Posted on 06/27/2008 2:04:21 PM PDT by EveningStar
Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal has signed a stealth creationist bill into law, and American educational standards take a huge step backward: Science law could set tone for Jindal.
The creationist front group called the Discovery Institute is quietly crowing, and maintaining the fiction that the bill is not religiously-based.
(Excerpt) Read more at littlegreenfootballs.com ...
I’m not a creationist. I think the concept of evolution is viable and believable.
Teacher: Okay Johnnie, can you tell me why you can light the end of that tube on fire when it comes from above the electrodes in the water?
Johnnie: God makes fire!
We need a separation.
This has projection written all over it. Go preach it to those Christian scientists who work on evolution.
Johnnie: God makes fire!
We need a separation.
Ditto...
I've got a sale on this week. Save $millions...
Then it comes down to rejecting the assumption of any event actually having happened unless it was witnessed and recorded, regardless of the supporting evidence.
I would definitely object to my child being taught that the earth is 6000 years old and that children played with dinosaurs - just for starters.
But then, I would also object to my children being led to believe that man is merely an animal. Those so-called science teachers who teach that, are teaching the religion of scientism, they aren't teaching science.
I like to be able to know the source when I am browsing through Latest Articles and I often can't tell when they are abbreviated.
I don’t know, its probably just me, but I aint accepting the idea that straw men arise from spontaneously rotting meat.
But I will accept the idea that science has conclusively proven that the Earth is not flat, is not the center of the universe, nor held up by a giant turtle. Moreover, the foregoing notwithstanding, and nevertheless, neither do things fall off the world when they travel beyond the edge of the map; eveon so the region beyond the map may be the region of dragons and stuff.
Furthermore, I believe science has had its say about the type of cheese that the moon is made of too.
If that's a strawman, then we need to purge that from the history books. What do you think we'll have left by the time we're done with this little exercise in calling everything a strawman?
I've got a sale on this week. Save $millions...
pic missing from first post!
The goal of the Discovery Institute is to use the evangelical philosophy Intelligent Design to convert more people to Christianity. Not exactly appropriate for the science class.
So, Einstein, Infield, Hoyle, Born, and Ellis are just ignorant, superstitious charletans?
In your hopeless quest to appear oh so scientific, you consistantly make a fool of yourself.
Do you contend that they believe that the stars are holes poked in a box?
The entire evolution argument is a strawman for atheism. There is no fact involved. It is speculation, and assumption. Your arguments about gravity and astronomy, physics and mathematics, all assume things that can be proven true. That some theists are able to accept ID, is aquiescence to "junk Science", IMHO.
Geology studies rocks and the earth constructions, but doesn't have a clue where they came from. They speculate, but that's just another name for GUESS. To believe that some inorganic "something", somewhere, found a specific opportunity to become organic, to adapt to conditions, and then metamorphize billions of times in only billions of years? Plus, all that brings us to the present state we live?
That is your ultimate argument, if you construct evolution backwards, and is as absurd as it sounds. Nothing became something. Inorganic became organic. Organic single celled became multi-celled complex. Man is just an accident, requiring zillions of permutations (where did I put those things, dammit?) and really has no meaning. Ergo, there is no need for morals nor objectivity. Depravity doesn't exist, it is just evolutionary process.
"In the beginning, God..." makes a whole lot more sense to me. But, if you're angry at God, think you know something more than most of us, or just want to disprove His Being, I'd like to see some proof, not the foolish liturgy of the evolutionary philosophers... I can call my dog "science". That doesn't make his farts smell any better...
I won't wait up.
Is your cognition really that limited? You cannot understand that all motion can be accurately described in an infinite number of different coordinate systems? You don't realize that the origin can be arbitrarily placed anywhere, without changing anything?
Then where does your Bible tell us would be a good place for long term storage of nuclear waste?
straw-man: A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.
So atheists put forth a misrepresentation of evolution? Those that say it rejects/denies God certainly do. Is that what you meant? Somehow I don't think so.
Nizkor.org-
Fallacy: Straw Man
Description of Straw Man
The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person’s actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of “reasoning” has the following pattern:
1. Person A has position X.
2. Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
3. Person B attacks position Y.
4. Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.
This sort of “reasoning” is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself. One might as well expect an attack on a poor drawing of a person to hurt the person.
Examples of Straw Man
1. Prof. Jones: “The university just cut our yearly budget by $10,000.”
Prof. Smith: “What are we going to do?”
Prof. Brown: “I think we should eliminate one of the teaching assistant positions. That would take care of it.”
Prof. Jones: “We could reduce our scheduled raises instead.”
Prof. Brown: “ I can’t understand why you want to bleed us dry like that, Jones.”
2. “Senator Jones says that we should not fund the attack submarine program. I disagree entirely. I can’t understand why he wants to leave us defenseless like that.”
3. Bill and Jill are arguing about cleaning out their closets:
Jill: “We should clean out the closets. They are getting a bit messy.”
Bill: “Why, we just went through those closets last year. Do we have to clean them out everyday?”
Jill: “I never said anything about cleaning them out every day. You just want too keep all your junk forever, which is just ridiculous.”
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.