Here Is What Louisiana Schoolchildren Learn About Evolution

[MovingTarget]

So in the US of A and theocracies like Iran teach the same shite to children...go figure.

Meanwhile, the rest of the world have moved on...time to wake up US...or get left behind....like any other theocracy.

On another note...if you think that this is a significant portion of what we teach to our kids, you don't know squat about our educational system. Yes, this minute slice is growing, but the tide has been held back in the vast majority of the US. We are not a theocracy - not by a longshot. Perhaps you are unaware that we take the separation of church and state much more seriously than they do in most countries. That extends into the public school classroom.

 

[hal2kilo]

2+2=4

So Johnny what's your opinion

:thumbsup:

Simple and to the point.

 

[ichy]

so the school is teaching two different viewpoints? thats SHOCKING! BURN THEM, BURN THEM ALL!!!

Guess what, not all viewpoints are valid. Maybe we should teach "different viewpoints" about whether the Holocaust happened or not.

 

[ichy]

Have you even read the bible? do you even know whats in it?

"Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey." (1 Sam. 15:3).

Fantastic guide to morality :thumbsup:

 

[ichy]

2+2=4

So Johnny what's your opinion

Not really the greatest analogy since math has proofs whereas science does not. IMO a better comparison would be teaching 9/11 conspiracy theories. Yeah, I wasn't there to see the 9/11 attacks with my own eyes, and it's theoretically possible that they were an inside job, however an overwhelming mountain of evidence says that all that "Loose Change" nonsense is horseshit. Same with evolution. I wasn't actually there too see anything evolve, but when you look at the evidence that's out there it overwhelmingly shows that creationism is nothing but feeble-minded superstition.

 

[Retro Rob]

"Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey." (1 Sam. 15:3).

Fantastic guide to morality :thumbsup:

Yep as I said, and your silly and incorrect assessment lacks context completely. Go and learn something about it first.

 

[Timorous]

It's your examples that are retarded. Nothing else compares to that which would exist on a plain beyond our perception. It is not possible to answer our creation because for every theory you can simply ask "why did THAT happen?"

The question itself is ad infinitum.

That makes the assumption that there was 'something' before the start of the universe and that the universe required 'something' to get it started.

Creation is evidence of a creator. It's actually atheists on whom the weight of proof exists. Where anywhere do we see evidence of things simply springing into existence?

That assumes that there was a state that existed prior to the universe for the universe to spring into.

Go back through time and the universe exists. It is like rewinding a tape, you can go back to the start but no further, the universe is likely the same in that there was no such thing as before. If you want to argue about who/what/how play was pressed to get it moving in the first place I would counter with the natural process of entropy.

With regards to evolution the issue is that a lot of people fail to separate the observable fact from the theory. The observable fact is that evolution is true, animals change over time to better fit into the niche they are in. The theory is explaining HOW that happens and we understand a lot more regarding the HOW evolution happens they we understand HOW gravity happens but I do not see anybody denying gravity like they do with evolution.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Creation is evidence of a creator. It's actually atheists on whom the weight of proof exists. Where anywhere do we see evidence of things simply springing into existence?

But it isn't a given that what exists is a "creation," numbnuts. You demonstrate thoroughly that existence has a beginning, first. Then we can talk about whether or not it makes sense to talk about something causing that beginning. Only after that can you make arguments that this alleged something features the characteristics of your pet deity.

 

[Atreus21]

I guess quanthum physics is above you.

I'll disregard you fallacy of "reversin the burden of proof"...and point you to reality:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_fluctuation

Now go read up..and keep your fallacies away when the adults are talking....they are debunked and obsolete

Yes, I'm sure the philosophies that have pervaded humankind since its inception are only recently debunked by the enlightened class. Do atheists have a single argument not predicated on arrogance?

You've given a scientific principle in response to a a philosophical question. From what origin do the mechanics which govern the universe arise? Where did this framework come from in the first place?

 

[Lonbjerg]

so the school is teaching two TOTALLY different viewpoints, one backed by facts , data and science...the other having NOTHING? thats SHOCKING! BURN THEM, BURN THEM ALL!!!

FYP...

 

[Lonbjerg]

On another note...if you think that this is a significant portion of what we teach to our kids, you don't know squat about our educational system. Yes, this minute slice is growing, but the tide has been held back in the vast majority of the US. We are not a theocracy - not by a longshot. Perhaps you are unaware that we take the separation of church and state much more seriously than they do in most countries. That extends into the public school classroom.

What sepeartion?
Swear on the bible?
One nation under "god"?

You must mistake me for an ignorant person.

 

[ichy]

Yep as I said, and your silly and incorrect assessment lacks context completely. Go and learn something about it first.

In what possible context is it good for god to advocate genocide?

Besides, at the end of the day it doesn't matter how much of the Bible I've read, that doesn't make it anymore true. I could read Winnie the Pooh from cover to cover and it wouldn't make anthropomorphic bears real.

 

[dank69]

Have you even read the bible? do you even know whats in it?

Probably not.

More than likely, he either heard someone else's critique of it, or did what most bigoted Bible "readers" do, .. read one, or maybe two passages, close it, and charatcerized the entire Bible and the belief of ALL religious people off that two second Bible reading.

I can guess where he went too.. the parts which shows God's views on gays and the punishment(s) levied against them.

Typical, typical, typical... I expect nothing more.

Are you two suggesting that there is something in the Bible other than words written by men?

 

[Atreus21]

Now we know how stupid you are, thinking 'data' has any relevance. There is no data, and there never will be. That's the point.

It doesn't mater why the big bang happened. Even if they answer that, we will simply move on to asking why the factors behind it exist. Every answer to why is responded to by another "why?". The question is ad infinitum - IT CAN NEVER BE ANSWERED.

Like an adult responding to a child playing that game, you eventually resort to "just because". The answer to "why" is beyond us. It always will be.

It's beyond our comprehension, but not beyond our knowledge to describe. A creator in this case would have to exist outside of time to break the chain of causality. That's the basis of the first cause argument. A being that has always existed which itself was not caused. It's impossible to understand being outside of time, but not impossible to describe.

 

[Lonbjerg]

Yes, I'm sure the philosophies that have pervaded humankind since its inception are only recently debunked by the enlightened class. Do atheists have a single argument not predicated on arrogance?

You've given a scientific principle in response to a a philosophical question. From what origin do the mechanics which govern the universe arise? Where did this framework come from in the first place?

So you admit you were ignorant and that quanthum physics debunked your false claim?

Just jumping from one fallacy to a bunch of fallices are not an answer...

 

[Lonbjerg]

It's beyond our comprehension, but not beyond our knowledge to describe. A creator in this case would have to exist outside of time to break the chain of causality. That's the basis of the first cause argument. A being that has always existed which itself was not caused. It's impossible to understand being outside of time, but not impossible to describe.

Humna imagination is large...but facts is:
There is NO evidence for ANY "deity"...quit the opposite.

And just because you can imagine something...dosn't make it true.

The only place a "creator" lives, are in the feble minds of religious nutters...just like a pshycosis only excists inside the skull of the patient.

 

[Retro Rob]

In what possible context is it good for god to advocate genocide?

Besides, at the end of the day it doesn't matter how much of the Bible I've read, that doesn't make it anymore true. I could read Winnie the Pooh from cover to cover and it wouldn't make anthropomorphic bears real.

It would make what you say about it more educated, and as a result, make you more educated on the subject your attempting to vilify. It just amazes me how folks read not even a handful of Bible verses and are instant scholars on its contents.

 

[Atreus21]

So you admit you were ignorant and that quanthum physics debunked your false claim?

Just jumping from one fallacy to a bunch of fallices are not an answer...

I admit that I had no prior knowledge of Quantum Fluctuation, yes. But the argument holds that we don't observe, except in rare exceptions on atomic scales, spontaneous creation of intricately designed objects. A wristwatch presupposes a watchmaker. Yet a construct as massive and intricate as the universe is attributed to...nothing. All the processes necessary for its creation came from...what?

 

[Atreus21]

Humna imagination is large...but facts is:
There is NO evidence for ANY "deity"...quit the opposite.

And just because you can imagine something...dosn't make it true.

The only place a "creator" lives, are in the feble minds of religious nutters...just like a pshycosis only excists inside the skull of the patient.

Again, the fact that we are created is evidence of a creator. The facts that forces exist which govern the creation of matter at its basis, such as Quantum Fluctuation, is evidence of a creator.

It's like trying to disprove that cars are created by men by crediting the tools involved in the job.

 

[Lonbjerg]

I admit that I had no prior knowledge of Quantum Fluctuation, yes. But the argument holds that we don't observe, except in rare exceptions on atomic scales, spontaneous creation of intricately designed objects. A wristwatch presupposes a watchmaker. Yet a construct as massive and intricate as the universe is attributed to...nothing. All the processes necessary for its creation came from...what?

You arguments is a tried old one (I suspect there are a LOT of areas of science you are utterly cluesless about....hence your "argumentation".

Here is my reponse to you old, tired "song:

Bring me ANY evidence for your "creator"...or keep fiction out of it.

 

[Lonbjerg]

Again, the fact that we are created is evidence of a creator. The facts that forces exist which govern the creation of matter at its basis, such as Quantum Fluctuation, is evidence of a creator.

Circulear logic...you use all the tired old religious verbal-vomit....boooooring!!!!!

 

[Retro Rob]

Are you two suggesting that there is something in the Bible other than words written by men?

All I am suggesting is that critics read and understand what they're reading before making uneducated and uninformed conclusions.

 

[ichy]

It would make what you say about it more educated, and as a result, make you more educated on the subject your attempting to vilify. It just amazes me how folks read not even a handful of Bible verses and are instant scholars on its contents.

You ignored my question. What context makes the verse that I quote (where god orders the slaughter of women and children) any less horrible?

 

[Lonbjerg]

All I am suggesting is that critics read and understand what they're reading before making uneducated and uninformed conclusions.

So you agree that the bible is a rewrite of older Judean myths, who borrowed them from the Assyrians...who got their inspiration from the Sumerians?

Becuase if you think the bible is a orginal "work"...we know who is "uneducated and uninformed"? 🙂

 

[Atreus21]

Circulear logic...you use all the tired old religious verbal-vomit....boooooring!!!!!

For all the atheist's claim of higher knowledge and superior intellect, you sure are long on cheap insults.