Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Free Republic Poll on Evolution
Free Republic ^ | 22 September 2006 | Vanity

Posted on 09/22/2006 2:09:33 PM PDT by PatrickHenry

Free Republic is currently running a poll on this subject:

Do you think creationism or intelligent design should be taught in science classes in secondary public schools as a competing scientific theory to evolution?
You can find the poll at the bottom of your "self search" page, also titled "My Comments," where you go to look for posts you've received.

I don't know what effect -- if any -- the poll will have on the future of this website's science threads. But it's certainly worth while to know the general attitude of the people who frequent this website.

Science isn't a democracy, and the value of scientific theories isn't something that's voted upon. The outcome of this poll won't have any scientific importance. But the poll is important because this is a political website. How we decide to educate our children is a very important issue. It's also important whether the political parties decide to take a position on this. (I don't think they should, but it may be happening anyway.)

If you have an opinion on this subject, go ahead and vote.


TOPICS: Heated Discussion
KEYWORDS: crevolist; evolution; id
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,461-1,4801,481-1,5001,501-1,520 ... 1,621-1,636 next last
To: Virginia-American

Ah, I see..I do believe you have a fine point here...in fact, if I remember correctly, it has always been believed by many, that the Salem Witch Trials were nothing but a grab for goods and land...accuse someone of being a witch, get them hanged, and then grab their household goods, and land...nothing 'religous' about it...just good old fashioned greed...

Tricky...


1,481 posted on 09/29/2006 4:47:56 PM PDT by andysandmikesmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1480 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Stochastic; andysandmikesmom
The tam-tam speaks; the ensuing silence agrees.

The Romans were familiar with the phenomenon:

tacere consentire est

1,482 posted on 09/29/2006 5:01:12 PM PDT by Virginia-American (What do you call an honest creationist? An evolutionist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1471 | View Replies]

To: Virginia-American

"Tacere consentire est"


May I have a translation, please...


1,483 posted on 09/29/2006 5:23:13 PM PDT by andysandmikesmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1482 | View Replies]

To: andysandmikesmom

To be silent is to consent.


1,484 posted on 09/29/2006 5:27:41 PM PDT by PatrickHenry (When the Inquisition comes, you may be the rackee, not the rackor.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1483 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry; Virginia-American

Ah, thanks PH...I shall have to remember this...quite a true sentiment, and one appropriate to this thread...


1,485 posted on 09/29/2006 5:36:27 PM PDT by andysandmikesmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1484 | View Replies]

To: All
Latest Poll Results

Over 200 more votes have come in. Prior FR polls typically receive around 6,000 votes before they're ended. This one now has 4,492 votes, almost 75% complete.

The important votes are from those who have expressed an opinion on the poll question, so I'm ignoring all votes for "undecided" or "pass." Those with an opinion have voted as follows:

Yes (put creationism in science class) 2,590 votes
No (keep creationism out of science class) 1,514 votes
Total votes (excluding "undecided" or "pass") 4,104
Percentage voting "No" is 36.9%
1,486 posted on 09/29/2006 6:08:35 PM PDT by PatrickHenry (When the Inquisition comes, you may be the rackee, not the rackor.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1485 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman; tomzz
Nothing in this idea ("... humans were transported here ...") would suggest that humans and chimpanzees should have identical cytochrome c molecules, or genes for same that differ by a single silent mutation. In a similar vein, chimpanzees appear to be genetically closer to humans than they do to gorillas or orangutans.

The "transported here" humans are inexplicably similar to a particular "not transported here" ape species, which appears in every genetic way to be our sister species.

1,487 posted on 09/29/2006 6:12:16 PM PDT by VadeRetro (Liberalism is a cancer on society. Creationism is a cancer on conservatism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1425 | View Replies]

To: Quark2005

"Sensible people do not ignore all the evidence gathered since 1350 or try to filter it through a medieval mindset to reach the conclusion they desire"

"If people can't deal with that, it's not a problem with the science, it's their own personal problem."


What year was the printing press with movable type invented in?

What was the first book printed with that printing press?

What year did the scientific revolution start (Kepler, Francis Bacon etc.)?

Who was Einstein referring to when he remarked 'had made the greatest change in our conception of reality'
http://www.st-edmunds.cam.ac.uk/faraday/Faraday.php

Perhaps there is a connection....[ Many historians (for ex. Francis Schaeffer) have explored the topic in detail.]

Perhaps Michael Faraday, one of the greatest physicists of and one of the finest experimenters of all time (according to Einstein), was not a 'sensible' person because he like Bacon was convinced that the book of God's world and the book of God's word had the same author.

Perhaps we would still be living without electricity if Faraday didn't explore the book of God's world.

Perhaps Fadaday didn't have a "personal problem."
Perhaps Darwin and subsequent followers had/have a their "own personal problem" with God.


1,488 posted on 09/29/2006 6:35:03 PM PDT by FreedomProtector
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1361 | View Replies]

To: FreedomProtector

Perhaps, maybe or possibly, you might have an assertion problem.


1,489 posted on 09/29/2006 6:40:37 PM PDT by ml1954 (ID = Case closed....no further inquiry allowed...now move along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1488 | View Replies]

To: ml1954

: )


1,490 posted on 09/29/2006 6:43:12 PM PDT by FreedomProtector
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1489 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
I didn't say transported here from a distant galaxy. IF humans were transported here, which is a big if since there are other possibilities as I noted, it was almost certainly from close by. Mars would be one possibility, but there are others. Consider Saturn's little moon Iopeta for instance:

Maybe there's some naturalistic theory as to how a moon gets a wall around it on a great circle arc which can be seen from space, but I've never heard such a theory.

The other possibility would be that they had demokkkrats or palestinians (or evolutionites) or some such there and built a wall to keep them on their own side of it.

1,491 posted on 09/29/2006 7:04:39 PM PDT by tomzz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1487 | View Replies]

To: tomzz
Maybe there's some naturalistic theory as to how a moon gets a wall around it on a great circle arc which can be seen from space, but I've never heard such a theory.

Let me take your virginity on this one. Impact. Liquification. Cooling and hardening. Small object, low gravity, tectonically inactive, high-relief structures can stay essentially forever. (Or until obliterated by subsequent impacts.)

There are lots of maria-filled craters on the moon. I'm surprised you've never seen it.

1,492 posted on 09/29/2006 7:08:55 PM PDT by VadeRetro (Liberalism is a cancer on society. Creationism is a cancer on conservatism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1491 | View Replies]

To: tomzz
I might also mention that it makes no sense at all to appeal to a cold, dead, tiny moon as a likely origin of humanity as opposed to Earth. It particularly won't do at all in dismissing the sister-species status of humans and chimps cited already.

Big-time non-sequitur, in fact.

1,493 posted on 09/29/2006 7:17:44 PM PDT by VadeRetro (Liberalism is a cancer on society. Creationism is a cancer on conservatism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1491 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro

You might want to take a harder look at the picture. The little moon has a wall all the way around it which neatly divides the moon into two equal halves. If that were an easy thing to have happen, all by itself, then why don't other bodies in our system have such walls? Again, there is no rational theory as to how that could happen naturally.


1,494 posted on 09/30/2006 12:49:43 AM PDT by tomzz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1492 | View Replies]

To: js1138

You seem to be asserting that the UN is doing good things.


1,495 posted on 09/30/2006 3:19:17 AM PDT by .30Carbine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1450 | View Replies]

To: .30Carbine

No, I am not. I am asserting that peace is a worthy objective. If you want to understand where I am coming from you have to know that I went to a Quaker college and am influnced by their work.

I did not buy the liberalism, but I understand that being a Christian is proactive. You do not wait for someone to attack you so you can kill him, if it is within your means to avoid violent conflict.

How this works out in real life is not a simple thing. I am not a democrat and I basically agree with Bush's foreign policy. Sometimes a lesser conflict avoids a greater conflict.

Nathanael Greene was a Quaker.


1,496 posted on 09/30/2006 7:43:54 AM PDT by js1138 (The absolute seriousness of someone who is terminally deluded.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1495 | View Replies]

To: FreedomProtector
Who was Einstein referring to when he remarked 'had made the greatest change in our conception of reality'

Einstein was not a creationist.

Perhaps Michael Faraday, one of the greatest physicists of and one of the finest experimenters of all time (according to Einstein), was not a 'sensible' person because he like Bacon was convinced that the book of God's world and the book of God's word had the same author.

The fact that one has to go back to the mid-1800's or earlier to find great scientists who didn't 'believe' in evolution is hardly a point in favor of its apologetic opponents.

Perhaps Darwin and subsequent followers had/have a their "own personal problem" with God.

Darwin doesn't have "followers" any more than any of the other great scientists you mentioned. The only people who seem to attribute to Darwin this sort of reverence are those who, for some strange reason, are hellbent in denying what it is that he discovered.

1,497 posted on 09/30/2006 9:24:03 AM PDT by Quark2005 ("Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs." -Matthew 7:6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1488 | View Replies]

To: tomzz
Let me start by conceding something, and I'll flog this point hard before I get to answering your main point. Yes, I missed a key phrase "great circle" in your post and didn't stare hard enough at the picture. Thus, I took the fairly standard sized wall of upturned crust around the large impact crater as being your wall.

So I absolutely was looking at the wrong thing. I'm not dodging or brazening that in the slightest way.

So, do I think you have a great case for Iapetus (as most people spell it) as the place from which humans arrived here?

I think it fails on certain Occam's Razor grounds.

For one thing--no doubt this will disgust you no end--I suspect (no peeking, either) that the great circle ridge is still a maximum case of an impact crater ridge, the same kind of feature as the one I was mistakenly looking at on the more obvious crater. There isn't much else going to reshape moons of that size except certain funny period orbital resonances, etc. But I'll admit in this case that I may be the only one who would think so and that all informed speculation is following other lines.

The problem is more with your idea. For one, you propose it as the alternative to thinking humans originated here on Earth along with other DNA life including our genetic sister species, the chimpanzees, who seem more related to us than to other outwardly similar apes (gorillas, organutans). We actually fit well into the kind of nested hierarchy of relatedness a phylogenetic tree of common descent would produce, a fact which would be the bizarrest possible coincidence if we alone were somehow unrelated to the other life and delivered here by Raelian genetic engineers.

Then, there's the question of what humans building a ring around cold, dead, little Iapetus were eating, drinking, and breathing. Then there's the question of what humans were doing building a ring around cold, dead, little Iapetus.

Yes, humans planted a flag on our own little cold, dead, moon, while they ate, drank, and breathed stored resources. Call me when we build the Great Wall of Luna.

Which is to say we don't have the technology right now to do that kind of thing. But we had it once and somehow lost every tiny bit of it getting here. Why?

1,498 posted on 09/30/2006 9:28:50 AM PDT by VadeRetro (Liberalism is a cancer on society. Creationism is a cancer on conservatism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1494 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro

Placemarker.


1,499 posted on 09/30/2006 9:44:37 AM PDT by PatrickHenry (When the Inquisition comes, you may be the rackee, not the rackor.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1498 | View Replies]

To: longshadow

Prime!


1,500 posted on 09/30/2006 9:44:53 AM PDT by PatrickHenry (When the Inquisition comes, you may be the rackee, not the rackor.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1499 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,461-1,4801,481-1,5001,501-1,520 ... 1,621-1,636 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
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

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