good. Mutation is neither inherently good or bad, it depends upon the mutation. Its true that a mutation can create an undesireable trait, such as Down's Syndrome in humans, but it can also create and advantageous state, such as the CCR5-delta 32 mutation, which made those that carried it immune to the plague a few centuries ago (and, curiously, immune to HIV/AIDS in contemporary times). You have to bear in mind that there are four factors of evolution: Mutation; Genetic Drift; Gene Flow; and Natural Selection. Originally posted by _PerfectAgent_ There are no mutated bacteria outside of laboratories. Why would you think that? Seriously... I'm wondering why you would believe this. It's patently false. Originally posted by _PerfectAgent_ Mutating flies take longer to develop and therefore is less fit than the original strain. The example I was using wasn't one of mutation, but one of natural selection. The flies actually adapted to various environments through several generations. I dont' remember the specifics, but I believe there were basic changes such as light/dark, etc. The "evolved" strain is infact inferior to the original. [/b] In some cases this can be quite true, but what happens is that the strain with the least advantage perishes while the more advantaged strain flourishes. Come on guys... this is all very basic stuff. Everyone can't be from Georgia here! * ducks Obi's fist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rccar328 Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 Personally, I think this argument is taking the wrong turn. In my mind, at least, this issue is not about the viability of evolution theory - there is too much evidence to disprove it, and not enough evidence to prove it entirely (unless the time travel thread takes an unexpected turn). The issue here is political correctness. Should the word "evolution" be removed from curriculum? No way. Evolution theory is too likely to remove from scientific curriculum. Political correctness has no practical meaning. If you call a severely handicapped person "handi-capable," does it make that person able to do things that were impossible before? No. If you remove references to Mount Rushmore or the Trail of Tears from history texts because they might offend Native Americans (another politically correct term in itself), does it change the fact that Mount Rushmore exists or the Trail of Tears tragedy occured? No. The reason political correctness does not work is because: 1. It only lasts for one generation. Think of African Americans - the N word, a derogatory term, was replaced with negro, which was replaced with black, which has now been replaced with African American. After a while, African American will no longer be acceptable, and we'll have to find another term. Have these name changes changed the people they describe? No, they're the same people. But how dare we offend anybody? There is a debate in California today to change the term "illegal immigrant" to "undocumented worker." This name, too has evolved over time, changing from "wetback" to "illegal immigrant." After a while, "undocumented worker" will no longer be acceptable, and we'll have to change it again. 2. Removing events from historical texts does not mean that they did not occur, and does not allow future generations to learn from our past. We could look on the past through rose-colored glasses and repeat history's mistakes, or we can learn the hard lessons and allow future generations to better mankind in the process. So no, evolution should not be changed to "biological changes over time". It's the same thing either way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinWalker Posted February 6, 2004 Author Share Posted February 6, 2004 Whoa! Hang on a sec there Rccar! I agree with you. Except with your glib remark about the time-travel thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Datheus Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 Can anyone else really argue with that? [/thread] if you ask me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 I take this as a rest of motion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.