Fear terrorists? Nah, fear stupidity.Follow

Georgia considers banning evolution from textbooks


In-f'ucking-credible

Excuse me while I vomit. Does anyone have any idea what exactly goes through these f'ucktard's heads when they come up with **** like this? Every time i think "Hey, thats the stupidest f'ucking thing I've ever heard" someone always seems to prove me wrong.

Thankfully, this dumbass was forced to drop her proposal yesterday.

"The proposal drew widespread criticism. Former President Carter said it exposed the state to nationwide ridicule."

"Some religious conservatives applauded Cox's proposal as a step toward teaching creationism in schools."

A step towards teaching creationism? A step towards making you bible pushing a'ssholes look like the ***** you really are.


Site needs a spellchecker

Edited, Fri Feb 6 22:50:53 2004 by SelfishMan

Edited, Fri Feb 6 22:54:15 2004 by SelfishMan

you forgot activist

Someone needs to buy Dyzalot a newspaper

I'm just trying to help our president turn the US into a Christian police state

Please go vomit, don't let us stand in your way.

As for what's going through "these f'ucktard's heads", the logic probably isn't too far off of what goes through an atheists head when they scream "evolution is where it's at".

Narrow minded dumbasses like you that say "I'm open minded as long as you think evolution is the only way things could have possibly happened." really confuse me sometimes.

If you really want seperation of church and state, let's make sure we get atheist, agnostic and The Church of Darwin people's beliefs the hell out of our government as well.

I live in Georgia, and I'm EXTREMELY Right-Wing! I listen to Sean Hanity daily, battle with my liberal (swine, lol) friends all the time, etc......

I fro one an all for this president, and what Georgia is trying to do..... not to mention, is evolution a proven fact? Not many of the science teachers in Georgia believe so......

As for this gay marrige stuff..... I feel like bombing these judges..... the majority of Americans are against it! I do believe people should have the right to have their own sexual choices (eg, to be "gay"). I must agree with this president, We must protect the sancity of Marriage. At least in Reno and Vegas, they aren't getting married to members of the same sex :P

PS: I don't see why that bill didn't get passed.... I think it is official that Georgia is the most Right-Wing, Religious state in the nation.....

PSS: I think that people should be allowed to debate this in the class room, if everyone consents to it! (Jeff Styles thinks people should! (he's on the local radio moring news/talkshow)

PSSS: Who ever started this thread is a radical, left-wing, hippi(-crit supporter)! Go back to the 60's!

Edited, Sat Feb 7 18:34:27 2004 by SplinterCellDude

Did I say anywhere in my post, that "evolution is the only way things could have possibly happened"? No.

Did I say anywhere in my post that Creationism should not be taught in schools? No.

The point I was making, was that by attempting to ban the word evolution from classrooms, Georgia's Superintendent of Education made herself look a fool.




Once again, Seperation of Church and State was never mentioned in my post.

And personally, I don't think that Seperation of Church and State can ever be attained, unless the Government completely removes itself from setting guidlines for marriage.



Is Creationism a proven fact?



I'd like to see the results of this poll you took, that proves that the majority of Americans are against same sex marriages. Almost everyone I know doesn't have a problem with it.

I don't understand one part of your post though Splinter. The first sentence, you threaten bodily harm to "these judges", and then in the very next sentence, you go on to say, "I do believe people should have the right to have thier own sexual choices." Stop riding the fence, and pick a side.



I never asked you to like me Splinter. Kiss my ***.

Obviously it's not a "proven theory" since the word "theory" in of itself means it is not proven. However, it is a scientifically valid theory with infinately more evidence on its side than anything else. Even the bulk of creationist scientific "evidence" is simply attempts to discredit evolution rather than any sort of evidence supporting the 6000 year old Earth/instanteous creation of life ideas. It'd be like me running through footage of Kennedy being shot and pointing out everything wrong with a lone gunman theory and coming to the conclusion that Kennedy must have been killed by time travelling alien dinosaurs.

Like I said, I'd be content to see time given to alternate scientific theories of how life began and changed over the years. Discussions about divine beings belong in the social studies classroom, unless you want to devote equal time in Biology class and say it's just as likely that the world was spawned from the corpse of Ymir or the egg of Pan Gu as is the theory that YHWH brought it forth.

With enough faith, who needs evidence? Didn't you guys know that the fossil record was put on Earth by Satan to make us doubt the holy Word of God?

With blind trust you need not bother with trying to understand anything. Life is bliss!

You know.....

There's an unprecedented crapload of evidence that Japan exists. However aside from pictures (which can easily be doctored), television (special effects anybody) and movies I've never seen it. I've never set foot on ground in Japan or flown over it. Yet somehow I know it exists......how do I know it exists? Faith that all the evidence pointing to it's existance isn't crap.

Think about it.

All historical sciences are theory based. As no corroborating eyewitnesses exist, all of the evidence is circumstantial. Granted, circumstantial evidence can be damning, and in overwhelming quantities, difficult to argue with, if not impossible to refute.

Evolution is rarely taught at the k-12 level as a theory. It is generally presented without contrasting it to the other prevailing theory of our world’s genesis (note the small "g"). As such, it is reasonable to assume that children in science classes may deem this to be de facto "truth".

Scientists theorize that a moon in orbit around Earth for a time long enough that no mention of the cataclysmic separation of the mass from the Earth exists in recorded history must have several feet of "moon" dust on its surface. The depth of dust covering the surface of the moon is consistent with the amount of dust that would have accumulated over a period not exceeding 10,000 years.



I would have to disagree slightly. Attributing creation to a specific divine presence, i.e. giving weight to one particular "myth" over another would have no place in the public schoolroom. However, identifying as a theory that is held by a significant number of people on this planet "creationism", as another potential explanation, should not make anyone of or possessing greater than, an average intelligence feel threatened.



Actually, there are psychological models which support the science, or rather the deification of scientific fact, as a religion, or at the very least an addiction. I believe if you review the history of science in its journals, you will find that quite a few long held theories turned out to be just that. You see, theories are the "made up" rationale formulated by people reviewing available data. Even "FACT"s are subject to speculation and conjecture when new data is put forth that draws them in to question. I know personally that I have rarely in my life seen greater arguments than the ones to be had when "scientists" of opposing views are brought together for discussion. It is generally just as impassioned as an abortion debate, sans the gunplay and bombings.

All this longwinded post is intended to do is suggest that emotional opinions in this and similar arguments will do nothing to further understanding and common ground. Regardless of what you believe, you have to share the planet with people who believe something else. Whipping out your d1ck on a message board is a futile effort, and while I will not search for the picture, as it makes some here emotionally opinionated, arguing, especially about issues like this, with someone over the internet is like winning a race at the Special Olympics. You may have one, but you are STILL a ******.

The "moon dust" thing was debunked in the 1960's as being attributed to faulty data regarding the amount of space "debris" lands on the Earth annually. Continued tests by NASA using satellite data and laser readings show that the amount of dust landing on the Earth (and the moon) is much much less than what was originally thought in the infancy of the space program. You might want to buy a book.

I don't know what school you went to, but back when I was in freshman biology, evolution was certainly presented as a theory. We even took the time to look at some alternate theories like that guy with the giraffe necks (whose name escape me). Evolution as a science wasn't really taught prior to that (maybe a little in junior high).

I'm all for a world religions class. As a social science class, not a 'hard' science.

Edited, Mon Feb 9 01:22:13 2004 by Jophiel

Interesting to hear you speak of "agendas" when many Pro-Creation websites already admit that the lunar dust argument is based on faulty data and shouldn't be used as evidence when trying to prove a young Earth. This site goes into some detail on how H. Slusher apparently out and out lied in his 'evidence' that the moon would be covered by hundreds of feet of dust (and consquently how the ICR [linked to above] finally dropped its claims that Slusher's work supported a young Earth).

In any event the specific focus was on evolution so, unless we're talking about life on the moon, evidence directly supporting the idea that all the world's fauna came to being within a 24 hour window is more appropriate. Unfortunately, that 'evidence' is more often in the form of "we found this place where this one thing happened that probably shouldn't have according to evolution!" instead of trying to support their own claims.

Edited, Mon Feb 9 03:02:20 2004 by Jophiel

Just want to add this:

The radion-carbon method p.e. is no theory at all and this method of dating the age of fossils cleary outrules that
a)Earth is only 6000 years old
b)everything on earth was created in a short amount of time.

But a Theologist (not a priest!) once explained his view at the university that the "genesis" and evolution is no contradiction at all. He stated that the act of creation could take god what we would call 6 days and the evolution of live as we know it may just be going according to Gods plans.

I am a true agnostic in RL but I can live perfectly well with that solution...



Edited, Mon Feb 9 07:25:04 2004 by Leiany