Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ayatollahs in the classroom [Evolution and Creationism]
Berkshire Eagle (Mass.) ^ | 22 January 2005 | Staff

Posted on 01/22/2005 7:38:12 AM PST by PatrickHenry

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 1,101-1,106 next last
To: Southack

121 posted on 01/22/2005 12:06:31 PM PST by WildTurkey (When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: Junior

Can't you koolaid drinkers speak with your own voices? All you do on these threads is post links to fatuous choirs. Just tell me your best empirical fact supporting your belief system.


122 posted on 01/22/2005 12:10:11 PM PST by metacognative (follow the gravy...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Southack
Abiogenesys (sic) Observing the unaided self-sequencing of DNA base pairs into a viable original living entity

Please prove your claim that abiogenesis teachings state that their is no "aid".

123 posted on 01/22/2005 12:12:09 PM PST by WildTurkey (When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: Blurblogger; RadioAstronomer; ThinkPlease; PatrickHenry; snarks_when_bored
The sun HAD to be larger. It's on fire! The fire that creates the heat from our sun is burning something. Gaseous mixture ratios have to be within a certain range to burn, thus a further argument for its shrinking to maintain density equilibrium.

[Laughter subsides....]

Q. What is the maximum amount by which a star can decrease its mass by conversion to energy that is radiated away?

A.

"They [stars] are continually radiating energy into space and thereby losing mass, and, as this energy is released in nuclear reactions in the interior of the star..... This mass loss is slight, and cannot exceed 1% of the star's mass in its entire life...."

Source: "The Stars: Their Structure and Evolution," R. J. Tayler; Wykeham Publications (London) Ltd, 1974

I regret to inform you that your "hypothesis" about stellar structure and energy release mechanisms is in need of modification.

124 posted on 01/22/2005 12:12:23 PM PST by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: NJ Neocon
This is the issue the Evangelicals will use to hold the GOP hostage, like the greens & left hold the Dems hostage. This will be our abortion & homosexual marriage albatross. We are handing the MSM and the Dims a club to bludgeon us with.

Wait until some of these idiotic school board cases work their way up to the Supreme Court. Then the issue will become one of those ghastly litmus tests for appointing federal judges, just like abortion, bussing, school prayer, etc. If you thought the confirmation hearings for Bork and Clarence Thomas were nightmares, just hold on a few more years. Lunacy awaits us.

125 posted on 01/22/2005 12:13:43 PM PST by PatrickHenry (<-- Click on my name. The List-O-Links for evolution threads is at my freeper homepage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: WildTurkey

Why does Darwin look Amish


126 posted on 01/22/2005 12:13:46 PM PST by bobdsmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: NJ Neocon
Oh for the love of

I think you incorrectly posted this to me.

127 posted on 01/22/2005 12:15:29 PM PST by WildTurkey (When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

I'll bet if you understood your overused source links
you could express them yourself. I'm going to take my computor apart and put it in the sun, and wait for it to assemble just by chance.
I wish I had an inkling of the dumb faith you darwinites have....


128 posted on 01/22/2005 12:17:01 PM PST by metacognative (follow the gravy...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: metacognative

hehe


129 posted on 01/22/2005 12:20:12 PM PST by Science Theories Arent Guesses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: metacognative
I'm going to take my computor apart and put it in the sun, and wait for it to assemble just by chance.

Now you know that evolution and science would NOT predict that. You are just having a little fun, right?

130 posted on 01/22/2005 12:21:25 PM PST by WildTurkey (When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

You think "lunacy" descibes the belief of 90% of americans.Where does that put you? Only a tiny percent of blue staters believe in darwinian materialism.


131 posted on 01/22/2005 12:22:33 PM PST by metacognative (follow the gravy...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

Source: Book 2, Chapter 10, Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler.


OMG! I thought I was one of the few that has actually waded through the drivel of A. Hitler.


132 posted on 01/22/2005 12:22:53 PM PST by furball4paws ("These are Microbes."... "You have crobes?" BC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Science Theories Arent Guesses
hehe

Come on. First post have to have a little more meat that that! Take a side, make a statement and stand by for the attacks.

133 posted on 01/22/2005 12:23:03 PM PST by WildTurkey (When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: Southack
Probability math is still taught in our dilapadated public schools, one presumes, so applying that math to areas of known contention, where said math will show a precise scientific answer, seems like the obvious path

If you think calculating the probability of life's origin gives a precise scientific origin, guy, they sure didn't do a good job teaching it in your school.

134 posted on 01/22/2005 12:27:26 PM PST by Right Wing Professor (Evolve or die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: DaGman

Those crazy creationists refuse to believe things popped out of nowhere and rose up to something for nothing.
If only they would close their minds and join the darwinite minority.


135 posted on 01/22/2005 12:27:38 PM PST by metacognative (follow the gravy...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: Blurblogger

"The sun HAD to be larger. It's on fire! The fire that creates the heat from our sun is burning something. Gaseous mixture ratios have to be within a certain range to burn, thus a further argument for its shrinking to maintain density equilibrium. Similarly the newest era of missles that sucks out the O^2 from the atmosphere creates suction. Review the laws of thermodynamics and physics and then we can talk again. "

The sun is a nuclear reactor and being "on fire" shows very little understanding of nuclear reactions. However, the sun has clearly lost some mass since its formation, but as a percentage of its original, it is probably very small.


136 posted on 01/22/2005 12:28:01 PM PST by furball4paws ("These are Microbes."... "You have crobes?" BC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: metacognative
Those crazy creationists refuse to believe things popped out of nowhere and rose up to something for nothing. If only they would close their minds and join the darwinite minority.

AGAIN!


137 posted on 01/22/2005 12:31:16 PM PST by WildTurkey (When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: All
For this minor league MSM outlet (Berkshire Eagle of MA) to concoct a theory that discussion of The Bible in schools will directly and exclusively lead to our becoming a third world country with Saudi-style religious dogma and Taliban leadership, is as equally ridiculous (or plausible) as saying that discussions of evolution will directly and exclusively lead to the total moral decay of our nation and we will end up as a communist satellite of Cuba or China or Mexico.

For a member of FR to post liberal dogma from a liberal rag, with nothing that is 'news' or not already posted hundreds of times, except for their theory of America's evolution into a Saudi-like regime, says more about the agenda of a small group of posters here who continually fly in the face of basic conservative principles.

20 or 30 of the same people posting their same arguements on each side over and over and over (ad nauseum) will not change a thing, a mind, the facts, or the faith. It's ALL unprovable. These posts get a relatively low # of views on FR and don't do a thing to advance conservative principles, except to bring out the extremists on both sides.

If you believe in God, you must believe He is sovereign over everything. Everything else is secondary. It's like arguing about whether it's better to earn a million dollars in stocks or bonds, on Nasdaq or NYSE. What's the difference?

God has a purpose for all of us. The end goal is to be with Him in heaven. Only then might we understand. If you are not of this belief, that's fine, but trying to impact people of faith on this issue without belief in God and His sovereignty is a total waste of time and bandwidth. If you are an atheist, then your credibility is no better than the 'creationist' web sites that are automatically dismissed as uncredible.

This issue seems so easily solved. Allow the teaching of evolution to be an optional class in government schools, allow The Bible to be an optional class in government schools. Let parents and students decide what to choose, what to study, what to believe, including both.

That would be the conservative approach to such a minor 'speed bump' of an issue.

138 posted on 01/22/2005 12:33:23 PM PST by NewLand (Faith in The Lord trumps all!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: WildTurkey
Take a side, make a statement and stand by for the attacks.

Don't expect too much out of that - I suspect that someone's about to find out that sock puppets and their owners are dealt with pretty harshly by the mods.

139 posted on 01/22/2005 12:33:35 PM PST by general_re (How come so many of the VKs have been here six months or less?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852

Science isn't the realm of opinion. ID has no aspect which can be studied using the inductive methods of science. Nor does ID answer where we came from. A designer must have origins. Hence our origins are the origins of the designer, which goes unanswered. ID can be taught in theology or philosophy, but it is innappropriate for science. When the correct answer in a science class becomes "God did it" then sciecne ceases to exist and we are back to the dark ages. The U.S. will need to import more H1Bs because Americans will be too ignorant to maintain our technological advantages. Everthing will be "God did it" and no one will know how to solve anything of complexity.


140 posted on 01/22/2005 12:35:51 PM PST by doc30 (Democrats are to morals what and Etch-A-Sketch is to Art.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 1,101-1,106 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson