Creationism vs. Evolution: Kansas in Spotlight Again

[Q Classic]

Name me one other thing taught in science curriculum that postulates miraculous intervention. This is a bizarre assertion on your part.

Nothing. But most scientific instruction at the elementary, middle, and high school levels is rife with inconsistencies, incorrect assertions, and often taught by teachers who don't know the difference between osmosis and osmium.

Hence, "roughly" equal quality.

If you consider it more insidious, then why do you have "no problem" with it?

Because it's fracking Kansas. If they want to be left behind in the technological world, let them. After all, they'll have their Left Behind books to love, cherish, and believe in.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Q Cubed

Name me one other thing taught in science curriculum that postulates miraculous intervention. This is a bizarre assertion on your part.

Nothing. But most scientific instruction at the elementary, middle, and high school levels is rife with inconsistencies, incorrect assertions, and often taught by teachers who don't know the difference between osmosis and osmium.

Hence, "roughly" equal quality.

Poor teaching of science has nothing to do with the designated curriculum. The precedent of letting something like ID into the curriculum would be quite damaging.

Because it's fracking Kansas. If they want to be left behind in the technological world, let them. After all, they'll have their Left Behind books to love, cherish, and believe in.

Right, because the IDists will be content to stop there and they wouldn't use such a "victory" in Kansas as momentum to proceed to other states with similar tactics. Like, oh, Georgia (Macon County?), or Pennsylvania (Dover), or...

This attitude is precisely the problem. "Oh, it will never be a problem here, just in those backwards places..." IDists aren't confining themselves to Kansas.

At any rate, I'd rather not leave Kansas kids to such devices. They have a right to a sound education without interference from religious nuts.

[Q Classic]

Right, because the IDists will be content to stop there and they wouldn't use such a "victory" in Kansas as momentum to proceed to other states with similar tactics. Like, oh, Georgia (Macon County?), or Pennsylvania (Dover), or...

Macon County? ID and Evolution are already having issues in Cobb County, which is a suburb of Atlanta.

This attitude is precisely the problem. "Oh, it will never be a problem here, just in those backwards places..." IDists aren't confining themselves to Kansas.

No, they're not. But they won't win where they don't have a stranglehold.

At any rate, I'd rather not leave Kansas kids to such devices. They have a right to a sound education without interference from religious nuts.

Why? The religious nuts are paying taxes for it. They're voting in people who'll do their bidding for it.

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by Q Cubed
Macon County? ID and Evolution are already having issues in Cobb County, which is a suburb of Atlanta.

No, they're not. But they won't win where they don't have a stranglehold.

Why should they be allowed to have any kind of base even if it should happen to be Kansas (wich I don't know anything about, so I don't know why it should be naturally for them to be a base for ID/creationism) ? If they can be fought, then they should be - otherwise you end up with just more ignorants that belive in nonverifiable stories instead of people who asks questions.

The religious nuts are paying taxes for it. They're voting in people who'll do their bidding for it.

I guess that that is one of the big reasons to divide religion and legislation. If you wan't an example how bad it can be, then just take soviet in the 30'es - can't remember his name while writing, but he had a theory about socialistic science wich almost destroyed the country. Some jerks may say that that was just good, but that isn't relevant here - it's the parallel - if you base your reseach and derived production upon fantasies not based upon facts, then you are surely destroying yourself.

[Q Classic]

Some jerks may say that that was just good, but that isn't relevant here - it's the parallel - if you base your reseach and derived production upon fantasies not based upon facts, then you are surely destroying yourself.

Let them reap what they sow.

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by Q Cubed

Some jerks may say that that was just good, but that isn't relevant here - it's the parallel - if you base your reseach and derived production upon fantasies not based upon facts, then you are surely destroying yourself.

Let them reap what they sow.

I didn't expect you to be one of the jerks, but if you insist, then you are welcome.

[Q Classic]

I didn't expect you to be one of the jerks, but if you insist, then you are welcome.

Honestly? We've got a few more important things to take care of, like fracking Darfur, NKorea, and Iraq, than stopping a bunch of nincompoops from ruining their own lives.

Also, if you're not bright enough to adapt to changing times, and choose to throw all your weight behind outdated or incorrect beliefs, you deserve whatever you get.

It's why I don't want any bailouts of Delta (though I'll be quite sad if it goes), why I hope the RIAA dies soon, and why I have no pity for the Christian Scientists who refused medical treatment.

[BlackCat]

Oh, I don't care if someone does harm to himself based upon his belief, so I don't cry if a CS dies because he doesn't want medic treatment.

You are worried about what happens in Dafur etc ? Well, what if these ID's and creationists really get power ? Not just Kansas (haven't yet figured out what is so special about Kansas), but enough to control US ? I can see plenty of scenarios. First of all, no more sensible research, next, current activities based upon non ID/creationist activities would be banned - admitted, it will take years, but in the end it will be catastrophic. Another scenario - a regime based on religion - the true religion - will have acces to critical buttons - admitted - it will solve the Nkorea problem.

Do you really think that Kansas is the sole goal for introduction of ID/creationism ? Or that you can limit to this particular state if they get their will there ? You may think that kansas are the only stupid state in US, but if I'm not wrong, then there are a whole bunch of other candidates just waiting.

[Lul Thyme]

Originally posted by Q Cubed
Honestly? We've got a few more important things to take care of, like fracking Darfur, NKorea, and Iraq, than stopping a bunch of nincompoops from ruining their own lives.

Viewed from a certain angle, all those examples (darfur, NK, Iraq) are examples of a bunch of nincompoops ruining their own lives...

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by BlackCat
then just take soviet in the 30'es - can't remember his name while writing, but he had a theory about socialistic science wich almost destroyed the country.

You're thinking of Lysenko, and he didn't almost destroy the country. His theories just set back Soviet agricultural science for a while.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Q Cubed
Macon County? ID and Evolution are already having issues in Cobb County, which is a suburb of Atlanta.

I meant Cobb County.

No, they're not. But they won't win where they don't have a stranglehold.

You're being naive if you don't think they can get their hold in a lot more places besides Kansas. The entire south is ripe for the picking.

Why? The religious nuts are paying taxes for it. They're voting in people who'll do their bidding for it.

Public schools shouldn't be practicising religious indoctrination with kids, no matter what the tax payers want. Remember that a government-run school can't be endorsing religion, now.

Besides, if a Neo-nazi group was able to somehow get itself elected in some backwater county and passed the teaching of racist dogma in the public schools, wouldn't that be a problem?

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Q Cubed

I didn't expect you to be one of the jerks, but if you insist, then you are welcome.

Honestly? We've got a few more important things to take care of, like fracking Darfur, NKorea, and Iraq, than stopping a bunch of nincompoops from ruining their own lives.

I fail to see how confronting this issue will somehow distract from our ability to work on those situations.

Also, if you're not bright enough to adapt to changing times, and choose to throw all your weight behind outdated or incorrect beliefs, you deserve whatever you get.

It's why I don't want any bailouts of Delta (though I'll be quite sad if it goes), why I hope the RIAA dies soon, and why I have no pity for the Christian Scientists who refused medical treatment.

So how about those Christian Scientists who refuse medical treatment for their children? Would you pity a child that dies because of his parents' beliefs? If so, you should still pity the kid who will have to go to school with this claptrap.

This whole issue is a fight over "indoctrination" of children. The fundies think (wrongly) that science curriculum with evolution indoctrinates kids to atheism and immoral lifestyles. They want to indoctrinate kids into anti-science and religiosity. I don't think it's ever a good idea to let a public school be a place where this happens.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
And theology is a simple subject that can be covered in that same time?

You still don't understand (even though theology is child's play when compared with any modern branches of science), this whole debate is not about evidence or coherent arguments.

Creationism is not about evidence or coherent arguments. Creationism has no theory. It is merely about picking at some seemingly weak point in evolution and scream "Look, God!" at the top of the proponent's lungs.

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
The key is not to throw the entire mass of a discipline at the debate, but to choose points that are your strongest evidence in favour of your position.

No, this is not how a evolution-creationism debate works. The creationist side invariably pick something that a layperson don't understand, and say, "Ha, evolution is refuted."

Of course this is done dispite such an argument has been refuted numerous times in the scientific community, because the layperson doesn't know.

The refutation will then involve some lengthy and usually dry scientific explanation.

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
I am not convinced that just because a subject is complicated, that it cannot be argued well in a debate format. The tricky part is to choose how you are going to be presenting your argument.

As the creationist side is the side that starts these things, they get to choose their audience, weapon, venue, etc. They won't let the other side to have much control.

[Odin]

@ Ben ignorance in this thread.

[Spiffor]

I actually still can't believe that there are still people who don't acknowledge evolution, considering taht there is a bug today that feeds on Nylon, an artificial material that came into existence only a few decades ago.