Skip to comments.
Let's Have No More Monkey Trials - To teach faith as science is to undermine both
Time Magazine ^
| Monday, Aug. 01, 2005
| CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER
Posted on 08/01/2005 10:58:13 AM PDT by wallcrawlr
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,201-1,220, 1,221-1,240, 1,241-1,260 ... 1,781-1,792 next last
To: durasell
Our challenge, as I see it, is to elect hot babes to school boards across the country. Won't matter much, as they'll STILL get their marching orders from Washington!
1,221
posted on
08/03/2005 7:50:55 AM PDT
by
Elsie
(Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
To: durasell
(We should all protest fight for more civilized debate)
1,222
posted on
08/03/2005 7:51:49 AM PDT
by
Elsie
(Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
To: Ichneumon
A new theory that explains why the language of our genes is more complex than it needs to be also suggests that the primordial soup where life began on earth was hot and not cold, as many scientists believe.
new
theory: What was wrong with the OLD one?
explains, needs: We're sure THIS time!
suggests, believe: At least I THINK we are......
1,223
posted on
08/03/2005 7:57:12 AM PDT
by
Elsie
(Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
To: Elsie
These threads inspire hostility in normally calm and reasonable people. Humor helps...
1,224
posted on
08/03/2005 7:58:30 AM PDT
by
durasell
(Friends are so alarming, My lover's never charming...)
To: WildHorseCrash
And if you are insulted by the use of Islamic, then you are a poor pathetic, ignorant fool. NOW will you whimpering off into the darkness????
1,225
posted on
08/03/2005 7:58:39 AM PDT
by
Elsie
(Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
To: narby
Why on earth would that "scare" them?UH... because civilization, as we know it, will COLLAPSE???
1,226
posted on
08/03/2005 8:00:54 AM PDT
by
Elsie
(Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
To: MEGoody
Nope. You were where I started reading this morning, realizing I had SO much to wade through!
1,227
posted on
08/03/2005 8:02:12 AM PDT
by
Elsie
(Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
To: Gumlegs
1,228
posted on
08/03/2005 8:04:16 AM PDT
by
Elsie
(Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
To: durasell
NO IT doesn't!!!!!
1,229
posted on
08/03/2005 8:05:36 AM PDT
by
Elsie
(Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
To: Elsie
1,230
posted on
08/03/2005 8:06:34 AM PDT
by
Elsie
(Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
To: durasell
These threads inspire hostility in normally calm and reasonable people. Humor helps... The idea of teaching myths as fact in public schools is a serious subject. Attempts at "humor" do not calm such discussions, they antagonize those who see this as a serious subject.
Elsie is one of the principle antagonists in this discussion, and hasn't added anything new for months.
For all I can tell, Elsie is an atheist pro-evolution troll, attempting to make creationists look stupid.
1,231
posted on
08/03/2005 8:09:41 AM PDT
by
narby
(There are Bloggers, and then there are Freepers.)
To: Oztrich Boy
No problem, most myths have enough gods to be permitted.Et vice versa.
1,232
posted on
08/03/2005 8:11:44 AM PDT
by
Doctor Stochastic
(Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
To: WildHorseCrash
Let's then try approaching this from several new directions.
Consider the civilizational consequences of atheism and aggressive secularism: they are strongly correlated with declining birthrate and national and civilizational decline. Spengler at the Asia Times has done a fine job of analyzing the data and putting his views on a solid foundation.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/GH02Aa01.html
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/front_page/ED08Aa01.html
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/FI08Aa01.html
As for domestic politics, faithful, Red Staters tend to marry, produce children -- and vote Republican in consequence of those life choices. The statistical evidence is compelling.
http://www.isteve.com/BabyGap.htm
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/07/opinion/07brooks.html?ex=1260162000&en=ebdde83f03fe6d2e&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland
And, to draw this back to media distortions of science, George Neumayr has hit the target on the abortion issue.
http://www.theamericanprowler.com/dsp_article.asp?art_id=8531
Neumayer's analysis applies to evolution as well. An aggressively secular and faith-hostile public school system and allied cultural elites and an accommodating news media news have promoted a false account of evolution as somehow disproving Christianity and the existence of God.
Of course, like other parents, most Christian parents cannot make sense of evolution or any other complex bit of science, but they do not want evolution or anything else used to undermine the religious faith and instruction of their children. For that, Christian parents get pilloried as dummies, obscurantists, and book burners.
As Herb Stein famously observed, "that which can not go on forever wont." Spengler's gloomy assessment may in the end be contradicted by events. In America, at least, evolution-worshiping, abortion-loving, left-voting Blue State atheists seem certain to diminish in numbers relative to married, children producing, conservative Red Staters.
Or, to state the scenario in term of evolution, the greater fertility and fitness of the faith-believing Red State species make them likely to prevail over the less fit and less fertile Blue State species. Now that is a kind of evolution that even Pat Robertson could heartily approve.
To: narby
1,234
posted on
08/03/2005 8:15:34 AM PDT
by
Doctor Stochastic
(Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
To: Dumb_Ox
Science is the study of physical reality. It SHOULD be studied isolated from political or religious beliefs.
To: xzins
"Intelligent design is a mathematical model that demonstrates how improbable it is for inanimate objects to combine into animate ones. Its math says that it very nearly approaches zero, and that, in fact, you have a far better chance of winning the next 280,000,000 dollar Lotto. (And you know how good that chance is for YOU. :>) Nice example of its lack of theory and inability to show design.
"One verification of this rarity would seem to be the lack of oodles of alien life forms from the billions upon billions of planets that must exist among the unimaginable number of stars."
You can see the surface of all those billions of other planets? Wow. Better talk to the astronomers.
1,236
posted on
08/03/2005 8:16:38 AM PDT
by
b_sharp
(Science adjusts theories to fit evidence, creationism distorts evidence to fit the Bible.)
To: wallcrawlr
I agree with the premise that evolution is a THEORY and should be taught as a THEORY only.
I believe that religion (and I do attend church 2 times per week) has no place in SCIENCE class, just like I don't want to study dinosaurs in church.
1,237
posted on
08/03/2005 8:19:10 AM PDT
by
trubluolyguy
(GWB a conservative? Don't make me laugh. Have you seen your borders?)
To: Ichneumon
No it was a case of I don't take you and your demented pal serious beyond a certain level. Therefore I tire of your 'logic'.
If these replies to me are in your minds clever victories,.. I could say more but it would not be nice.
What it is is you types take yourselves way too serious.
What it is is a metaphor of what you and the demented types don't see about the huge gaps of and leaps of faith too.. you apply your science.
So claim your victory. What have you won? Lay it at the metaphorical altar of your dead evolutionism.
To: xzins
"I think there've been exactly zero finds of extra-terrestrial life at this point. If there had been, Lord knows we would've heard about it a gazillion times." How many other planets have we investigated closely enough to determine if life exists or not? Possibly one, Mars. Even then we have not yet scratched the surface.
You are basing your premise of no extraterrestrial life found, on the investigation of one other planet out of how many possible planets?
Can you not see the fault in that premise?
"So far as highly advanced life forms"
And the probability of us being in contact with other intelligent organisms is exactly what? Don't forget to factor in both geometric and temporal distances.
By the way, does not ID suggest the designer may be extra terrestrial life? Ironic that you push ID yet forget that little nugget.
1,239
posted on
08/03/2005 8:28:15 AM PDT
by
b_sharp
(Science adjusts theories to fit evidence, creationism distorts evidence to fit the Bible.)
To: PatrickHenry
ID is to science what gay marriage is to marriage.Inane analogies such as the above amply demonstrate the warped logic necessary to palm off evolutionism as science.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,201-1,220, 1,221-1,240, 1,241-1,260 ... 1,781-1,792 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson