http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/12/20/intelligent.design.ap/index.html

score one for smart people

12/20/2005 12:31:07 PM

good

12/20/2005 12:38:23 PM

score for censorship!

12/20/2005 12:48:39 PM

censorship?

so if a history teacher was making students memorize a list of us presidents that consisted of nascar drivers and they were asked to stop that would be censorship too huh?

12/20/2005 12:53:53 PM

I hail this ban.

12/20/2005 1:01:07 PM

Censorship.

Gotcha.

12/20/2005 1:06:06 PM

You're dumb if you equate this to censorship.

12/20/2005 1:15:55 PM

i want to say the second one was a joke

12/20/2005 1:19:33 PM

Quote :

"The board's attorneys had said members were seeking to improve science education by exposing students to alternatives to Charles Darwin's theory that evolution develops through natural selection. Intelligent-design proponents argue that the theory cannot fully explain the existence of complex life forms. The plaintiffs challenging the policy argued intelligent design amounts to a secular repackaging of creationism, which the courts have already ruled cannot be taught in public schools. The judge agreed."

Score one for the legal system using a precedent case. This has nothing to do with "smart people".

12/20/2005 1:25:22 PM

it has everything to do with stupid people, however.

12/20/2005 1:29:49 PM

Quote :

"so if a history teacher was making students memorize a list of us presidents that consisted of nascar drivers and they were asked to stop that would be censorship too huh?"

Yes, its exactly like that scenario.

12/20/2005 1:32:10 PM

Basically.

He's saying it's censorship to ban a science teacher from teaching something that is in no way scientific.

Kind of like a history teacher teaching something that is in no way historical.

I JUST WANNA RACE, DIDDY.

12/20/2005 1:38:08 PM

Momentarily forgetting your beliefs may they be creationism OR evolution....

This is censorship because both "intelligent design" and "evolution" are theories of how our world came to be. Both are supported by scientific data and by equally intelligent individuals from universities and nations across the world. When a judge decides it's okay to ban the teaching of one theory vs. the other-- he's putting his beliefs ahead of our well balanced education. I, perhaps for one on this board, would have enjoyed learning about all theories available since we DO NOT KNOW where we came from or why we exist. Agreed?

Your opinions are just as strong and as biased as Christians, only the opposite point of view.

----

Also, maybe you guys think it's so religious and far-out crazy because you were never taught the scientific proof behind the "intelligent design" theory. Doesn't that sound reasonable?

[Edited on December 20, 2005 at 1:49 PM. Reason : add]

12/20/2005 1:47:40 PM

Quote :

"Both are supported by scientific data and by equally intelligent individuals from universities and nations across the world."

This is absolutely wrong. There IS no scientific proof behind "intelligent design", primarily because it is fundamentally unscientific. There is no data to support it because it has nothing to do with any actual data. It cannot be measured. It cannot be tested. It can neither be proven nor disproven. It is a nonscientific theory.

People can believe in it all they want, and that's perfectly acceptible. But it isn't science, it has nothing to do with science, and therefore it has no business being taught as science in the classroom.

[Edited on December 20, 2005 at 1:58 PM. Reason : asdf]

12/20/2005 1:54:27 PM

"Your great great uncle was a monkey."

that sounds really scientific....

I don't believe in evolution because it has fundamental flaws. Things just don't happen.

I also don't believe that "intelligent design" should be taught in public schools. I think it should be taught by churches. But I also firmly believe that evolution is merely a theory. There is no fact that supports that we evolved from something else. Every time remains of humans are found that date farther and farther back, evolutionists have to revise their "theory." That's not fact.


[Edited on December 20, 2005 at 2:02 PM. Reason : ]

12/20/2005 1:58:49 PM

I just think we should be exposed to more explanations for LIFE than evolution and the big bang. Speaking of crazy theories, how about that one? hah. All the complexities of dna, balanced ecosystems, and emotion just *PFFFT!* came into existence for no reason at all? To quote Super Troopers, "I'll believe that when me shit turns purple, and smells like rainbow sherbet!"

12/20/2005 2:13:49 PM

Quote :

"Both are supported by scientific data and by equally intelligent individuals from universities and nations across the world."

yet no university or nation teaches it.

12/20/2005 2:15:36 PM

^^ yep you're absolutely right, it all came into being at once the way it is now.

everything worked JUST like it does now 28293203892943282989238204304390 years ago.







the overwhelming stupidity that exists on both sides is fucking amazing.

[Edited on December 20, 2005 at 2:16 PM. Reason : *]

12/20/2005 2:16:28 PM

Quote :

""Your great great uncle was a monkey." that sounds really scientific.... "

HAHA, you're dumb.

Quote :

"All the complexities of dna, balanced ecosystems, and emotion just *PFFFT!* came into existence for no reason at all?"

HAHA, you're dumb too!

Quote :

"the overwhelming stupidity that exists on both sides is fucking amazing."

12/20/2005 2:19:30 PM

The theory of evolution is not just centered around the evolution of humans. It encompasses all life forms and can be seen in many variations in all ecosystems. Natural selection is a part of the theory of evolution and that can be seen in a very observable time-period in organisms with very short generation times.

Also, the theory of evolution does not theorize that humans came from monkeys. It theorizes that humans and apes both evolved from a common ancestor.

12/20/2005 2:19:38 PM

I suggest that you people visit the NC Museum of Natural Sciences today.

12/20/2005 2:22:18 PM

Quote :

"score for censorship!"

I was JOKING! I firmly believe in the theory of evolution. And I'm a Christian too. Get that. I dont' necessarily think the two are mutually exclusive.

But no, I do not believe it is censorship.

12/20/2005 2:22:29 PM

word

12/20/2005 2:23:00 PM

Please see the following questionnaire:

Are you on board with intelligent design or equate it in any way with actual science?

Is evolution made up?

Do you use the word theory with quotes?

If you answered yes or even considered answering yes to any of these questions either you obviously haven't ever studied any science of any type BECAUSE I REFUSE TO BELIEVE PEOPLE THAT CAN CONSTRUCT A SENTENCE ARE JUST THAT STUPID

You ascend to the pinnacle of idiocy by saying things like "I don't believe in evolution" or using the terms "science" and "intelligent design" in conjunction without "utterly deviod of" seperating them.

When you use the word believe people get confused this is not a pick and choose issue it's demonstrable, observable scientific fact.

12/20/2005 2:26:18 PM

hhahaha i love it when people make threads setting up their rant. cause you knew the rant was coming..

12/20/2005 2:27:24 PM

i just wanted to post weeeeeeeeeeeeeeee, but when people beg for it....

12/20/2005 2:30:36 PM

you seem like the type of man that would drive an awesome car

[Edited on December 20, 2005 at 2:36 PM. Reason : ]

12/20/2005 2:35:25 PM

i was thinking the same thing about you

clearly taste and style are evolved qualities (look at me, thread tie-in and everything)

12/20/2005 2:38:03 PM

http://www.venganza.org/ Church of the Flying Spaghetthi Monster - check this out

12/20/2005 2:39:24 PM

Quote :

"Your great great uncle was a monkey." that sounds really scientific.... I don't believe in evolution because it has fundamental flaws. Things just don't happen. "

i forgot that things magically happened. to bad all the dragons and unicors were killed of 100's of years ago. and fuck big corporations for eliminating the practice of magic thus making my life boring so i must consume their products

12/20/2005 2:42:32 PM

jwb. You seem to have really intelligent responses to my comments. Obviously you have no opinions of your own, you simply object to others' opinions and call them dumb. An opinion contrary to yours is only an opinion. You have NO facts to support evolution. There are pieces, but there are also large breaches that cannot be explained for our existence.

Evolutionists take the equivalent of 5 pieces of a 1,000 piece puzzle, put them together, and call it complete. There is no end-all be-all scientific way to say where we came from, but to call religious people dumb for believing in a higher power is very narrow-minded and frankly unintelligent. Faith-based theories on our existence are much more widespread and universally accepted than science-based theories because there is more historical evidence of faith-based theories. The Bible is not a story book, it is a book of history. The correlations between it, and other historical records of the times suggest that we were created by a higher being. Check it in several religions that are/were worldwide (Juddaism, Islam, and Roman and Greek mythology). All say that we were created by a god, whether it was Jehovah, Allah, or the gods on Olympus. I could very well be wrong, but if I'm wrong what have I lost. I believe in Heaven, and I believe I am going there. If I'm wrong, I haven't lost anything. If I'm right, I go to a place where gold paves the streets and the Son always shines. If evolutionists are right, then they're right, but if they're wrong and they don't have God in their hearts, then they wind up in Hell for eternity. I choose God, I choose to believe that God created this world, and I reject the "theory" of evolution.

I still don't believe that religion should be taught in PUBLIC schools. But I also don't believe that evolution should be taught as fact.

12/20/2005 2:50:09 PM

using your analogy i guess the beleivers of intelligent design must have lost the puzzle in the attic.

^ no one is arguing rather or not god exists or if ID is the reason behind evolution and the way the world works in the first place. but the argument is simple ID which has is not support by any SCIENTIFIC proof does not belong in a SCIENCE class .

[Edited on December 20, 2005 at 2:58 PM. Reason : l]

12/20/2005 2:56:25 PM

^^ i think you might need to look up the definition of the word theory.

after that, lookup all the evidence FOR evolution, then try and find ANY evidence for intelligent design.

12/20/2005 2:57:40 PM

I want to know why people get so offended over evolution and the possibility that humans evolved from apes.

Quote :

""Your great great uncle was a monkey." that sounds really scientific...."

So does, "I don't know, we just appeared one day."

People say you can't prove evolution is real, but you can't prove God is real, either.

[Edited on December 20, 2005 at 3:03 PM. Reason : .]

12/20/2005 2:57:49 PM

1) I have never been taught evolution as a fact. It has always been presented as a theory.
2) There's nothing within the theory of evolution that excludes religion. Is it not possible that a higher being created the world using the process of evolution, so that the world would be more self-sufficient and continue creating based on the fundamentals set up by said being? All I'm saying is, and I know that I am repeating people, the two (creationism and evolution) are not mutually exclusive. After all, the bible says that God can do anything. To say that evolution excludes God, does that not infer that God could not have developed evolution? I believe that the bible says that he could have, because he can do anything.

12/20/2005 2:59:58 PM

12/20/2005 3:00:15 PM

Quote :

"Faith-based theories on our existence are much more widespread and universally accepted than science-based theories because there is more historical evidence of faith-based theories."

by historical evidence you mean people with no tools to explain the world around them have been making shit up for a long time

12/20/2005 3:00:23 PM

if you analyze basic human behavior its no different than other primates or even animals for that matter. except for the fact that we have cool technologies and a more complex understanding of the world around us.

humans eat, sleep, breathe, compete over territory and mates, all behaviors of primates and other animals. physiologically we even are similar to the great apes

[Edited on December 20, 2005 at 3:04 PM. Reason : l]

12/20/2005 3:01:19 PM

Quote :

"Quote : "Faith-based theories on our existence are much more widespread and universally accepted than science-based theories because there is more historical evidence of faith-based theories." by historical evidence you mean people with no tools to explain the world around them have been making shit up for a long time "

yeah and 1000 years ago Doctors beleived that humans were made of four humors and the best cure for anything was draining blood and baths were unsanitary

[Edited on December 20, 2005 at 3:03 PM. Reason : l]

12/20/2005 3:03:15 PM

Quote :

"JWHWolf:jwb. You seem to have really intelligent responses to my comments. Obviously you have no opinions of your own, you simply object to others' opinions and call them dumb. An opinion contrary to yours is only an opinion. You have NO facts to support evolution. There are pieces, but there are also large breaches that cannot be explained for our existence. "

this has been debated TO DEATH, in the soapbox and other places, and im NOT going to take the time to dignify THIS:

Quote :

""Your great great uncle was a monkey." that sounds really scientific...."

with a serious response. so instead i will laugh at you,

and i still am



[Edited on December 20, 2005 at 3:10 PM. Reason : .]

12/20/2005 3:03:31 PM

I think all of you need to do research on both ID AND evolution.

it sounds like youre arguing off of prejudices to one or the other and not actual knowledge of the topic.

12/20/2005 3:04:06 PM

I don't know one way or the other, but ID doesn't fit the scientific method the way evolution does, and shouldn't be taught in a science class. Philosophy or religion, sure.

12/20/2005 3:18:50 PM

IMO theory shouldnt be 'taught'. It can be mentioned but science class should consist of facts and methods.

12/20/2005 3:19:57 PM

i'm not sure any of you understand the concept of a scientific theory to begin with

12/20/2005 3:20:30 PM

Quote :

"Theory: A theory is more like a scientific law than a hypothesis. A theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers. One scientist cannot create a theory; he can only create a hypothesis. In general, both a scientific theory and a scientific law are accepted to be true by the scientific community as a whole. Both are used to make predictions of events. Both are used to advance technology. The biggest difference between a law and a theory is that a theory is much more complex and dynamic. A law governs a single action, whereas a theory explains a whole series of related phenomena. An analogy can be made using a slingshot and an automobile. A scientific law is like a slingshot. A slingshot has but one moving part--the rubber band. If you put a rock in it and draw it back, the rock will fly out at a predictable speed, depending upon the distance the band is drawn back. An automobile has many moving parts, all working in unison to perform the chore of transporting someone from one point to another point. An automobile is a complex piece of machinery. Sometimes, improvements are made to one or more component parts. A new set of spark plugs that are composed of a better alloy that can withstand heat better, for example, might replace the existing set. But the function of the automobile as a whole remains unchanged. A theory is like the automobile. Components of it can be changed or improved upon, without changing the overall truth of the theory as a whole. Some scientific theories include the theory of evolution, the theory of relativity, and the quantum theory. All of these theories are well documented and proved beyond reasonable doubt. Yet scientists continue to tinker with the component hypotheses of each theory in an attempt to make them more elegant and concise, or to make them more all-encompassing. Theories can be tweaked, but they are seldom, if ever, entirely replaced. "

http://wilstar.com/theories.htm

12/20/2005 3:27:01 PM

Quote :

"scientific theory n : a theory that explains scientific observations; "scientific theories must be falsifiable""

two entries for scientific fact:

Quote :

"Main Entry: scientific fact Part of Speech: noun Definition: any observation that has been repeatedly confirmed and accepted as true; any scientific observation that has not been refuted Example: The structure of a cell membrane is considered a scientific fact. scientific fact n : an observation that has been confirmed repeatedly and is accepted as true (although its truth is never final)"

according to dictionary.com

[Edited on December 20, 2005 at 3:37 PM. Reason : .]

12/20/2005 3:28:24 PM

^^that last bold part is probably too much for tww, so let me make it simpler

gravity is a scientific theory

[Edited on December 20, 2005 at 3:29 PM. Reason : .]

12/20/2005 3:28:43 PM

Why do evolution assholes always have this air of superiority about them, calling themselves "smart people" and shit? You are not any more superior than anyone else - peopl ehave disagreeing views. Schools are not the place to be indoctrinating students into your ridiculous anti-Christian mindsets.

12/20/2005 3:54:17 PM

school is not the place to teach science!!

12/20/2005 3:56:33 PM

its not the place to introduce them into christian mindsets either.

12/20/2005 3:56:34 PM