Skip to comments.
American Federation of Teachers: Statement on Bush & Intelligent Design
American Federation of Teachers via WebWire ^
| 05 August 2005
| Antonia Cortese
Posted on 08/05/2005 5:22:08 PM PDT by PatrickHenry
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 161-178 next last
To: b_sharp
What is the theory of macro-evolution?
I know that this is a setup question, but it is Friday.
Here is a link for you:
Macroevolution.
To: PatrickHenry
Dang! It's been a rough few weeks for me. First I find myself agreeing with the ACLU, now the AFT.
Oh well, I'm not alone. Bradley Ralko joined the ACLU.
To: cinives
"And you can prove evolution ? Darwin himself noted major flaws in the theory, and nothing since has explained those flaws. " No theory is proven. Evolution itself is an observed process. Darwin noted the flaws and then addressed them later in the same book.
"No, ID is not a scientific theory, but then evolution is only a theory, not a fact, and should be taught as such."
Yes, the theory of evolution is only a theory. A scientific theory the meaning of which, you show no knowledge.
63
posted on
08/05/2005 6:11:19 PM PDT
by
b_sharp
(Science adjusts theories to fit evidence, creationism distorts evidence to fit the Bible.)
To: PatrickHenry
Fundies using "intelligent design" instead of "creationism" is exactly like the lefties using "choice" instead of "abortion".
It's sleazy and deceptive.
If plastic-haired snakefondlers want to promote their 6-days-of-construction-4,000-years-ago oooga-booga, they can do it in church.
64
posted on
08/05/2005 6:11:21 PM PDT
by
Hank Rearden
(Never allow anyone who could only get a government job attempt to tell you how to run your life.)
To: bobdsmith
that's totally different, i loved all my science classes, i learned a great deal. In fact, i was taught very little about the evolutionary theory at all, feel free to rip me a new one for that, i wont mind. It's just a theory. Why does everyone go ape when some people object to it? Isn't that the point of a theory?
65
posted on
08/05/2005 6:11:44 PM PDT
by
JennMack
To: JennMack
Why does everyone go ape when some people object to it?
LOL.. Maybe because they think we are relatives.
To: elkfersupper
To: Dimensio
Hard as it is for me to believe, but I didn't see microgood speaking of evolution. His question started with single-cell organisms.
LOL.. I assume you meant abiogenesis instead of evolution above.
To: PatrickHenry
Wonderful Patrick will we be hearing from the Communist Party on President Bus's dreaded creationism any time soon?
And for the record, the first sentence is a lie, just like the first sentence in all the other left wing garbage you posted. Bush never said "that Intelligent Design should be taught in the nations science classrooms:".
But what the hell, if the teachers union says it, it must be true right Patrick?
69
posted on
08/05/2005 6:15:14 PM PDT
by
jwalsh07
To: cinives
No, ID is not a scientific theory, but then evolution is only a theory, not a fact, and should be taught as such.
You mean kind of like the theory that human beings are intelligent?
70
posted on
08/05/2005 6:15:19 PM PDT
by
ml1954
To: JennMack
More MD's and less scientists please.
That's a brilliant position. If everyone had that attitude, you'd still go for a "bleeding" to cure a common cold.
71
posted on
08/05/2005 6:15:33 PM PDT
by
Dimensio
(http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
To: ml1954
Don't shoot the messenger ????? What was the message ????
I believe it was: "For the love of God, don't shoot me!"
Those messengers are a nervous bunch.
To: DirtyHarryY2K
In the context of evolutionary science.
You asked "for example" in response to my statement that everything in science is subject to change. Had you wanted me to specifically provide an explanation of how this applied to evolution, you should have stated as much. I've yet to find a Psychic-over-IP client for Linux.
In evolution, we may discover that birds diverged from reptiles at a completely different point than currently believed. In fact, there is a minority of biologists who already hold this position.
73
posted on
08/05/2005 6:17:21 PM PDT
by
Dimensio
(http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
To: Dimensio
" That's a brilliant position. If everyone had that attitude, you'd still go for a "bleeding" to cure a common cold."
There it goes again, we're all living in the past, a bunch of hayseed bible-thumpers and such. Some very important ACTUAL scientists were christians, james clerk maxwell for one, and his contributions have little to do with evolutionary theories. Regardless of where you think we come from, i really dont care it's your business not mine, it has little to do with where we're going. Just a theory is all
74
posted on
08/05/2005 6:18:22 PM PDT
by
JennMack
To: JennMack
I was taught very little too, think it consisted of one 2 hour lesson with darwin finches and anti-bacterial resistance. I can't recall any historical evolution being taught at all.
It's not so much that people object to it and come up with sensible criticisms, its that a lot of people attack it without really knowing what it is, use a very tired out set of flawed arguments, and make out that the entire field is nothing more than a guess.
To: bobhoskins
I believe it was: "For the love of God, don't shoot me!"
Or maybe it was, "For the love of God, don't shoot me, shoot THEM!".
76
posted on
08/05/2005 6:20:42 PM PDT
by
ml1954
To: ml1954
Or maybe it was, "For the love of God, don't shoot me, shoot THEM!".Maybe. I couldn't here the last few words, I was too busy shooting.
To: b_sharp
78
posted on
08/05/2005 6:21:54 PM PDT
by
Doctor Stochastic
(Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
To: JennMack
There it goes again, we're all living in the past, a bunch of hayseed bible-thumpers and such.
You're the one who wants to reduce the number of scientists.
Some very important ACTUAL scientists were christians,
I never denied as much.
james clerk maxwell for one, and his contributions have little to do with evolutionary theories.
Actually, they have nothing to do with evolutionary theories because James Clerk Maxwell was a phycisist. Einstein's theories also have nothing to do with evolution. That doesn't mean that evolution is not important to the field of biology.
Claiming that evolution is meaningless simply because there are other fields of science that don't address evolution is stupid.
Just a theory is all
So is gravity.
79
posted on
08/05/2005 6:22:17 PM PDT
by
Dimensio
(http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
To: Jim_Curtis
akin to suggesting that students be taught the "alternative theory" that the earth is flat or that the sun revolves around the earth.
The sun does revolve around the earth. I watch it happen from my fixed position on earth every day.
The earth is also flat. You just need to use Riemann coordinates instead of Euclidean coordinates.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 161-178 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