"I'm not a scientist, but I play one at Churchy Creation Seminars"
Posted on 08/18/2008 9:35:10 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
With five seats on the State Board of Education up for grabs this year, education advocates say how children learn about evolution hangs in the balance -- and who voters choose could affect Kansas' national reputation.
A frequent flip-flop between moderate and conservative majorities on the 10-member board has resulted in the state changing its science standards four times in the past eight years.
Conservatives have pushed for standards casting doubt on evolution, and moderates have said intelligent design does not belong in the science classroom.
In 2007, a new 6-4 moderate majority removed standards that called evolution into question.
This year, none of the three moderates whose seats are up for election are running again. Only one of the two conservative incumbents is running for re-election...
(Excerpt) Read more at kansas.com ...
Maybe you’ll figure it out when you’re sober.
1) The Darwinists steadfastly refuse to admit that teaching about the origins of man has profound religious consequences for **all** the children in the classroom.
2) The Darwinists will defend government support and ownership of government schooling and are more than willing to have government force upon children their atheistic worldview and have taxpayers forced to pay for it.
3) On the other hand, the Creationists and IDers say: Give us our school tax dollars back so that we can send our children to private schools.
4) The Creationists and IDers say: Let the schools funds follow the child so Darwinists can send their kids to their schools and we can send our to our schools.
So?.... Who are the bullies here?
Answer: The Darwinists as always.
That seems to typify your approach to life.
I'm sure that teaching kids the earth moves and orbits the sun has religious "consequences." Folks in the recent past seems to think this was an important issue. But they got over it, except for a couple of FReepers.
Personal attack. A very weak defense of Coyote’s pseudo-science.
Is that all you’ve got?
Until you have something to say. Did you have an actual point. One relevant to the discussion?
Sky God gets confused sometimes
Hmmm... I've lived in a place that received around 500 inches of snow per year. If that snow did not melt (it did where I lived, thankfully) and if compressed to 10 percent of its original depth to account for lost interstitial volume, we arrive at an ice depth of around 4 feet. At four feet of accumulation per year for the intervening 60 or so years, the resulting figure is quite close to the 250 feet you've mentioned. I guess I've missed your point.
Raining while the sun is shining is just God’s way of promising He’ll use something besides a flood next time.
I’ve always been fond of Jaguars falling from the sky, as some religions predict.
The point is, you are mounting a very weak defense of Coyote’s pseudo-science.
Go back to your post #197, you began there with me.
"I'm not a scientist, but I play one at Churchy Creation Seminars"
I remember post 197. That’s why I asked if you had a point.
No one suggested that Coyote’s list was “scientific.” It was provided as an exhaustive list of the possible ways for life to start.
Do you want to add to the list?
Thank for that explanation. Sadly there are many here who won’t read it, let alone understand it.
You have just proved my point!
Darwinists **refuse** to accept that using the government to **force** their worldview on other people's children has religious consequences for **all** the children in the room!
I forgot one:
Darwinists will mock those that advocate freedom in education.
Who are the bullies here?
Answer: The Darwinists
Well I'm glad someone read it. I always worry about typing a long post because I think people will just scroll past it (like I tend to do--especially when it is full of Bible verses).
I’ll go back and read it.
regards,
What do you mean by freedom in education? Would you mandate the teaching of Xenu as an alternative to evolution in science classes?
More to the point, science ignores religion. All of them. They have nothing to offer because the need for evidence is not consistent with faith.
What you perceive as hostility is simply indifference.
There are thousands of conflicting religions. Freedom in education cannot possibly mean teaching every creation story as an alternative to science in science classes. If the findings of science are intollerable to you, avoid science classes. But you are not going to change the nature of science or its findings.
//No one suggested that Coyote’s list was “scientific.” It was provided as an exhaustive list of the possible ways for life to start.//
Do you agree with Coyote’s list? Are those valid hypothesis to you?
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.