Skip to comments.
Scientists unite for science curriculum
Houston Chronicle ^
| Sept. 30, 2008
| KELLEY SHANNON
Posted on 09/30/2008 7:21:06 PM PDT by Soliton
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-89 next last
Science fights back
1
posted on
09/30/2008 7:21:06 PM PDT
by
Soliton
To: Soliton
Fights back against what? I guess they will have to throw out Newton (who wrote more theology than science), Kepler, and a host of others who were all theists!
2
posted on
09/30/2008 7:23:25 PM PDT
by
LiteKeeper
(Beware the secularization of America; the Islamization of Eurabia)
To: LiteKeeper
Fights back against what?Superstition
3
posted on
09/30/2008 7:25:51 PM PDT
by
Soliton
(> 100)
To: Soliton
"Texas public schools should be preparing our kids to succeed in the 21st century, not promoting political and ideological agendas that are hostile to a sound science education," So this means that they're banning Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" from being shown in classrooms? /s
To: LiteKeeper
Yeah, it always amuses me that the evolutionists are the ones who get the most defensive. They conveniently ignore the scientific method when it doesn’t satisfy their agenda.
5
posted on
09/30/2008 7:29:28 PM PDT
by
DocCincy
To: Soliton
Supernatural and religious teaching? You mean stuff that is opinion based rather than fully proven? Like quantum physics? Big Bang? Dinosaurs as reptiles? Piltdown man? LOL!
6
posted on
09/30/2008 7:31:05 PM PDT
by
Seruzawa
(American Government: Providing Middle Class Incomes to Unemployables for Over 200 Years!)
To: Soliton; betty boop; metmom; MrB; GodGunsGuts; valkyry1; Arthur Wildfire! March; Fichori; Elsie
7
posted on
09/30/2008 7:31:10 PM PDT
by
tpanther
(All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. Edmund Burke)
To: LibFreeOrDie
So this means that they're banning Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" from being shown in classrooms? /sUnfortunately not, oh see your /sarc> tag now
8
posted on
09/30/2008 7:34:15 PM PDT
by
valkyry1
(McCain/Palin 2008)
To: LibFreeOrDie
If there’s ANY ideological agenda parents should be aware of it’s the secular humanist godless liberal NEA FAILED school agenda.
The atheists got a shot for decades all while excluding others.
It’s WAY past time citizens realize science isn’t interested in sterilizing God from public science class, education in general, etc.
9
posted on
09/30/2008 7:34:23 PM PDT
by
tpanther
(All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. Edmund Burke)
To: tpanther
10
posted on
09/30/2008 7:35:43 PM PDT
by
valkyry1
(McCain/Palin 2008)
To: Seruzawa
The guy’s got a LOT invested in there being no God.
He needn’t worry, God will not force him into His presence in the eternal afterlife.
Choose separation now, choose separation forever.
11
posted on
09/30/2008 7:38:19 PM PDT
by
MrB
(0bama supporters: What's the attraction? The Marxism or the Infanticide?)
To: Soliton
They’re fighting themselves? Who knew?
12
posted on
09/30/2008 7:39:57 PM PDT
by
Blogger
To: Soliton
I must have been asleep for the past x years. Seems I’ve always heard of the “theory” of evolution - I guess I missed when it was officially renamed the “fact” of evolution.
13
posted on
09/30/2008 7:40:22 PM PDT
by
Rembrandt
(We would have won Viet Nam w/o Dim interference.)
To: LiteKeeper
To: Soliton
Was Newton superstitious? Was Kepler superstitious? How about Bacon? Or Boyle? Or Linneaus? How about Faraday? James Joule? Pasteur? Lord Kelvin? Lister? All theists. Superstitious? Hm?
15
posted on
09/30/2008 7:42:52 PM PDT
by
LiteKeeper
(Beware the secularization of America; the Islamization of Eurabia)
To: moreofthesame
Evolutionist “just-so” stories.
16
posted on
09/30/2008 7:44:04 PM PDT
by
LiteKeeper
(Beware the secularization of America; the Islamization of Eurabia)
To: Rembrandt
I must have been asleep for the past x years. Seems Ive always heard of the theory of evolution - I guess I missed when it was officially renamed the fact of evolution.It's a thoroughly tested theory supported by mountains of evidence.
17
posted on
09/30/2008 7:44:29 PM PDT
by
Soliton
(> 100)
To: LiteKeeper
Was Newton superstitious? Was Kepler superstitious? How about Bacon? Or Boyle? Or Linneaus? How about Faraday? James Joule? Pasteur? Lord Kelvin? Lister?Apparently yes
18
posted on
09/30/2008 7:46:49 PM PDT
by
Soliton
(> 100)
To: LiteKeeper
Can you show where any of these Scientists insisted that a supernatural agency was the cause of a physical phenomenon?
19
posted on
09/30/2008 7:47:57 PM PDT
by
allmendream
(Sa-RAH! Sa-RAH! Sa-RAH! RAH RAH RAH! McCain/Palin2008)
To: Soliton
Fighting back against the religion that birthed them— Christianity.
Good job rebellious child. Go get em.
20
posted on
09/30/2008 7:48:58 PM PDT
by
lonestar67
(Its time to withdraw from the War on Bush-- your side is hopelessly lost in a quagmire.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-89 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson