Posted on 12/03/2005 5:28:45 PM PST by Right Wing Professor
Sad. But whatcha gonna do?
Sad. But whatcha gonna do?
Easy, go find a nice glass of merlot, what else? [And here I was being nice, too.]
There are plenty of conservative Christians who accept evolution (along with the rest of modern science). Creationism is not synonymous with conservative Christianity.
You say that you do not have much science background.
I have noted that your posts are well grounded and sincere.
Should you have any questions I can help with, please ask. Teaching is a true passion with me and there is nothing as gratifying as a willing student.
I'll keep that in mind should I ever get out west again. I know animals also tend to chase so it's never wise to run from some. I've seen the lions at the local zoo do it when they see a little kid dash across the open area near their pen. That could be why they go after the bikers.
I about got run down on a cross country ski trail by some ______ (insert derogatory word of choice here) who was on a snowmobile pulling his kids on a sled, when EVERYONE else was on their own two feet, er... skis. He was a menace to everyone else and ruined the peace and serenity of the scene with that ________ machine.
Are you serious about the whipped topping stuff?
If you have a cite, I'd like to store it in my "just damn" collection.
”The creationists do think that science is a democratic process.”
Well, who told them that? Let’s see . . . how does it work? You have a governing authority of some kind . . . a commission; a board; a legislature. Sometimes appointed by an elected authority; sometimes elected directly; created by certain political processes from as simple an initiative as a policy or a law, to as fundamental a process as by charter or by constitution. Each governing authority has jurisdiction over certain specified responsibilities, sometimes constructed quite narrowly, sometimes very broadly. Oddly enough, it unfolds that one of those activities happens to be the establishment and administration of government indoctrination centers, otherwise known as ‘public schools,’ which are funded by the people’s resources, as are all government powers.
Oh, wait . . .
Remarkably, it seems that two candidates for a Kansas authority have played and won the game exactly by the rules. They made clear what their agenda would be, they submitted themselves to the judgment of the people of Kansas, and they garnered more support than their opponents were able to muster. Though it’s surely a bit too melodramatic to assert that anyone thinks science is a democratic process, it’s clear that in Kansas, as it is in the whole of the US, educational standards, including standards for the teaching of science, are a democratic process, as they have been for well over a century.
“Reality doesn't answer to a vote.”
It doesn’t?! From what planet have you been viewing this controversy? In a representative republic, reality answers to majority’s vote all the time. But it is true that we don’t always like the answer we get from reality when it’s abused by majority’s vote. Your angst is a classic example. I doubt this condition will inspire any self-examination on your part, though, only finger-pointing.
placemarker
Nonresponsive, Sir. The issue is teaching standards, and if education is to be financed by government, then the standards must be subject to public policy. If, that is, we are to maintain our practice that a public voice be present where public monies are involved. You want to have your cake and eat it too. You want, that is, the benefit of public support without public participation. “Send your money, and shut up.” Archetypical Liberal schtick. With all the attendant blowing of smoke.
If you don’t want to play, then say so. Or just don’t respond. Your actual response is so empty, it’s embarrassing.
I do believe you are knit-picking.
I provided access to well over a thousand names.
Now let's see why Coyne was wrong here:
http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=2933&program=CSC+-+Views+and+News
Anybody ever stop to think that evo scientists are in it for the money? Shhhhhhhhhh
Coyne and his fellow Darwinists love to chant that the evidence for Darwinism is "overwhelming" -- and so it is, if we have to shovel it. How could it be otherwise? For decades, Darwinism has enjoyed a taxpayer-supported monopoly in the biological sciences. Scores of journals dedicated to advancing it have churned out literally tons of articles. Anyone who actually reads the literature of evolutionary biology with an open mind, however, soon realizes that almost all of it simply assumes that the theory is true. What is "overwhelming" is not the evidence, but the faith it takes to call Darwinian evolution a fact even after 150 years of failing to find much of any evidence for its core tenets.
This is why Darwinists cannot allow biology students to think critically about evolution, much less to hear about alternative theories such as intelligent design.
http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=2933&program=CSC+-+Views+and+News
Oh, up on #895, it is nit picking, not knit picking.
Nit: The egg of a louse or other parasitic insect. Louse nits can be seen on the head feathers of most martins and appear as tiny, white capsules. The lice that parasitize Purple Martins spend their entire life cycle on the birds and therefore, travel with them to Brazil and back each year, nestled among their feathers. Martins frequently engage in head scratching to relieve the irritation cause by the lice crawling there. ..
Just Google "Burger King"+Allah and pick your story. There are dozens from the UK
Can't resist ...
900
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.