NationStates Jolt Archive

Cobb County School district: I now shudder to think of what a miserable, hopeless place it must be.

The Cobb County School District has passed a law that puts stickers on science books warning students that evolution is just a theory and should ne considered with an open mind. What this means is that evolution is taught but don't believe it, it could conflict with your good christian values like the fact that god created the world in seven days, 5000 years ago.

What is wrong with people that do this? Are they that insecure in their belief that they need to try and show other ideas as ones that should not be accepted? Can I put a warning label on the bible doing the same thing?

Here are the disclaimers: Welcome to Hell Evolutionists! (http://www.swarthmore.edu/NatSci/cpurrin1/textbookdisclaimers/)

The first one is a real warning from Cobb COunty, the others are generally for entertainment only.

I have family that live in Cobb County and I have spent several summers there. I can believe this. You would think that a science textbook would explain what a theory is and provide enough info for the student so that their wouldn't need to be a sticker.

It doesn't matter, kids smart enough to understand evolution will know to dismiss that sticker.

No Christians actually pushed the "How the Bible tells it is exactly how it happened" theory until the Seventh Day Adventists.

That is so retarded [the use of disclaimers on a science textbook]

I'm not surprised. I wouldn't be shocked if the Flat Earthers started demanding that their beliefs be recognized in school classrooms...after all, if religious myths are to be given equal time in science class with the empirical facts, why stop with Creationism and evolution? Why not present the idea that the world rests on the back of a giant turtle, and explain to kids that it is just as legitimate a "theory" as the theory of gravity?

I'm not surprised. I wouldn't be shocked if the Flat Earthers started demanding that their beliefs be recognized in school classrooms...after all, if religious myths are to be given equal time in science class with the empirical facts, why stop with Creationism and evolution? Why not present the idea that the world rests on the back of a giant turtle, and explain to kids that it is just as legitimate a "theory" as the theory of gravity?
Oh, well, now, that's just silly. :rolleyes: why would we want to teach such a thing? We know it's not true....

Well, what is worse:
those disclaimers or the fact that last year were weren't even allowed to use the word evolution in any science course... yeah, true. We weren't.

(Yeah, I am from GA, and thankfully NOT Cobb County. Just a close neighbor!)

Oh, well, now, that's just silly. :rolleyes: why would we want to teach such a thing? We know it's not true....
ah ah ah, no we don't. we cannot possible wrap our limited human brains around the infinite nature of the Giant Turtle, and all our scientific theories cannot prove or disprove Him because He is beyond empirical data. He could easily confound our measuring devices, since He does not appreciate being tested by humans, and may have His own reasons for concealing Himself from us. the Turtle is just as viable a "theory" as gravity, i tells you!

It doesn't matter, kids smart enough to understand evolution will know to dismiss that sticker.

*laughs* Thats so not true in GA.... trust me... Some are... but I mean, I know at my HS people don't even know what evolution is. They just are like, "Doesn't that have to do with monkeys?"

Cobb County School district: I now shudder to think of what a miserable, hopeless place it must be.

The Cobb County School District has passed a law that puts stickers on science books warning students that evolution is just a theory and should ne considered with an open mind. What this means is that evolution is taught but don't believe it, it could conflict with your good christian values like the fact that god created the world in seven days, 5000 years ago.

What is wrong with people that do this? Are they that insecure in their belief that they need to try and show other ideas as ones that should not be accepted? Can I put a warning label on the bible doing the same thing?

Here are the disclaimers: Welcome to Hell Evolutionists! (http://www.swarthmore.edu/NatSci/cpurrin1/textbookdisclaimers/)

The first one is a real warning from Cobb COunty, the others are generally for entertainment only.






“This book was donated anonymously to your school library to discreetly promote religious alternatives to the theory of evolution when you are finished with it please refile the book under fiction”


Or how about

“This sticker covers a pre-existing sticker designed to subtly undermine the teaching of evolution in your class to see the full text of the original sticker please examine books of the children of school board members”

lol thats funny

Edit though it would be nice for a link to prove that the first one is ACTULAY on the text books or if it is just another joke takeoff

Ok I am curious … that page linked appears to be a joke site

At least I highly doubt they put a sticker that says

“This book was donated anonymously to your school library to discreetly promote religious alternatives to the theory of evolution when you are finished with it please refile the book under fiction”


Or how about

“This sticker covers a pre-existing sticker designed to subtly undermine the teaching of evolution in your class to see the full text of the original sticker please examine books of the children of school board members”

I hope you are not actually taking this site seriously
Read the first post again. The first sticker only is the genuine sticker - the rest are taking the piss. I nearly made that mistake too.

Read the first post again. The first sticker only is the genuine sticker - the rest are taking the piss. I nearly made that mistake too.
Yeah I read it and edited it (saw it right away afterwords ... to early for me eyes)

I didn't... ;) I figured the rest were a joke after I saw that religious one.

Edit though it would be nice for a link to prove that the first one is ACTULAY on the text books or if it is just another joke takeoff

Here you go: Original Disclaimer (http://www.swarthmore.edu/NatSci/cpurrin1/textbookdisclaimers/CobbDisclaimer.jpg)
Same thing in Alabama! (http://www.eagleforum.org/educate/1995/dec95/biology.html)

Maybe you should try my school district. Prayer for Muslims supported by the state, while forbidding all religious expression by any other religion. In a public school.

Maybe you should try my school district. Prayer for Muslims supported by the state, while forbidding all religious expression by any other religion. In a public school.
Yeah, you just keep posting that in every thread you find vaguely related to religion.

*laughs* Thats so not true in GA.... trust me... Some are... but I mean, I know at my HS people don't even know what evolution is. They just are like, "Doesn't that have to do with monkeys?"

Do you think those kids are going to actually pay enough attention or learn enough about evolution to believe it? Know they are going to go on believing that the earth was created 5000 years ago, devasted 4000 years ago, and completely repopulated from a mountain in the middle east.

Sticker or no sticker those kids won't accept it.

My school was just peachy-keen... They allowed the bloody Christians to have a fellowship - yeah, a way for the fundamentalist to gather and bible-thump in addition to the Islamic group we had. Which meant, that if you were an athiest, you might have to hear about how you're going to hell.

Here you go: Original Disclaimer (http://www.swarthmore.edu/NatSci/cpurrin1/textbookdisclaimers/CobbDisclaimer.jpg)
Same thing in Alabama! (http://www.eagleforum.org/educate/1995/dec95/biology.html)
I meant to like a real sight (like as in news story) not just something off of some jerkoffs site(or a blown up picture of what you showed before) … I am not trying to disprove you but I genuinely haven’t been able to find anything
On cnn fox or yahoo bout it and figured there would be a story about it.

Torching, I suppose that you find it amusing that putting up "Christmas" decorations in an elementary school (which used to happen all the time when I was a kid) is now expressly forbidden. And at the same time, children are forced to read verses from the Koran for "familiarization" with Islam. They are shown how to pray as a Muslim. And the Muslims are given a special room in each school and may go there at any time to pray.

And why is that not relevant?

Come down to my daughter's school and I'll show it to you.

Sometimes the US really gives me the heebiejeebies...

I'm not surprised. I wouldn't be shocked if the Flat Earthers started demanding that their beliefs be recognized in school classrooms..My grandmother was a Flat-earther. But then she also stuck Sellotape over the holes in power sockets to stop the electricity leaking out overnight.

Torching, I suppose that you find it amusing that putting up "Christmas" decorations in an elementary school (which used to happen all the time when I was a kid) is now expressly forbidden. And at the same time, children are forced to read verses from the Koran for "familiarization" with Islam. They are shown how to pray as a Muslim. And the Muslims are given a special room in each school and may go there at any time to pray.

And why is that not relevant?

Come down to my daughter's school and I'll show it to you.
Why would I find that amusing? I think that's daft, same as you. But what's wrong with learning about other people's religions? Are you worried that your children's faith isn't strong enough to see someone else's opinion and resist suddenly changing their minds?

Children are forced to read passages from the Koran, are they? What, like they are forced to learn to read and write, and forced to learn to count?

Muslims pray at certain times in the day, not "any time of day", and they also need to pray in the right direction, facing Mecca. That's why the facilities are there for them.

But you're right about the suppression of Christian practices, if that's not too strong a word (I'm tired now and can't think of a better one) - I don't see why there shouldn't be a small chapel on the grounds, too. There shouldn't be any obligation to put one in, mind, but not being openly Christian because you're afraid of upsetting other people is stupid. Besides which, Christmas-time isn't exclusively a Christian festival, and never has been.

Evolution is a scientiric theory, and should be thought of as such. When hearing about theories in school, kids should be taught to think of them as such. Think about how many atomic theories we have gone through in just the past 100 or so years, before reaching electron clouds, which are still feasibly wrong.

The theory of evolution should be considered the same way, and yes, it may be correct, and yes, it may be wrong. But science should not be locked in place by having schools teach aspiring young minds that theories are completely true.

I'm disgusted at how schools force children to take Christmas and Easter holidays, whether they are Christian or not. Thanks to Christian bias within the education system, children of other faiths are being disadvantaged through missed schooling.

Evolution is a scientiric theory, and should be thought of as such. When hearing about theories in school, kids should be taught to think of them as such. Think about how many atomic theories we have gone through in just the past 100 or so years, before reaching electron clouds, which are still feasibly wrong.

The theory of evolution should be considered the same way, and yes, it may be correct, and yes, it may be wrong. But science should not be locked in place by having schools teach aspiring young minds that theories are completely true.
Despite the fact that it has been proven - but that doesn't disprove the existence of a God.

Hmm, atomic theories, eh? You mean all those theories that were slowly refined as more evidence was accumulated, rather than soundly disproven?

I leave open the possibility, however, that you are taking the piss.

I'm disgusted at how schools force children to take Christmas and Easter holidays, whether they are Christian or not. Thanks to Christian bias within the education system, children of other faiths are being disadvantaged through missed schooling.
Though to be fair most major religions have something during the xmass season
Though Easter could be pushed latter and just call it spring break :P

I'm disgusted at how schools force children to take Christmas and Easter holidays, whether they are Christian or not. Thanks to Christian bias within the education system, children of other faiths are being disadvantaged through missed schooling.
rofl

Though to be fair most major religions have something during the xmass season
Though Easter could be pushed latter and just call it spring break :P
They're doing that in Britain - but that's because of the conversion to the five (or is it six?) term system. It is actually much better for the children, in terms of term-length, and they actually get more holiday, because they still get the Good Friday and Easter Monday Bank Holidays.

I'm disgusted at how schools force children to take Christmas and Easter holidays, whether they are Christian or not. Thanks to Christian bias within the education system, children of other faiths are being disadvantaged through missed schooling.

Well here at the University of No Holidays, we don't get Easter off. So you can rest assured that the state of New Hampshire is taking no one's religious beliefs into consideration.

But science should not be locked in place by having schools teach aspiring young minds that theories are completely true.
Science has traditionally been taught on a "first you learn how it is, then when you know that we'll tell you why it might not be"
The idea being that you need to know how scientists think things are before trying to get you're head round what it could be - too much complexity too early gets in the way of understanding.
Also it is unlikely to ever be totally overthrown, more likely to be adjusted or at mst downgraded as Newton's theories were after Einstein's work. A theory that lasts well over 100 years without serious challenge must be saying something fundamentally true, particularly one that has been so consistently attacked as this one has.

Torching, I suppose that you find it amusing that putting up "Christmas" decorations in an elementary school (which used to happen all the time when I was a kid) is now expressly forbidden. And at the same time, children are forced to read verses from the Koran for "familiarization" with Islam. They are shown how to pray as a Muslim. And the Muslims are given a special room in each school and may go there at any time to pray.

And why is that not relevant?

Come down to my daughter's school and I'll show it to you.
Favoring one religion over another in any public school is wrong. If they're gonna force students to read to Koran, they should force them to read the Bible, the Torah, and all other various religious texts. If they have a special room for Muslims to pray, they must have a room for Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, and atheists, for meditation or whatnot.

The government cannot prohibit the free exercise of religion. But it cannot establish one over another either.

I don't have a problem with that sticker, provided that religious texts come with a similar disclaimer :p

I'm disgusted at how schools force children to take Christmas and Easter holidays, whether they are Christian or not. Thanks to Christian bias within the education system, children of other faiths are being disadvantaged through missed schooling.
besides those being more commercial than not these days unless you are christian for easter, i guess it kinds of screws up holidays for people of other religions. but no one cares in america ++

I don't have a problem with that, provided that religious texts come with a similar disclaimer :p
"Warning: Views presented in this book are not shared by all, you don't have to believe it. But if you don't, you'll go to hell!"

Cobb County School district: I now shudder to think of what a miserable, hopeless place it must be.

The Cobb County School District has passed a law that puts stickers on science books warning students that evolution is just a theory and should ne considered with an open mind. What this means is that evolution is taught but don't believe it, it could conflict with your good christian values like the fact that god created the world in seven days, 5000 years ago.

What is wrong with people that do this? Are they that insecure in their belief that they need to try and show other ideas as ones that should not be accepted? Can I put a warning label on the bible doing the same thing?
[/url]

The first one is a real warning from Cobb COunty, the others are generally for entertainment only.

Being from Cobb County myself, a little more context might help.

The sticker was added to certain textbooks because one woman decided she found the idea of evolution being taught in public schools offensive and went around the ultra-conservative suburbs getting I think about 2,000 people to sign a petition stating they wanted a warning on books that teach evolution. And, because the local government is very conservative, they took the ball and ran with it.

What I find ironic is that none of these conservative suburbanites considered who would be teaching the text! Teachers are, as a group, the least affluant and most liberal folks in East Cobb, and they hate parents interfering with their domain. In my experience, our response to that sticker was to laugh at how ridiculous it was and note that the general populace and local government have no idea what the hell a scientific theory is.

Although... if they changed the name to "law" of evolution...

"Warning: Views presented in this book are not shared by all, you don't have to believe it. But if you don't, you'll go to hell!"

Or how about:

"This publication is classified immature. It contains several scenes of unnecessary violence, incest and euphenisms for semen."

Creationism seems to be a paricularly US problem amongst western capitalist nations. The vast majority of Christians in the others are happy with the idea that God created the universe including evolution and the big bang etc. It doesn't have to be either/or.

they're just as important to the US as any liberal.

I don't honestly believe that either party, Democrat or Republican, has my religious freedom at heart.

The Democrats in my area want to enforce political correctness, and that means upholding "oppressed" religions and being "tolerant" of typically non-US religions, while erasing any mention of any religious tradition that has been in place here.

My area is not the only one under crazy rules. In California, there's a school district where children are not allowed to study the Declaration of Independence and other historical writings because they mention the word "God".

The Republicans (most of them) would like us all to be Christians. Swinging far the other way, they would ram their own idea of religion down our throats.

Neither wants to get the state out of the business of religion. Both have their own agenda, and in different parts of the country, depending on the level of their political power, they are exercising it.

Don't tell me that Montgomery County, Maryland isn't a Democratic stronghold with special Muslim prayer rooms while forbidding all other forms of religious expression at school. And the ACLU doesn't think it's unfair. The ACLU is not the paragon of legal virtue - it has its own agenda, which is supporting this program.

I would say both "extreme" positions are unfair, balance is the key. If sides end up in this either or situation on every little issue then the chances are that the only outcome will be a parallisation of thought and a stifling of proper constructive debate. Not that we get much of that either but you get my point.

Indeed, Xen. I think the problem with most of these discussions is not the topic, however, or even the labels. It's the view that some people have that their "side" of things is not only the only correct "side", but the only "fair" and "just" side.

It makes it difficult to discuss this with local politicians, who believe that their side can never do wrong. Rather than move from a position of logic and equity, they want to move (and "they" can be Democrats or Republicans) from a position of "how do we get more power".

There are people who believe that Fox News is "fair and balanced". There are also people who believe that Air America or NPR is "fair and balanced". Truth be told, none of them are fair, and none of them are balanced. All three tell enough lies and make enough distortions in a single day to keep a nation of people from polite and cogent discourse.

Indeed, Xen. I think the problem with most of these discussions is not the topic, however, or even the labels. It's the view that some people have that their "side" of things is not only the only correct "side", but the only "fair" and "just" side.

It makes it difficult to discuss this with local politicians, who believe that their side can never do wrong. Rather than move from a position of logic and equity, they want to move (and "they" can be Democrats or Republicans) from a position of "how do we get more power".

There are people who believe that Fox News is "fair and balanced". There are also people who believe that Air America or NPR is "fair and balanced". Truth be told, none of them are fair, and none of them are balanced. All three tell enough lies and make enough distortions in a single day to keep a nation of people from polite and cogent discourse.


Hear hear!!

Just when I thought I was the only one who hadn't forgotton that the First Amendment was there so that individuals could worship any way or god the choose, and not just be any Christian denomination they choose.

Kudos on that post!

My area is not the only one under crazy rules. In California, there's a school district where children are not allowed to study the Declaration of Independence and other historical writings because they mention the word "God"..
go reread the thread and the situation before making stupid loaded statements

I'm a Christian and :eek: I don't believe in Creationism.

This is due to the meanings of Adam and Eve (I forget them) and the overwhelming scientific evidence.

Just wanted to say it somewhere.

Is this a joke?

I believe, Chess, that you want people only to agree that events such as the Cobb County disaster occur, and that in no way do the opposite of conservatives ever transgress in such a manner, as I pointed out. I'm not making a politically loaded statement that is false - the county in California made the news last week with their list of forbidden material - material that is forbidden on the basis of religious belief.

If placing a creationism sticker inside a biology textbook is a disaster of religious intrusion, then it is at least as politically loaded as a school district that favors one religion (creating Muslim prayer centers on school grounds) or forbidding the reading of the Declaration of Independence because it contains references to "God".

I fail to see how my statement is not relevant to the thread. Perhaps I am not nodding my head in sublime and heedless agreement with the fount of knowledge.

Is this a joke?
As far as I have been able to find no legitimate news source has it … if they have one I have not seen it posted (again not saying it is not happening … just genuinely haven’t found ANY of the big hitters covering anything in cobb … CNN Fox BBC MSNBC )

I heard the Cobb County story on NPR a few days ago. Of course, that doesn't make it true, now does it?

After all, I'm not willing to believe half of what I hear on Fox, so to be fair, I shouldn't believe half of what I hear on NPR.

I heard the Cobb County story on NPR a few days ago. Of course, that doesn't make it true, now does it?

After all, I'm not willing to believe half of what I hear on Fox, so to be fair, I shouldn't believe half of what I hear on NPR.
Yeah I don’t trust heavily biased news stories completely but most of the time they would at least have SOME story even if it was tilted one way or the other

I heard the Cobb County story on NPR a few days ago. Of course, that doesn't make it true, now does it?

After all, I'm not willing to believe half of what I hear on Fox, so to be fair, I shouldn't believe half of what I hear on NPR.

I dunno, I'm more inclined to believe that NPR is closer to journalistic integrity that Fox.

I mean, c'mon, they're Fox!!

I know I'm new to this whole thing, but I would like to point out that Darwin himself stated that evolution was a theory and that scientists are always critically analysing the assumed. Though I do think it was only but there out of political correctness gone wild.

If creationism is getting a look in, then I demand that Bill Hicks teachings be considered.

I'm not surprised. I wouldn't be shocked if the Flat Earthers started demanding that their beliefs be recognized in school classrooms...after all, if religious myths are to be given equal time in science class with the empirical facts, why stop with Creationism and evolution? Why not present the idea that the world rests on the back of a giant turtle, and explain to kids that it is just as legitimate a "theory" as the theory of gravity?
The worlds not on the back of a turtle silly, its on the back of four elephants who are on the back of a turtle. :rolleyes:

I don't have a problem with that sticker, provided that religious texts come with a similar disclaimer :p

Religous texts are not used to teach any class in a public school in the United States. Sorry, no book, no disclaimer.

Well, it seems we're putting warning labels on everything.

How about a label for "EVERY" book that says, "Please confirm the contents of this book by verifying the statements within by direct experiment, scientific observation, or substantial agreement by reference."

Kinda like "Caution, Contents May Be Hot"

Creationism seems to be a paricularly US problem amongst western capitalist nations. The vast majority of Christians in the others are happy with the idea that God created the universe including evolution and the big bang etc. It doesn't have to be either/or.

Finally found someone who agrees with me. I don't think the creationism and evolution have to be mutually exclusive. :)

Finally found someone who agrees with me. I don't think the creationism and evolution have to be mutually exclusive. :)
I personally feel that evolution, big bang etc make the universe such a rich and complex place that it reinforces my faith in an omnipotent and omniscent God - one able to create such wonders that we can only understand a tiny fraction of it.

I'm disgusted at how schools force children to take Christmas and Easter holidays, whether they are Christian or not. Thanks to Christian bias within the education system, children of other faiths are being disadvantaged through missed schooling.
And why would they want to go to school extra?

Its down to the fact that in the UK Church and State are not separated. The official state religion is therefore the one that is prefered. People of different faiths being allowed to opt out and do their own thing is not new - it happened in the 70s too - certainly in my school.

The worlds not on the back of a turtle silly, its on the back of four elephants who are on the back of a turtle. :rolleyes:

What's the turtle standing on, you may ask? Well, it's turtles all the way down!

Also, I think a good disclaimer would be:

CAUTION: Some contents of this book may not have been personally approved by Jesus. After reading, consult Bible for recommended number of self-imposed lashes to the back in order to avoid going to hell.

I heard the Cobb County story on NPR a few days ago. Of course, that doesn't make it true, now does it?

I live just over the border from Cobb County. I can assure you that it is true.

Not that I would mind it, as long as the sticker said "Remember, everything in science is a theory. It should be approached with a critical eye for evidence and an open mind."

It is the religious singling out of one theory that a few religious zealots don't like that bothers me.

Don't tell me that Montgomery County, Maryland isn't a Democratic stronghold with special Muslim prayer rooms while forbidding all other forms of religious expression at school. And the ACLU doesn't think it's unfair. The ACLU is not the paragon of legal virtue - it has its own agenda, which is supporting this program.

Considering that the ACLU has been known to support the religious freedoms of *Christian* schoolchildren, I doubt very seriously that they are supporting any such program. Source?

I meant to like a real sight (like as in news story) not just something off of some jerkoffs site(or a blown up picture of what you showed before) … I am not trying to disprove you but I genuinely haven’t been able to find anything
On cnn fox or yahoo bout it and figured there would be a story about it.

There was something on CNN like a month ago.

Evolution is a scientiric theory, and should be thought of as such. When hearing about theories in school, kids should be taught to think of them as such. Think about how many atomic theories we have gone through in just the past 100 or so years, before reaching electron clouds, which are still feasibly wrong.

The theory of evolution should be considered the same way, and yes, it may be correct, and yes, it may be wrong. But science should not be locked in place by having schools teach aspiring young minds that theories are completely true.

Good teachers already teach it this way.

It is the *students* who often take it as fact, because doing so is much easier than actually thinking about it.

There was something on CNN like a month ago.
Alright I will keep looking at cnn but I guess they don’t have the story archived unless I am looking wrong … oh well not really my job to prove the author’s point for him/her

I personally like the one "This book contains material on gravity. Gravity is a theory, not a fact, regarding a force that cannot be directly seen"

Hahah! Kinda like religion! (And gravity IS a fact. wtf? It's called the LAW of Gravity for a REASON, people!)

I personally like the one "This book contains material on gravity. Gravity is a theory, not a fact, regarding a force that cannot be directly seen"

Hahah! Kinda like religion! (And gravity IS a fact. wtf? It's called the LAW of Gravity for a REASON, people!)

Laws are theories that have lasted the test of time. However, they are *still* theories.

You are the perfect example of someone who missed this point in science class. Never mind that it's in the first chapter of most science textbooks.

I personally like the one "This book contains material on gravity. Gravity is a theory, not a fact, regarding a force that cannot be directly seen"

Hahah! Kinda like religion! (And gravity IS a fact. wtf? It's called the LAW of Gravity for a REASON, people!)
You want to be technical it can still be disproved (there are always modifications) maybe not modifications that would effect us on earth but in some unique circumstances such as lets say black holes … new development in how it acts in that case…

It would still change gravity


Also may want to read the first post again … I thought the same thing … only the first one is “real” (still doubtful about that) the rest are “jokes”

Honestly, it is a SCIENCE CLASS, so teach science.
Its not a theology class so dont teach theology.

I think that we should barge into the theology class and make them teach evolution. :D ooohhh yaa!

Laws are theories that have lasted the test of time. However, they are *still* theories.

You are the perfect example of someone who missed this point in science class. Never mind that it's in the first chapter of most science textbooks.
Damn u beat me to it!

You want to be technical it can still be disproved (there are always modifications) maybe not modifications that would effect us on earth but in some unique circumstances such as lets say black holes … new development in how it acts in that case…

It would still change gravity


Also may want to read the first post again … I thought the same thing … only the first one is “real” (still doubtful about that) the rest are “jokes”


lol yeah i know, but the fact still remains that some people actually believe the others :rolleyes:

It's kinda sad, ain't it? I mean, you could put a similar sticker on the Holy Bible, writing something like "Adam and Eve didn't write the Bible, nor did God himself, so we have no practical evidence of Paradise. Therefore, the Creation must be considered a theory..." I wonder how those people who made these stickers would react. Maybe they would/should think about it that way...

Reminds me of a This Modern World strip that was discussing the Kansas school board being filled with right-wing Christians.

I was amused by the one part that showed geology being taught to a classroom with a diagram of the Earth, with space labeled "Heaven" and all the parts from crust to core collectively labeled "Hell."

only the first one is “real” (still doubtful about that)

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/11/08/evolution.debate.ap/

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/11/12/ga.evolution.ap/

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6434725/

For your enjoyment.

Evolution isn't a law, it's a theory, meaning there's apossibility it couldn't be true. THey aren't taught to believe it, they're just taught the theory. I really see nothing wrong with the sticker. It's stupid, but oh well.

Kinda reminds of when I stumped my bilogy teacher. We were talking about the cell theory. Part of the cell theory states that all new cells arise from existing cells. On the other hand, you have the third (I think it's the third) law of thermodynamics, which states that matter cannot be created or destroyed. Id cells arise from existing cells, how is that possible?

My teacher had no answer.

Evolution isn't a law, it's a theory, meaning there's apossibility it couldn't be true. THey aren't taught to believe it, they're just taught the theory. I really see nothing wrong with the sticker. It's stupid, but oh well.

Kinda reminds of when I stumped my bilogy teacher. We were talking about the cell theory. Part of the cell theory states that all new cells arise from existing cells. On the other hand, you have the third (I think it's the third) law of thermodynamics, which states that matter cannot be created or destroyed. Id cells arise from existing cells, how is that possible?

My teacher had no answer.
majick

Evolution isn't a law, it's a theory, meaning there's apossibility it couldn't be true. THey aren't taught to believe it, they're just taught the theory. I really see nothing wrong with the sticker. It's stupid, but oh well.

Kinda reminds of when I stumped my bilogy teacher. We were talking about the cell theory. Part of the cell theory states that all new cells arise from existing cells. On the other hand, you have the third (I think it's the third) law of thermodynamics, which states that matter cannot be created or destroyed. Id cells arise from existing cells, how is that possible?

My teacher had no answer.

That's because your teacher was incredibly stupid. What do you think food is for... LOL *shakes head*

Evolution isn't a law, it's a theory, meaning there's apossibility it couldn't be true. THey aren't taught to believe it, they're just taught the theory. I really see nothing wrong with the sticker. It's stupid, but oh well.

And yet another product of a shitty education. Laws *are* theories, they are simply theories that have stood the test of time. Even laws might not be completely true.

Kinda reminds of when I stumped my bilogy teacher. We were talking about the cell theory. Part of the cell theory states that all new cells arise from existing cells. On the other hand, you have the third (I think it's the third) law of thermodynamics, which states that matter cannot be created or destroyed. Id cells arise from existing cells, how is that possible?

My teacher had no answer.

Your teacher was apparently an idiot (not surprising considering what you said above). The first law of thermo is your mass balance. And it only applies in a *closed* system, which a cell is not.

That's because your teacher was incredibly stupid. What do you think food is for... LOL *shakes head*

That's exactly what I was thinking, only I was thinking more profane words, like: "your teacher is a f*cktard for not knowing that one."

Aside (since it's been mentioned a couple times)
The laws of Thermodynamics
1)Energy can neither be created nor destroyed (it can only be converted)
2)In a closed system with NO energy either entering or leaving, the potential energy of the system will naturally degrade into other forms of energy (energy cannot be lost, see first law).
3)No energy exists in atoms at absolute zero.

Using these, there is no loophole in thermodynamics you've found. It isn't even thermodynamics that you've tried to violate. While it is true that a certain amount of energy can be converted into a certain mass, this is almost impossible to achieve, especially where humans are on the technological scale. This isn't what happened. The one cell in question uses nourishment taken in (or Ammazia's recent discovery of food which your teacher seemed to be unaware of) to grow to about the size of two cells, having twice the parts it need. It then divides, resulting in the creation of two new cells at the cost of the single old cell. It's called mitosis if you care to look it up. This explanation should have been given by your teacher, but since he did not, I feel justified in classiying the guy (or girl) as a f*cktard.

Anything to do with science is absolutely not true. We don't fully understand ANYTHING. We just have explanations which explains things as best as possible at the time, using as many facts as possible.

To me, creationism has less facts than evolution and thus, evolution seems far more feasible than creationism.

Anything to do with science is absolutely not true. We don't fully understand ANYTHING. We just have explanations which explains things as best as possible at the time, using as many facts as possible.

To me, creationism has less facts than evolution and thus, evolution seems far more feasible than creationism.

A very good, a true scientist who understands the scientific method. View the observable universe, using existing data and observation to understand the world best. If there's a flaw, the scientist either re-examines the framework of his ideas to fit the new data or scraps the old framework and comes up with something new that fits both the old and new data. To call anything else science is pure satire.

Anything to do with science is absolutely not true. We don't fully understand ANYTHING. We just have explanations which explains things as best as possible at the time, using as many facts as possible.

To me, creationism has less facts than evolution and thus, evolution seems far more feasible than creationism.
Which is scientific method, the explanation that most closely fits the observed facts and that provides predictions that are not contradicted by new discoveries is the most probable explanation. It is as pointed out above why they are called theories and not laws as scientists do not like to close out the possibility of a new fact changing the theory. Laws suggest that it is fixed.

[edit]looks like I posted pretty much at the same time as the post above and said the same thing :) snap!

meh, we all agree that the scientific method is the scientific method, I don't see a problem with that.

meh, we all agree that the scientific method is the scientific method, I don't see a problem with that.
Going by the rest of the thread I wouldn't be so sure everone knows it so it might be worth saying.

And why would they want to go to school extra?

To learn grammar good?

A very good, a true scientist who understands the scientific method. View the observable universe, using existing data and observation to understand the world best. If there's a flaw, the scientist either re-examines the framework of his ideas to fit the new data or scraps the old framework and comes up with something new that fits both the old and new data. To call anything else science is pure satire.

You left out one important option: to reject the new piece of data as a mistaken one or an abberrant result. Given that such results do sometimes reslt from error, you cannot ignore this option, however, sometimes the baby is thrown out with the bathwater when a new unexpected, correct result is rejected.

You left out one important option: to reject the new piece of data as a mistaken one or an abberrant result. Given that such results do sometimes reslt from error, you cannot ignore this option, however, sometimes the baby is thrown out with the bathwater when a new unexpected, correct result is rejected.
Does happen … though hopefully he/she is a good scientist and continues to re run tests … if he/she comes up with the same result again … then consider the original finding

Does happen … though hopefully he/she is a good scientist and continues to re run tests … if he/she comes up with the same result again … then consider the original finding

Yes, but in some cases the variables beyond the control of the experimenter only come together on very rare ocassions to produce the apparently aberrant result.


(Note: I'm not using this as an argument against science, just to add a caveat to the earlier poster's claims)

Yes, but in some cases the variables beyond the control of the experimenter only come together on very rare ocassions to produce the apparently aberrant result.


(Note: I'm not using this as an argument against science, just to add a caveat to the earlier poster's claims)
Oh I understand … and yeah sometimes it is beyond … usually an increase in technology allows them to narrow the variables (not always) or a development in some other field

Oh I understand … and yeah sometimes it is beyond … usually an increase in technology allows them to narrow the variables (not always) or a development in some other field

...aside from the fact that KillAllYourFriends' description of science doesn't seem to make any mention of falsification, but rather forming theories which are in agreement with data: shall you tell him, or shall i?

...aside from the fact that KillAllYourFriends' description of science doesn't seem to make any mention of falsification, but rather forming theories which are in agreement with data: shall you tell him, or shall i?
have fun ... time for high speed network proformance anaylisys (class ...)