Posted on 01/31/2004 2:47:59 AM PST by kattracks
Edited on 05/26/2004 5:19:21 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
How does reottng fruit refer to biological change over time? What biological changes are occurring?
What do you suppose the mechanism is?
What biological changes are occurring?
No biology involved. It's the action of demons.
How long are you going to pretend to misunderstand what is plain for everyone? A pathetically dishonest performance, even for you.
It is a simpe, question. What biological changes are occurring?
Her proposed means to ban "evolution" is to replace it with "biological change over time," a term both more awkward and imprecise. Yes, the rotting of fruit is a biological process, the metabolization of the fruit by bacteria and molds. It is literally "biological change over time." Just like PC phrases employed by the left--for instance: "physically challenged" versus "handicapped"--Ms. Cox's an empty maneuver taking us a step away from linguistic precision. It certainly promises to do nothing to improve education in Georgia.
Continually, you pretend not to understand. You have in the space of a few pages ignored the obvious, attempted to whip what is not in evidence out of nothing, and are now wishing away your failures. Who are you fooling here?
Rather than begging further elucidation on the mysteries of rotting fruit, please address why your posts have been dishonest.
What are the biological changes that occur when fruit rots?
That's clear. That was my point.
The biologicial diversity of the fruit increases dramatically. Why are you playing this silly dishonest game on this thread?
Huh? How so?
What do you mean biological diversity?
As far as the term "biological change over time" it is not currently used. Someone suggested using it. That is what the article is about. There is no factual issue involved there.
I don't feel you need to be so defensive and confrontational.
If you simply thought about the questions I'm asking you you'd see that rotting fruit is not an example of biological change.
No what?
You made statements. I am asking you about them.
Your performance has been noteworthy for the falsehood of its assertions. I am asking you about that. Why is it necessary to lie?
As far as the term "biological change over time" it is not currently used.
It is not currently replacing "evolution," which remains in use in its own right. It is completely unclear whether "biological change over time" is ever used. You had no more wit and no more integrity than to claim that lack of proof that is was used was proof of its banning. You said it was banned. This is a lie. Why did you do that?
Someone suggested using it.
Cathy Cox would like to ban evolution. Failing that, she would like to ban "evolution." The only ban in these articles is hers and goes in the direction stated.
That is what the article is about. There is no factual issue involved there.
Another falsehood from you.
I don't feel you need to be so defensive and confrontational.
I don't feel you need to lie.
If you simply thought about the questions I'm asking you you'd see that rotting fruit is not an example of biological change.
It's not an example of evolution. That is my point. The rotting of fruit is certainly "biological change over time." So is the growth, maturation, and death of an individual organism or a red blood cell. Practically anything alive or of biological origin which is not the same in a few days or hours is "biological change over time." Cathy's proposal is ridiculous, a sabotage of education.
Are we having a problem that anything can be sort of anything you want if you're a clever person among dunces? Wouldn't it be awful if you weren't appearing all that clever? If people could see?
Again, what then is the biological change that occurs? You mentioned physico-chemical reactions that also occur to non-biological material. Those are not biological changes.
How quickly you forget Cynthia McKinney ;-)
False. I mentioned molds and bacteria. How are their metabolic processes not biological?
The issue was the fruit. Molds and bacteria also can degrade non-biological material. A pile of sugar, for example, being degraded by bacteria is not indicative that there has been a biological change in the sugar and the same is true for the degradation of a fruit's sugars or other chemical structures.
What is the biological change that occurs to the fruit?
Jimmy, they already ridicule us.....it will just get worse. How I hate to admit it, but this time I agree with you. We have far too many problems in our school system to worry about verbage. For example: "How many kids can spell evolution?"
It gets eaten. That is a change through time by a biological agency. "Biological change through time," a new nonsense PC phrase.
Creationists keep aping the political left. The left long ago embraced the use of stealthy cover organizations for their activism. Creationism came up with "ID" and the Discover Institute. The left came up with defining deviancy down, the new politics of meaning, "economic democracy" instead of "socialism," and other semantic shenanigans. Cathy Cox said, "Let's ban the word 'evolution' and just talk about 'biological change over time.'"
The left wrote the book on how you operate when you're up to no good. One of basic ideas is to just keep brazening everything out. That almost sums up every creationist poster on every crevo thread.
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.