You notice how the articles when these things happen always happen "quietly?"
That's because they aren't being subjected to open discussion. One powerful group (Bauer's in this case) silently, secretly puts forth its agenda behind closed doors, pushes it through, and whoops! There goes any concept of the idea that we're living in a free society... which, in the end, is just what they want.
These things happen quietly, because if they happened with noise and fanfare, the opposition would have a chance to get its cannons into place and make it a fair fight, which is the LAST thing the C'ers want.
WHAT ARE THEY HIDING?
------------------ 'In every country and in every age the priest has been hostile to Liberty; he is always in allegiance to the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection of his own." ---- Thomas Jefferson
posted
What do you mean, what are WE hiding? Walt Brown (noted creationist, for those of you who don't know) has challenged many leading evolutionists to a formal debate, and now has issued a standing invitiation to anyone who wants to try, and yet no one has taken him up on it in years. Any idea why?
And I still say that both should be taught completely optionally. Maybe I'd better get into state politics instead of national, eh? That way, only those of you who live in Tennessee would have to deal with my ideas. At least for a while, that is. : )
------------------ "I consider the foundation of the Constitution as laid on this ground: That "all powers not delegated to the United States, by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States or to the people . . ." To take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specially drawn around the powers of Congress is to take possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible of any definition." - Thomas Jefferson to George Washington, 1791
posted
Oh, the fun never stops around here, does it?
First of all, this really has little to do with creation or evolution. It's just some nice-sounding Orwellian doublespeak. Note how none of the content has changed, just a few of the buzzwords.
Regarding teaching both: Again I say unto thee, nay! A thousand times nay! Creationism belongs in a theology class, not a science class. The reasons are many and have been pointed out time and time and time and time and time again, though you refuse to acknowledge them.
Regarding debates: Wha huh? These sorts of debates happen all the time, almost always at creationist events. Why? Because creationists are totally unwilling to actually argue in a venue where scientific accuracy counts. Instead, they pack their halls with people who, like yourself, will simply ignore whatever the invited scientist has to say. Beyond that, these debates are almost never about the science involved. I dare you to show me a single such debate where the creationist doesn't start attacking the evolutionist.
------------------ "Quadrilateral I was, now I warp like a smile." -- Soul Coughing
posted
I should add, attacking the evolutionist on entirely unrelated matters. Accusing them of being athiests and so on, none of which has any bearing on the matter at hand. But they know their audience, I suppose.
------------------ "Quadrilateral I was, now I warp like a smile." -- Soul Coughing
posted
Sol, I know exactly what you're talking about... i work at Darien Lake and every year they have several speakers discussing Evolution/creation....usually they turn into scientist-bashing fests.
------------------ "I'm looking for someone to change my life. I'm looking for a miracle in my life. And if you could see, what its done to me... To lose the love I knew, could safely lead me to The land that I one knew... To learn as we grow old, the secrets of our souls." Question, The Moody Blues
So you suggest teaching evolution as a scientific fact, and completely ignore another theory that fits the fact better, just because the other theory happens to involve the direct intervention of a supernatural entity at some point? Your big bang/random chance theory requires that, too, you know. And since the theory I defend fits the facts far better, I'd suggest that IT should be taught as scientific fact instead. Does anyone have an aspect of nature that my beliefs don't explain? My point is that neither can be prooven, so neither should be taught as fact.
------------------ "I consider the foundation of the Constitution as laid on this ground: That "all powers not delegated to the United States, by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States or to the people . . ." To take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specially drawn around the powers of Congress is to take possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible of any definition." - Thomas Jefferson to George Washington, 1791
posted
I suggest teaching scientfic fact in school as opposed to a totally unsupported patchwork pulled together by various forces wishing to seek the teaching of their religion of choice, yes. Despite you proclaiming that your theory is supported by the facts, it would seem that the truth is in fact exactly the opposite.
------------------ "And I can't approach myself, skating over this perdition." -- Soul Coughing
posted
You keep saying that my theory doesn't work and that yours does, but you never point out any holes in mine, or any evidence irrefutably in favor of yours. If you'd care to do so, I'm listening.
------------------ "I consider the foundation of the Constitution as laid on this ground: That "all powers not delegated to the United States, by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States or to the people . . ." To take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specially drawn around the powers of Congress is to take possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible of any definition." - Thomas Jefferson to George Washington, 1791
posted
I'm not suggesting that any particular creation story be taught, just that the scientific theory that says that the world reached its present state through natural processes that were set in motion by a supernatural being some milenia ago. Again, as an option, not as fact.
------------------ "I consider the foundation of the Constitution as laid on this ground: That "all powers not delegated to the United States, by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States or to the people . . ." To take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specially drawn around the powers of Congress is to take possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible of any definition." - Thomas Jefferson to George Washington, 1791
posted
Uh, no. You missed several involving various methods of dating the universe/Earth/system. You never did explain that amorphous paste on Archaeopteryx. You never explained how what is effectively a computer program capable of making a copy of itself could arise by random chance. And you never explained away the data that points to a decrease in the speed of light and atomic vibration. Oh, and nothing against liquefication and a global flood, either. So now, which one of us is claiming something that didn't happen to make theirself happy?
------------------ Meddle not in the affairs of Dragons; for you are crunchy and good with ketchup.
posted
I discounted every "Archie is a hoax!" point, including that "paste". First has repeatedly shown you more then a few reasons why electromagnetic radiation cannot have slowed down. He's also pointed out that the hydrologically sorted layer theory is utterly without basis and has been experimentally disproved.
------------------ "And I can't approach myself, skating over this perdition." -- Soul Coughing
posted
Would you care to refresh my memory as to the supposed c decreaseand liquefication refutations? I really have no idea what you're talking about. And perhaps you'd care to describe the details of these experiments involving liquefication. Every experiment I've heard of produced the results predicted. And I repeatedly asked you to explain the fact that Archie's furcula was oversized, cracked, and turned the wrong way. You never did.
------------------ Meddle not in the affairs of Dragons; for you are crunchy and good with ketchup.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
