NationStates Jolt Archive

“Scientists say it takes millions of years to form stalactites,” Benson said. “However, in only a couple of hours, I have formed stalactites just by using paper towel and Epsom Salts.”

Yeah retard, and gold should be dirt cheap because for a few bucks I can buy lead fishing sinkers, melt 'em down with a propane torch, cast them into an ingot and spray paint them gold.

This kid won first prize in the "life science" http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=18345643&BRD=2081&PAG=461&dept_id=385210&rfi=6

Well we sure know who's going to get a Nobel Prize or two when they're older. :rolleyes:

This retarded stalactite bullshit has been going on for years. If I was a judge, I would have pimp slapped him and kicked him out of the convention hall. All this idiot proved is he knows how to make rock candy.

http://www.superdickery.com/images/misc/morbo.jpg
Stalactites do not work that way!

Thank you Morbo.

Yeah stupid judges.

Epsom salts are primarily magnesium sulfate.
Stalactites are primarily calcium carbonate.

The minerals differ in their properties, and thus ability/speed to form those pointed hanging things.

Yeah retard, and gold should be dirt cheap because for a few bucks I can buy lead fishing sinkers, melt 'em down with a propane torch, cast them into an ingot and spray paint them gold.

This kid won first prize in the "life science" http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=18345643&BRD=2081&PAG=461&dept_id=385210&rfi=6

Yeah, wonderful kid, now try doing it with almost pure water.

Doesn't work? Didn't think it would, psst, here's a hint:

it usually takes millions of years for stalactites to form naturally

On a related note, the girl who did the "why is the sky blue?" should have gotten first prize.

this leaves the question of what kind of newspaper would a caveman/xenu read?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FV9yDhu5rBA

The kid can be excused on the grounds that they're too young to know any better. The parents, teachers, and judges are brainless cretins.

its kind of ironic how a kid exploiting creationism wins a science fair.

Creationism=no science

The kid can be excused on the grounds that they're too young to know any better. The parents, teachers, and judges are brainless cretins.
He was in the 8th fucking grade. They are all stupid fucks. He is able to know better and they are just encouraging him to be a stupid shit.

Maybe everyone else's projects were just really bad? Like baking soda volcanoes and hamster/light bulb experiments?

Maybe everyone else's projects were just really bad? Like baking soda volcanoes and hamster/light bulb experiments?

All of the Life Science entries were pretty shitty, but they are all far better than making stalactites out of Epsom Salt especially because MAKING STALACTITES HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH LIFE SCIENCE.

I applaud PICA's fantastic judgment in awarding these prizes. As everyone knows, the central tenet of evolution is that stalactites are very old. With his project "Creation Wins!!!", Mr. Benson finally proved that all the world's caves were created in a few hours by Charles Darwin.

:D The reader opinions are coming up with nicely sarcastic comments.

Maybe everyone else's projects were just really bad? Like baking soda volcanoes and hamster/light bulb experiments?

09:00-Just a potato
.
.
.
.
.
.
16:00-Still just a potato

09:00-Just a potato
.
.
.
.
.
.
16:00-Still just a potato

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
23:59-Rotten potato?

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
23:59-Rotten potato?

.
.
.
Therefore entropy causes life to devolve and evolution sucks.

So because he created rock candy in a few minutes humanity popped up out of nowhere. Even though there is limitless and abundant proof that we evolved and o proof at all cept for in the bible that man just appeared.

Science is grand... was this a catholic school by any chance? That could explain much...

On a related note, the girl who did the "why is the sky blue?" should have gotten first prize.

she should of gotten a million dollars for explaining that so well on a thing that I always meant to find out

.
.
.
Therefore entropy causes life to devolve and evolution sucks.

Evolution and Entropy have something to do with each other? :p

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
23:59-Rotten potato?

Nah, potatoes keep for ages.

My shopping habits rely on this fact.

Wow.

she should of gotten a million dollars for explaining that so well on a thing that I always meant to find out

If you have a million dollars, I'm sure she's willing to accept it.

Nah, potatoes keep for ages.

My shopping habits rely on this fact.

But what if we put salt on it?

Then at least it'll be a dried potato.

Science is grand... was this a catholic school by any chance? That could explain much...

Would make more sense if it was a non-denominational church school. There are almost as many of those in the US as catholic schools, and they are all specifically against evolution, whereas the Church has no official stance on it.

What the fuck? A school-kid thinks he's disproved Darwin? By using paper towel and Epsom salts? Oh please, this is a joke, surely? He can't actually be serious?

she should of gotten a million dollars for explaining that so well on a thing that I always meant to find out

It's really not that complicated.

I still giggle when I hear people say it's because of all the water. Reflection and such.

Silly, silly people.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
23:59-Rotten potato?

Or maybe 23:59-Bonsai potato.
http://i14.tinypic.com/6g3uz3a.jpg

It's really not that complicated.

I still giggle when I hear people say it's because of all the water. Reflection and such.

Silly, silly people.

It is because of the water, the water in space! You see the earth is really inside a giant snow-globe and there's water outside of it. Those people who think the atmosphere is made of gases and stuff are crazy, its really made out of glass! Of course that means no one ever really went to the moon or into space and that the space station doesn't exist. I guess those are all hoaxes by the government who are trying to stop people from being claustrophobic from being stuck in a snow globe! :p

http://www.superdickery.com/images/misc/morbo.jpg
Stalactites do not work that way!

Thank you Morbo.

/thread :p


i made a stalactite in my pants once :)

Even worse, nobody claims that it takes millions of years to form stalactites.

Rayleigh scattering is why the sky is blue.

/thread :p


i made a stalactite in my pants once :)
I have no idea what that's supposed to mean, but I do know that it's not going to be good.

Wasn't there something a while back about this whole series of creationist science fairs?

/thread :p


i made a stalactite in my pants once :)

I have one that just keeps growing and growing...

...but I have a tendency to break it off :p

Evolution and Entropy have something to do with each other? :p

Only if you're a Creationist. :D

It is because of the water, the water in space! You see the earth is really inside a giant snow-globe and there's water outside of it. Those people who think the atmosphere is made of gases and stuff are crazy, its really made out of glass! Of course that means no one ever really went to the moon or into space and that the space station doesn't exist. I guess those are all hoaxes by the government who are trying to stop people from being claustrophobic from being stuck in a snow globe! :p

Rayleigh scattering and the Tyndall effect, where blue wavelength light scatters more strongly than other wavelengths when passing through a fluid holding particles in suspension.

It is because of the water, the water in space! You see the earth is really inside a giant snow-globe and there's water outside of it. Those people who think the atmosphere is made of gases and stuff are crazy, its really made out of glass! Of course that means no one ever really went to the moon or into space and that the space station doesn't exist. I guess those are all hoaxes by the government who are trying to stop people from being claustrophobic from being stuck in a snow globe! :p

Your scientific genious astounds me!

I was taught early on, like in 5th grade... that the sky appears blue during the day because of the mixture of the gases and water in the atmosphere. Much like the one girls milk project when the light shines on it from certain angles the colors change. Rainbows are formed by the same phenomena when there is an abundance of water in the atmoshpere.

I have one that just keeps growing and growing...

...but I have a tendency to break it off :p

I tend to do that to people who can't keep their hands to themselves.

On another note, I was able to prove why a train platform collapsed and what could be done to stop it, but no one gave me an award *cries softly to herself* Nobody likes me....

What the fuck? A school-kid thinks he's disproved Darwin? By using paper towel and Epsom salts? Oh please, this is a joke, surely? He can't actually be serious?

You know, I always expected it to be a schoolboy who finally exposed the Biologists' lies about evilution. ;)

I have one that just keeps growing and growing...

...but I have a tendency to break it off :p
Oh, right, I understand now.

I thought it was going to be something to do with dripping fluids, you see... *shudders*

What the fuck? A school-kid thinks he's disproved Darwin? By using paper towel and Epsom salts? Oh please, this is a joke, surely? He can't actually be serious?

That was my first treaction until I thought about it for about 5 minutes. This was not an anti-Darwin thing. It was about the other aspect of creationism that is not talked about as much methinks.

Some of the creationists believe that the Lord created the earth a ridiculously short time ago. I do not know how long but I think it is something like 10,000 to 20,000 years ago. I think this kid was trying to show that the world could have been created a lot sooner than scientists claim.

Not all creationists are this nutty sort but I have met a few at a family reunion and they were literally wild eyed in their belief. They gave me the creeps.

I think that the Lord is the author of life mainly because life does not spontaneously generate. I think that the Lord is surrounded by great mystery and science is the best lantern that we have to penetrate the darkness of the unknown and illuminate our knowledge of his truth.

All of the Life Science entries were pretty shitty, but they are all far better than making stalactites out of Epsom Salt especially because MAKING STALACTITES HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH LIFE SCIENCE.

Yeah, shouldn't that have been more like "Earth Science" even if it weren't crap?

Yeah, shouldn't that have been more like "Earth Science" even if it weren't crap?

Geology, specifically.

I tend to do that to people who can't keep their hands to themselves.

On another note, I was able to prove why a train platform collapsed and what could be done to stop it, but no one gave me an award *cries softly to herself* Nobody likes me....

I'd give you an award but you might break it off...

Disclaimer: All in good fun, I'm not trying to harass you. (besides my girlfriend would kill me)

To me it sounds like an award winning project, or at least an honorable mention. Better than salt stalagtites anyway...

/thread :p


i made a stalactite in my pants once :)

I can't tell if that's a sexy stalactite or a smelly stalactite. :p

That was my first treaction until I thought about it for about 5 minutes. This was not an anti-Darwin thing. It was about the other aspect of creationism that is not talked about as much methinks.

Some of the creationists believe that the Lord created the earth a ridiculously short time ago. I do not know how long but I think it is something like 10,000 to 20,000 years ago. I think this kid was trying to show that the world could have been created a lot sooner than scientists claim.

Not all creationists are this nutty sort but I have met a few at a family reunion and they were literally wild eyed in their belief. They gave me the creeps.

I think that the Lord is the author of life mainly because life does not spontaneously generate. I think that the Lord is surrounded by great mystery and science is the best lantern that we have to penetrate the darkness of the unknown and illuminate our knowledge of his truth.

I think it's 3000 years, or at least that's what I've heard some say.

I think it's 3000 years, or at least that's what I've heard some say.
IIRC it's ~6000 years because some clergyman with too much time on his hands added up all the ages of people in the Bible.

Geology, specifically.

Yeah, but I think they call geology "earth science" when they're that young. At least they did when I was.


I think it's 3000 years, or at least that's what I've heard some say.

Most Young-Earth Creationists put it at 6000-10000 years. The 6000 estimate apparently comes from adding up all the ages of people described in the OT and the lineage of Christ and then adding AD time on from there.

IIRC it's ~6000 years because some clergyman with too much time on his hands added up all the ages of people in the Bible.

Ah, fair enough. Eh, I never really listened to anything the mad creationists say, so I'm not too sure.

Did any of ya'll actually expect anything better from a "science" fair at a "Pawleys Island Christian Academy"? Really, this is almost a strawman, as it obviously was NOT a real science fair!

(I say that as a vet of real science fairs, some of the winners of which I knew personally. I knew had two freinds who recieved serious college scholarship money from national level real science fairs. This "science" fair is most obviously is not a serious one.)

Science is grand... was this a catholic school by any chance? That could explain much...

The Church shrugs its shoulders at evolution. I think the official stance is they dont conflict.

The Church shrugs its shoulders at evolution. I think the official stance is they dont conflict.

From all I've heard about the Catholic Church I'd be genuinely surprised if it was. I see this more likely happening in the deep South in some Southern Baptist Bible School.

From all I've heard about the Catholic Church I'd be genuinely surprised if it was. I see this more likely happening in the deep South in some Southern Baptist Bible School.

What? The "science" fair or their acceptance?

What? The "science" fair or their acceptance?

The "science" fair of course.

IIRC it's ~6000 years because some clergyman with too much time on his hands added up all the ages of people in the Bible.

eh, it only takes an hour or so. though there is some dispute over exact numbers since the bible disagrees with itself on the number of generations and how old people were at various times. also, it skips a few steps in places.

I can't tell if that's a sexy stalactite or a smelly stalactite. :p

I am an American but I had a girlfriend who had lived in UK for a few years. She said that all the UK guys had smelly stalactites. What is up with that?

Pawleys Island Christian Academy (PICA)...he disproved part of the theory of evolution.

That's why he won. The church looks for ways to prove evolution is a facade. Any shred of "evidence" they can get to prove that, they promote and reward.

Rayleigh scattering and the Tyndall effect, where blue wavelength light scatters more strongly than other wavelengths when passing through a fluid holding particles in suspension.

Technically the scattering was better explained by Einstein in his paper on critical opalescence, but Rayleigh was close enough (and easier to understand).

However - the physics is only half the answer. After all, violet is scattered even more, yet we do not see a violet sky. That is entirely due to biology - or more specifically: the way our eyes work. We simply are far more sensitive to blue.

"Why the sky is blue" really is an excellent subject for a science paper.

Youre just as ignorant as the judges.

If you go to the botton of the article and look there, you will see that the sky girl and the creatonist guy are in totaly diferent categories.

The guy was in Life Science, and look at the projects of those that won second and third:

2nd place: Nicole Cyr, sixth grade — Does Calcium in Milk Strengthen Bones?
3rd place: Loryn Hurston, seventh grade: Dog Smarts: What’s Behind Those Puppy-Dog Eyes?

Lame beyond understanding. Calcium and bones and dog smarts? No big deal the guy won first.

Btw, the overall champion was:
Overall Champion
• Rachel Harrison, eighth grade — Can a Polarized Lens Affect a Digital Photograph?

I am an American but I had a girlfriend who had lived in UK for a few years. She said that all the UK guys had smelly stalactites. What is up with that?

Honestly, I don't know, I just made it up. I'm guessing she did too, to be honest.

Lame beyond understanding. Calcium and bones and dog smarts? No big deal the guy won first.

Lame ? Probably. But at least they might have been somewhat scientific.

Youre just as ignorant as the judges.

If you go to the botton of the article and look there, you will see that the sky girl and the creatonist guy are in totaly diferent categories.

The guy was in Life Science, and look at the projects of those that won second and third:

2nd place: Nicole Cyr, sixth grade — Does Calcium in Milk Strengthen Bones?
3rd place: Loryn Hurston, seventh grade: Dog Smarts: What’s Behind Those Puppy-Dog Eyes?

Lame beyond understanding. Calcium and bones and dog smarts? No big deal the guy won first.


Oh come on, the "I disproved Evolution" experiment was awful. He proved you can make rock candy in a few minutes. Big fucking whoop.

Youre just as ignorant as the judges.

If you go to the botton of the article and look there, you will see that the sky girl and the creatonist guy are in totaly diferent categories.

The guy was in Life Science, and look at the projects of those that won second and third:

2nd place: Nicole Cyr, sixth grade — Does Calcium in Milk Strengthen Bones?
3rd place: Loryn Hurston, seventh grade: Dog Smarts: What’s Behind Those Puppy-Dog Eyes?

Lame beyond understanding. Calcium and bones and dog smarts? No big deal the guy won first.

At least those two things actually have something to do with Life Science. It would seem that - you know - actually having a project in the category might help.

was this a catholic school by any chance? That could explain much...

Doesn't appear to be. Looks like the Pawleys Island Community Church and Christian Academy (http://www.picapatriots.org/bsv.html) is more of a "Jesus spoke in red" kinda place.

Not surprisingly the curriculum (http://www.picapatriots.org/gpage5.html) "presents a Christian worldview and integrates Biblical principles into every subject." (Emphasis mine.)

I do find it ironic that their emblem looks much like the anarchist's "Circle A". ;)

http://www.picapatriots.org/images/DSCF5056.JPG

--snip--
Totally out of topic, but Arinola, how did you come up with your user name?

Somebody ought to put those judges out of their misery. Their suffering obviously has tainted their judgement. I propose a (very) late-term abortion for them.

Totally out of topic, but Arinola, how did you come up with your user name?

A friend gave it to me. Fuck knows how they came up with it. But I couldn't think of anything better at the time, so meh. Why you ask?

A friend gave it to me. Fuck knows how they came up with it. But I couldn't think of anything better at the time, so meh. Why you ask?
(In my native language, 'arinola' is the term we use for bedpans. (Some other dialects and closely-related languages use a similar-sounding word.) And bedpans are associated with sickness and poop and pee.)

(In my native language, 'arinola' is the term we use for bedpans. (Some other dialects and closely-related languages use a similar-sounding word.) And bedpans are associated with sickness and poop and pee.)

LOL. What language?

LOL. What language?
Tagalog.

(And I hate using bedpans.)

Somebody ought to put those judges out of their misery. Their suffering obviously has tainted their judgement. I propose a (very) late-term abortion for them.

I'd trust a scientist to objectively judge a paper I'd written for theology more than I'd trust one of these theocrats to judge a science fair project period.

In my native language, 'arinola' is the term we use for bedpans. (Some other dialects and closely-related languages use a similar-sounding word.) And bedpans are associated with sickness and poop and pee.


LOL!

I'll never look at Arinola's post the same ever again.

At least those two things actually have something to do with Life Science. It would seem that - you know - actually having a project in the category might help.
The whole "evolution-creationism" tie-in was what made it life sciences.
At least it is better than the science fair project I did in elementary school, which was, as far as I can remember, designed to determine whether a battery can power a light bulb.
It can

http://www.picapatriots.org/images/DSCF5056.JPG

http://trillian.mit.edu/~jc/ideas/img/Hammer_sickle_large.png

?

Not surprisingly the curriculum (http://www.picapatriots.org/gpage5.html) "presents a Christian worldview and integrates Biblical principles into every subject." (Emphasis mine.)

Ah great. People who are so insecure about their faith that they need to embrace shoddy work and deception, instead of being confident enough to allow children to be critical and make up their own minds based on known facts.
May God have mercy on them, for they have lost their faith.

I do find it ironic that their emblem looks much like the anarchist's "Circle A". ;)

Shoddy work and deceit is often linked to Satan...

Shoddy work and deceit is often linked to Satan...

Alpha + Omega = Circle + A

I'd trust a scientist to objectively judge a paper I'd written for theology more than I'd trust one of these theocrats to judge a science fair project period.

Ooh ooh! I'll do it! (I took a few theology classes in undergrad, hehe)


The whole "evolution-creationism" tie-in was what made it life sciences.

I see. That's cool. Next time my experiments don't go the way I'd expect, I'll just say, "Well, I've decided this disproves the laws of physics," and see if I can put it in a physics journal. =)

At least it is better than the science fair project I did in elementary school, which was, as far as I can remember, designed to determine whether a battery can power a light bulb.

Hehe. A friend and I tried to see if student misbehavior followed the lunar cycle by looking at how many students went to the office over a period of months and then looking for correlations to the lunar cycle. I think the title of the project was "Are students werewolves?"

There was no correlation that we could see. Of course, the whole project was flawed - students don't necessarily go to the office right when they misbehave. It did give us the fun opportunity of seeing what kinds of things people got sent to the office for, though - and sometimes we could guess who the offending student was....

I disproved the fact that stalagtites take millions of years every winter as a child.

All we needed is snow, a warm roof, and cold weather. We had stalagtites from our gutters every day.

Of course, the process of making these stalagtites, oh, sure, some will call them "icicles", might be a little different than the process of making "real" stalagtites...

but then again, so does making them with fucking epsom salts.

Alpha + Omega = Circle + A

SATOR
AREPO
TENET
OPERA
ROTAS

LOL!

I'll never look at Arinola's post the same ever again.

I am sad. :(

On another note, I was able to prove why a train platform collapsed and what could be done to stop it, but no one gave me an award *cries softly to herself* Nobody likes me....

You need to prove the theory. Collapse it during rush hour. Nobody will be able to dispute your genius then.

I am sad. :(
To be honest, what always comes to my mind every time I read your name is either me on the verge of dying with fever; or a bowl of yellow pee with brown poop of assorted sizes floating on it...

Don't worry, I'm trying to get them images out of my head every time by doing this :headbang:.

Not surprisingly the curriculum (http://www.picapatriots.org/gpage5.html) "presents a Christian worldview and integrates Biblical principles into every subject." (Emphasis mine.)

Mathematics-

Q: If Jesus has five loaves and two fish, and it takes one loaf or half a fish to feed a man, how many men can Jesus feed?

A: (5x1) + (2x0.5) = 5,000

The problem is that the people who get tapped to judge these things aren't necessarily teachers, scientists or educators on any level. In an 8th Grade science fair, they're usually tasked with evaluationg the student's methodology, math and understanding of the subject.

It's distinctly possible that these judges really were convinced that this kid has proven something, but that same project might have gotten a failing grade from his science teacher. (And well it should.)

When I was in 8th Grade I was attending a Catholic School but I remember well the deer in the headlights expression on the faces of the judges when I explained my project. Who got first place? The kid with the plants in Pepsi/Milk/Water. They dont' know anything. (My project, since you asked, was on how computers store data in RAM and on magnetic media, thank you.)

I think maybe the judges were easily swayed by their own ignorance of Geology and perhaps their own biases, but it isn't quite fair to start the Creationist-Bash over what was obviously a badly flawed project that received way more credit than it deserves.

I find it amusing how the anti-science uber-religious flock are so obsessed with passing off their myths as science.

I find it somewhat less amusing that these people are teaching children to be lazy and dishonest.

Lame ? Probably. But at least they might have been somewhat scientific.

His experiment was probabily the most scientific of the three.

Mind you that science is about observing nature and trying to explain it.

This kid observed nature and tried to explain it. And he used a method for explaining it.

You can say that his intentions were wrong, but you cant deny he had a theory and tried to prove it. He made an experiment and created a theory which was based on what he sees.

Of course, it was reasonably wrong, but for a kid his age maybe it wasnt as bad. What we would need to know is how the experiments of the other kids compare to it. I doubt the calcium kid did anything remarkably good. The puppy eyes kid, she probabily took pictures of her dog and tried to show when her dog was "happy or sad".

And considering there were like, I dunno, about 25 kids doing these projects, you can see there was not a lot of competition there.

This thread looks like a damn witchhunt, and is so full of radicals and ignorants as those people in churches that try to ban religion.

His theory, method, and facts were wrong. He is stripped of first place and automatically removed from the contest being in the wrong fucking category.

@NorthernBorders:
You don't attempt to prove a scientific theory.
You try your very hardest to disprove it.

If it lives then fine. You've made a seemingly correct theory. Congratulations.
If you manage to disprove then you either modify it and try again or give up.

Mathematics-

Q: If Jesus has five loaves and two fish, and it takes one loaf or half a fish to feed a man, how many men can Jesus feed?

A: (5x1) + (2x0.5) = 5,000

5*1 + 2*2, surely?

5*1 + 2*2, surely?

Why would it be 2? it's half a fish, not two fish to feed a man.

5*1 + 2*2, surely?

Indeed.

@Deus Malum:
One fish can feed two men, though.

http://trillian.mit.edu/~jc/ideas/img/Hammer_sickle_large.png

?

Dang them Comristians! (And I love your math class idea!)

Ah great. People who are so insecure about their faith that they need to embrace shoddy work and deception, instead of being confident enough to allow children to be critical and make up their own minds based on known facts.
May God have mercy on them, for they have lost their faith.



Shoddy work and deceit is often linked to Satan...

:cool:

Ooh ooh! I'll do it! (I took a few theology classes in undergrad, hehe)

I was science heavy for a poli sci (I have a BS not a BA...).

It does wonders for rigerous thinking, nu?

I see. That's cool. Next time my experiments don't go the way I'd expect, I'll just say, "Well, I've decided this disproves the laws of physics," and see if I can put it in a physics journal. =)

When my father was working as a industrial research scientist, he actually had someone in his lab who prayed over his experiments - a PhD Chemist praying that an experiment would work out the way he wanted. I don't have words for that...... :upyours:

Hehe. A friend and I tried to see if student misbehavior followed the lunar cycle by looking at how many students went to the office over a period of months and then looking for correlations to the lunar cycle. I think the title of the project was "Are students werewolves?"

I love it! How many werewolves did he find? LOL

There was no correlation that we could see. Of course, the whole project was flawed - students don't necessarily go to the office right when they misbehave. It did give us the fun opportunity of seeing what kinds of things people got sent to the office for, though - and sometimes we could guess who the offending student was....

Even better. :cool:[/QUOTE]


I am sad. :(

Nah, don't be. We still love ya!

This thread looks like a damn witchhunt, and is so full of radicals and ignorants as those people in churches that try to ban religion.

LOL I don't know many people in churches who try to ban religion...

(Indeed Ilaer.)

@NorthernBorders:
You don't attempt to prove a scientific theory.
You try your very hardest to disprove it.

If it lives then fine. You've made a seemingly correct theory. Congratulations.
If you manage to disprove then you either modify it and try again or give up.

Youre asking too much of the kid.

This thread is heavily biased. The ammout of atention the article gave to this specific kid is just as long as the one other kids got.

Are you making fun of my tendency to say 'indeed'?
*reddens out of embarassment*

:)

@NorthernBorders:
When I was in Year Seven we were taught that which I said.
Why am I asking too much of him?

Are you making fun of my tendency to say 'indeed'?
*reddens out of embarassment*

:)

Heh. Indeed I am not. Indeed I also abuse indeed. ;)

Heh. Indeed I am not. Indeed I also abuse indeed. ;)

Um... OK...
And... um... and don't you forget it!
:)

Youre asking too much of the kid.
If somebody is so young that they are unable to grasp the most fundamental concepts in science (i.e. "A scientific theory can be disprove, but never proven.") then they should not be participating in a SCIENCE fair.

Personally, I've known kindergarten kids who could grasp that concept. I don't think it's expecting too much that an 8th grader would be able to do so.

If somebody is so young that they are unable to grasp the most fundamental concepts in science (i.e. "A scientific theory can be disprove, but never proven.") then they should not be participating in a SCIENCE fair.

Personally, I've known kindergarten kids who could grasp that concept. I don't think it's expecting too much that an 8th grader would be able to do so.

Maybe he didnt understood it. Maybe the others didnt too. And I´m pretty sure most people DONT understand the scientific method. Just because you, Ilaer or anyone else knows it, doesnt mean the kid does.

And he doesnt need to know it, he just has to be better than the other ones. And when you compare his project to calcium kid and puppy eyes girl, you can probabily find more of the scientific method in his work than in the other two combined.

Even through he won first in Life Sciences (which is a pretty dumb name) he would probabily place last if he was directly competing against the engenier or physics guys.

Youre asking too much of the kid.
Asking he not be an idiot in 8th grade?

This thread is heavily biased. The ammout of atention the article gave to this specific kid is just as long as the one other kids got.
Yes, we are biased towards fact and good science. Sorry.

Youre asking too much of the kid.

This thread is heavily biased. The ammout of atention the article gave to this specific kid is just as long as the one other kids got.

But this kid is the only one listed who had a project that didn't even begin to fit into the category he won - not to mention claiming to disprove a long-standing scientific theory with something relatively unrelated.

If the blue sky girl, for instance, had suddenly said, "So this means that there is milk in the sky and I have disproven global warming!" (especially if she had, for some reason, been put in the Life Science category) and still got a prize, I think you'd see just as many issues.

The Church shrugs its shoulders at evolution. I think the official stance is they dont conflict.

Under John Paul II, yes... but I'm not sure that particular policy still holds.

See, Pope Palpatine I (...err, Benedict XVI) is a leader of a faction in the Catholic church with extremely strong ties to the Dominionist/theoconservative elements of the Republican party. I wouldn't be surprised if that particular doctrine was reversed in the near future (if it hasn't already been reversed).

(In case you hadn't really noticed, the modern theocons - the ones who took the Moral Majority and its ilk, reshaped those groups, and made them dominant forces in the Republican Party - aren't basing their arguments on Protestant teachings, but rather on old Catholic dogma... in no small part because the Catholic Church dogma still has leftover parts from the time when the Church still held political power in addition to its religious power.)

From all I've heard about the Catholic Church I'd be genuinely surprised if it was. I see this more likely happening in the deep South in some Southern Baptist Bible School.

Hell, I wouldn't really be surprised if something like this happened in some Deep South public school. Something to do with seventeen years of bitter experience.

Yes, I have the sad misfortune of living in the Deep South - the Pine Curtain, if you will - and I went to public school. I also happen to be a bit of a science nerd, with particular interest in evolutionary and conservation biology.

As a result, I've taken more than a few science courses where evolution is mentioned in the textbooks over my last few years in the Deep South. Evolution was covered in a grand total of ONE of those courses, and that teacher taught the subject in a "wink wink" fashion ("We're covering this because scientists claim that this is how life on Earth developed, and because the state says we have to, but we all know how life on Earth really happened..." :mad: ).

Hell, the college professor for my Honors Biology course completely skipped the evolution chapters on the syllabus... :mad:

Are you making fun of my tendency to say 'indeed'?
*reddens out of embarassment*

<snip>

Hey, how did Teal'c manage to find his way onto NSG?

[/stargateinjoke]

And he doesnt need to know it, he just has to be better than the other ones. And when you compare his project to calcium kid and puppy eyes girl, you can probabily find more of the scientific method in his work than in the other two combined.
A) That is wrong. You are assuming because their projects were stupid, their science is bad. Strike 1.
B) They were in the right fucking category of life science. Strike 2-4. You're kicked out of the park.

Even through he won first in Life Sciences (which is a pretty dumb name) he would probabily place last if he was directly competing against the engenier or physics guys.
Hm, he would lose in the science fair section that his science project actually belonged in. That just proves everyone involved is a dipshit.

Maybe he didnt understood it. Maybe the others didnt too. And I´m pretty sure most people DONT understand the scientific method. Just because you, Ilaer or anyone else knows it, doesnt mean the kid does.

And he doesnt need to know it, he just has to be better than the other ones. And when you compare his project to calcium kid and puppy eyes girl, you can probabily find more of the scientific method in his work than in the other two combined.

Even through he won first in Life Sciences (which is a pretty dumb name) he would probabily place last if he was directly competing against the engenier or physics guys.

If he didn't know it then he shouldn't have gotten any marks, never mind have come first!
He obviously didn't do any relevant research, performed a faulty experiment under the wrong conditions and came to a poor conclusion based upon shaky principles.

If that excuses him then I wish to file a complaint to whichever version of God he chooses to believe him, because evidently that God didn't think about endowing him with intelligence.

I don't care about his surroundings; no matter how fundamentalist his damned school is, he should still have the sense to question its authority and, in so doing, find it inadequate!

Heh. Indeed I am not. Indeed I also abuse indeed. ;)

Wait... when did Teal'c get a cloning device? :confused:

[/stargateinjoke]

Maybe he didnt understood it. Maybe the others didnt too. And I´m pretty sure most people DONT understand the scientific method. Just because you, Ilaer or anyone else knows it, doesnt mean the kid does.

If you don't understand the basics of the scientific method - at the very least, the basics - you shouldn't be even passing in a middle or high school science course.

And he doesnt need to know it, he just has to be better than the other ones. And when you compare his project to calcium kid and puppy eyes girl, you can probabily find more of the scientific method in his work than in the other two combined.

I don't see anything about his project that uses the scientific method. The calcium project was most likely research, rather than experimentally based. I don't know about the puppy one.

One way or another, both of those projects better fit the category. And it doesn't sound like either of them thought that a parlor trick had suddenly disproven a scientific theory.

Hell, I wouldn't really be surprised if something like this happened in some Deep South public school. Something to do with seventeen years of bitter experience.

Yes, I have the sad misfortune of living in the Deep South - the Pine Curtain, if you will - and I went to public school. I also happen to be a bit of a science nerd, with particular interest in evolutionary and conservation biology.

As a result, I've taken more than a few science courses where evolution is mentioned in the textbooks over my last few years in the Deep South. Evolution was covered in a grand total of ONE of those courses, and that teacher taught the subject in a "wink wink" fashion ("We're covering this because scientists claim that this is how life on Earth developed, and because the state says we have to, but we all know how life on Earth really happened..." ).

Hell, the college professor for my Honors Biology course completely skipped the evolution chapters on the syllabus...

Where the hell did you go to school? I was in a GA public school (and then a religiously affiliated GA private college) and none of my science teachers ever had any problems with evolutionary theory, although my sarcastic bio prof at college loved to joke about it being "evilution".

Things NB fails at:


*Science

*The entire internet

what do stalactites have to do with evolution?

what do stalactites have to do with evolution?

I think he was trying to say that the Earth couldn't possibly have been around long enough for evolution to occur because it couldn't possibly have been around long enough for stalactites to occur because his experiment couldn't possibly have given him the wrong results.

In other words, sheer ignorance and arrogance mixed into one.

Maybe he didnt understood it. Maybe the others didnt too. And I´m pretty sure most people DONT understand the scientific method. Just because you, Ilaer or anyone else knows it, doesnt mean the kid does.

If any non-disabled child reaches 8th grade without understanding these concepts, then every one of his teachers (science or otherwise) should receive a great big scarlet F.

NOBODY should be receiving prizes for such a failure.

And he doesnt need to know it, he just has to be better than the other ones. And when you compare his project to calcium kid and puppy eyes girl, you can probabily find more of the scientific method in his work than in the other two combined.

So...he should win because he sucked slightly less than the other kids?

Forgive me, but I have standards. Grading on a curve is stupid when it comes to stuff like this.

If every single kid failed to learn the scientific method, then every single kid should fail. Nobody should get an A+ or an award for being marginally less of a failure.

I don't blame kids for being ignorant when the adults in their lives make it their mission to keep their children ignorant. I pity this poor kid, and every other child at that "school." The teachers, parents, and administrators are the ones who really deserve to get yelled at.

... I don't blame kids for being ignorant when the adults in their lives make it their mission to keep their children ignorant. I pity this poor kid, and every other child at that "school." The teachers, parents, and administrators are the ones who really deserve to get yelled at.

Whilst I agree with your first point, I disagree with your second.

Surely he should question the authority of his teachers?

I think he was trying to say that the Earth couldn't possibly have been around long enough for evolution to occur because it couldn't possibly have been around long enough for stalactites to occur because his experiment couldn't possibly have given him the wrong results.

In other words, sheer ignorance and arrogance mixed into one.I don't get it. If this boy can create stalactites in no time, then there's no time for evolution?

I don't get it. If this boy can create stalactites in no time, then there's no time for evolution?

Yeah. Of course, he really should have been failed for "Playing God." After all, it is God who makes stalactites, not human beings. Right?

If any non-disabled child reaches 8th grade without understanding these concepts, then every one of his teachers (science or otherwise) should receive a great big scarlet F.

I studied the three core sciences (biology, physics, and chemistry) until the age of sixteen and I don't remember any of my teachers ever explaining the scientific method. It's a real shame in my opinion, because most people can live without knowing about continental drift or polymers, but an understanding of the scientific method is vital in distinguishing between science and pseudo-science.

Whilst I agree with your first point, I disagree with your second.

Surely he should question the authority of his teachers?
Ideally? Sure. He should question. Just like, ideally, a 5 year old should question their parents' authority if Mommy and Daddy like to beat their children with golf clubs. But if the 5 year old assumes that Mommy and Daddy know best, does that some how make it the kid's fault?

When it comes to taking responsibility for failure, adults get an adult share. An 8th grader, while often a very intelligent and perceptive creature, is still a legal minor. Our system of law, and our culture itself, recognize that a minor child should not be expected to demonstrate the full measure of adult judgment and reasoning.

We do not burden children with unrealistic expectations like, "Ignore what your parents, teachers, and all adults around you are saying, otherwise it's your fault for being duped."

The kids at that "science" fair were lied to by adults. A lot. I mean, a really, really lot. I don't blame the kids for having been lied to.

I blame the adults--WHO SHOULD KNOW BETTER--for being such pathetic ignorant creeps.

I blame the parents for choosing not to protect and guide their children the way a parent should.

I blame the teachers for so conspicuously failing at the job they receive a paycheck for doing.

As much as possible, I try to avoid ever blaming the victims.

I studied the three core sciences (biology, physics, and chemistry) until the age of sixteen and I don't remember any of my teachers ever explaining the scientific method. It's a real shame in my opinion, because most people can live without knowing about continental drift or polymers, but an understanding of the scientific method is vital in distinguishing between science and pseudo-science.

I've never seen a middle or high school textbook that didn't begin with a chapter on the scientific method - usually also with sections on various measurements. In fact, I'm fairly certain even the elementary school textbooks I used had such a chapter. Are teachers just skipping over these things?

Um... OK...
And... um... and don't you forget it!
:)

Indeed I won't. ;)

Maybe he didnt understood it.

It certainly apperears he didn't.

Maybe the others didnt too.

Unknown.

And I´m pretty sure most people DONT understand the scientific method.

Depends on the population sample.

Just because you, Ilaer or anyone else knows it, doesnt mean the kid does.

Indeed. However, he was entered in a SCIENCE fair, not a Theological fair, and hence shouold have at least been familiar with the bare minimums.

And he doesnt need to know it, he just has to be better than the other ones.

Nope. Entry into SCIENCE fair requires a SCIENCE project, not an anti-sceince project.

And when you compare his project to calcium kid and puppy eyes girl, you can probabily find more of the scientific method in his work than in the other two combined.

Not at all. His hypothesis was that the certain basic geologic principles were incorrect. His experiment made no serious attempt to disprove the hypothesis. It was utterly unscientific.

Even through he won first in Life Sciences (which is a pretty dumb name)

Life Sciences = Biology It most certainly is not a "dumb name", and attempting an ad hom like that is foolish.

he would probabily place last if he was directly competing against the engenier or physics guys.

What's an "engenier"?


(Taredas, I don't watch Stargate...)

I don't get it. If this boy can create stalactites in no time, then there's no time for evolution?

That's what his argument sounds like to me, yes.

Stalactites take millions of years to form. Evolution also takes millions of years.
His argument is that as he made stalactites in much less than millions of years, the stalactites on the Earth can't be millions of years old, thus not leaving enough time for evolution to occur in either.

It fails, of course, because his 'stalactites' aren't made out of the same substances as real stalactites.

Ideally? Sure. He should question. Just like, ideally, a 5 year old should question their parents' authority if Mommy and Daddy like to beat their children with golf clubs. But if the 5 year old assumes that Mommy and Daddy know best, does that some how make it the kid's fault?

When it comes to taking responsibility for failure, adults get an adult share. An 8th grader, while often a very intelligent and perceptive creature, is still a legal minor. Our system of law, and our culture itself, recognize that a minor child should not be expected to demonstrate the full measure of adult judgment and reasoning.

We do not burden children with unrealistic expectations like, "Ignore what your parents, teachers, and all adults around you are saying, otherwise it's your fault for being duped."

The kids at that "science" fair were lied to by adults. A lot. I mean, a really, really lot. I don't blame the kids for having been lied to.

I blame the adults--WHO SHOULD KNOW BETTER--for being such pathetic ignorant creeps.

I blame the parents for choosing not to protect and guide their children the way a parent should.

I blame the teachers for so conspicuously failing at the job they receive a paycheck for doing.

As much as possible, I try to avoid ever blaming the victims.

Good points.
I withdraw my objection.

I've never seen a middle or high school textbook that didn't begin with a chapter on the scientific method - usually also with sections on various measurements. In fact, I'm fairly certain even the elementary school textbooks I used had such a chapter. Are teachers just skipping over these things?

I wonder that as well. It certainly makes me glad I grew up in a scientific household - both my parents have graduate science degrees. I suspect that had more impact on my thinking than school...

I think he was trying to say that the Earth couldn't possibly have been around long enough for evolution to occur because it couldn't possibly have been around long enough for stalactites to occur because his experiment couldn't possibly have given him the wrong results.

In other words, sheer ignorance and arrogance mixed into one.

Bingo. (Attempt to get away from the "indeed" agreement. ;))

Not at all. His hypothesis was that the certain basic geologic principles were incorrect. His experiment made no serious attempt to disprove the hypothesis. It was utterly unscientific.

Actually, it would appear that his "hypothesis" was, "The evolutionary theory is wrong." He then went about trying to demonstrate this by showing that he could grow a stalactite-like structure in a short period of time, which supposedly somehow disproves evolutionary biology....

Mathematics-

Q: If Jesus has five loaves and two fish, and it takes one loaf or half a fish to feed a man, how many men can Jesus feed?

A: (5x1) + (2x0.5) = 5,000

Does anyone else find it hilarious that the same people who rail about religion mixing with science will not hesitate to try and disqualify religion by mixing it with science?

Things NB fails at:


*Science

*The entire internet

hey now.. be more specific. :p

Does anyone else find it hilarious that the same people who rail about religion mixing with science will not hesitate to try and disqualify religion by mixing it with science?

It's called mockery, get with the program.

It's called mockery, get with the program.

Exactly. Good to know we're on the same page, though. Good for you!:)

Ideally? Sure. He should question. Just like, ideally, a 5 year old should question their parents' authority if Mommy and Daddy like to beat their children with golf clubs. But if the 5 year old assumes that Mommy and Daddy know best, does that some how make it the kid's fault?

When it comes to taking responsibility for failure, adults get an adult share. An 8th grader, while often a very intelligent and perceptive creature, is still a legal minor. Our system of law, and our culture itself, recognize that a minor child should not be expected to demonstrate the full measure of adult judgment and reasoning.

We do not burden children with unrealistic expectations like, "Ignore what your parents, teachers, and all adults around you are saying, otherwise it's your fault for being duped."

The kids at that "science" fair were lied to by adults. A lot. I mean, a really, really lot. I don't blame the kids for having been lied to.

I blame the adults--WHO SHOULD KNOW BETTER--for being such pathetic ignorant creeps.

I blame the parents for choosing not to protect and guide their children the way a parent should.

I blame the teachers for so conspicuously failing at the job they receive a paycheck for doing.

As much as possible, I try to avoid ever blaming the victims.

Well said.

Actually, it would appear that his "hypothesis" was, "The evolutionary theory is wrong." He then went about trying to demonstrate this by showing that he could grow a stalactite-like structure in a short period of time, which supposedly somehow disproves evolutionary biology....

Fair enough. All this presuposes he actually had a stated hypothesis.

When I was doing Science Fairs way back in the dark ages (the Reagan Years...), it was an automatic assumption that the hypothesis would be promemently displayed on the booth and could be explained by the participant. I suspect this was not the case here...

Would make more sense if it was a non-denominational church school. There are almost as many of those in the US as catholic schools, and they are all specifically against evolution, whereas the Church has no official stance on it.

I went to a Catholic School 30-some-odd years ago, and we were taught that it was ok to believe in evolution. We were taught that God in essence created evolution. This was more likely a fundie school.

Fair enough. All this presuposes he actually had a stated hypothesis.

When I was doing Science Fairs way back in the dark ages (the Reagan Years...), it was an automatic assumption that the hypothesis would be promemently displayed on the booth and could be explained by the participant. I suspect this was not the case here...

Yeah, we had to do that in all the science fairs I participated in as well (Reagan/Bush/Clinton years), unless the project was more research based than experimental.

I went to a Catholic School 30-some-odd years ago, and we were taught that it was ok to believe in evolution. We were taught that God in essence created evolution. This was more likely a fundie school.

You'd be surprised how often this is the case. That was the position taken by the Catholic school I went to. In fact, my science teacher believed that Evolution=Creation in that the Biblical account was symbolic of the steps of natural selection.

The Mormon church doesn't take a position on that either, as far as I know. i go to church with creationists and Evolutionists alike. It's nice. Everybody gets along anyway. (Mormon teaching is very heavy on the "go out there and learn!" mentality. Quite refreshing.)

The problem I have is when somebody takes up a position without actually knowing both sides. For example:

When I was young I was invited to attend a Sunday bible junior church thing with some friends. In it, I got into an argument with one of the youth pastors who insisted that evolution was wrong because: "We used to do work with plants and we would t ake a plant and put it into a hot environment or a cold environment... It didn't evolve.. it died." I was shocked. That isn't anything like what evolution means, and yet this guy was asserting enough expertiese to be teaching hundreds of kids.

Personally, I have lost my belief in Darwinism but not for religious reasons, but for other, purely scientific reasons. I'll tell you this though, I at least can say I know what evolution is, unlike this yutz I spoke to.

Does anyone else find it hilarious that the same people who rail about religion mixing with science will not hesitate to try and disqualify religion by mixing it with science?


My religion, Buddhism, at least in the forms I follow, is utterly and completely compatable with science. One of the most fundamental Buddhist ideals principals is not to accept that which you haven't observed. That's compatable with science unlike any other religion I know...

Yeah, we had to do that in all the science fairs I participated in as well (Reagan/Bush/Clinton years), unless the project was more research based than experimental.

I managed state once. How far did you get?

You'd be surprised how often this is the case. That was the position taken by the Catholic school I went to. In fact, my science teacher believed that Evolution=Creation in that the Biblical account was symbolic of the steps of natural selection.

The Mormon church doesn't take a position on that either, as far as I know. i go to church with creationists and Evolutionists alike. It's nice. Everybody gets along anyway. (Mormon teaching is very heavy on the "go out there and learn!" mentality. Quite refreshing.)

The problem I have is when somebody takes up a position without actually knowing both sides. For example:

When I was young I was invited to attend a Sunday bible junior church thing with some friends. In it, I got into an argument with one of the youth pastors who insisted that evolution was wrong because: "We used to do work with plants and we would t ake a plant and put it into a hot environment or a cold environment... It didn't evolve.. it died." I was shocked. That isn't anything like what evolution means, and yet this guy was asserting enough expertiese to be teaching hundreds of kids.

Personally, I have lost my belief in Darwinism but not for religious reasons, but for other, purely scientific reasons. I'll tell you this though, I at least can say I know what evolution is, unlike this yutz I spoke to.

May I ask what those scientific reasons are?
You can telegram them if you want; I'm just curious because you seem to be an intelligent person, and if an intelligent person can be swayed from Darwinism in such a manner then I want to know what the reasons are.

I managed state once. How far did you get?

District, I think. I want to say I once got to state for Invent America, though. My school had good teachers, but not much by way of resources, so the projects usually weren't all that great and at least half of them were simply local school fairs, with no progression.

We did sweep up at the state Science Olympiad though.

Actually, it would appear that his "hypothesis" was, "The evolutionary theory is wrong." He then went about trying to demonstrate this by showing that he could grow a stalactite-like structure in a short period of time, which supposedly somehow disproves evolutionary biology....

Someone else posted about an other aspect of creationism. The article doesn't say what his hypothesis was, and we're all just speculating.

However, it makes more sense that his hypothesis was to disprove a disproof. The fact that geological formations take millions of years to form is used as a disproof that the earth was created 6000 years ago.

His experiment seemed to be geared to disproving the fact that it takes milliions of years to form a stalagtite.

Someone else posted about an other aspect of creationism. The article doesn't say what his hypothesis was, and we're all just speculating.

However, it makes more sense that his hypothesis was to disprove a disproof. The fact that geological formations take millions of years to form is used as a disproof that the earth was created 6000 years ago.

His experiment seemed to be geared to disproving the fact that it takes milliions of years to form a stalagtite.

From the article:

Brian Benson, an eighth-grade student who won first place in the Life Science/Biology category for his project “Creation Wins!!!,” says he disproved part of the theory of evolution. Using a rolled-up paper towel suspended between two glasses of water with Epsom Salts, the paper towel formed stalactites. He states that the theory that they take millions of years to develop is incorrect.

Click to learn more...
“Scientists say it takes millions of years to form stalactites,” Benson said. “However, in only a couple of hours, I have formed stalactites just by using paper towel and Epsom Salts.”

It seems pretty clear that he thought he was disproving evolutionary theory.

I've never seen a middle or high school textbook that didn't begin with a chapter on the scientific method - usually also with sections on various measurements. In fact, I'm fairly certain even the elementary school textbooks I used had such a chapter. Are teachers just skipping over these things?

Maybe it's taught differently here in the UK. My Chemistry teachers were pretty good, the Physics teachers less so, and the Biology teachers were a joke (one was incapable of maintaining discipline and the other was a Creationist).

<snipped because Dem already said everything that I would want to say about this retarded "science" fair project>



Where the hell did you go to school? I was in a GA public school (and then a religiously affiliated GA private college) and none of my science teachers ever had any problems with evolutionary theory, although my sarcastic bio prof at college loved to joke about it being "evilution".

Let's put it this way: When not at school, I live within a 200-mile radius of the Shrub-in-Chief's vacation home. It's amazing how much a moderately-sized city can seem like a small country town when you live in Redneck East Texas. :(

When school (well, college now - just graduated high school a couple of weeks ago) is in session, I live over near that center of culture and refined taste ( :rolleyes: ) that is Dallas, Texas.

<snipped>


(Taredas, I don't watch Stargate...)

Let's just put it this way - Teal'c (Stargate main character) is about as associated with the word "indeed" as McCoy from TOS is associated with "I'm a doctor, not a(n) ________".

I blame the adults--WHO SHOULD KNOW BETTER--for being such pathetic ignorant creeps.


Thats a little far.

Maybe it's taught differently here in the UK. My Chemistry teachers were pretty good, the Physics teachers less so, and the Biology teachers were a joke (one was incapable of maintaining discipline and the other was a Creationist).

It could vary even within the UK, then, since I attend Caistor Grammar School in Lincolnshire and we have excellent teachers in all departments, especially the physics teachers (and we have one biology teacher who I would happily spend the rest of my life listening to; that man's an absolute genius).

My religion, Buddhism, at least in the forms I follow, is utterly and completely compatable with science. One of the most fundamental Buddhist ideals principals is not to accept that which you haven't observed. That's compatable with science unlike any other religion I know...

Or, at least, your perception of any other religion you know.

May I ask what those scientific reasons are?
You can telegram them if you want; I'm just curious because you seem to be an intelligent person, and if an intelligent person can be swayed from Darwinism in such a manner then I want to know what the reasons are.

Sure. I'll TG you to avoid hijacking the thread :)

What the fuck? A school-kid thinks he's disproved Darwin? By using paper towel and Epsom salts? Oh please, this is a joke, surely? He can't actually be serious?
He didn´t just think he disproved Darwin, he thought whole Evolution would have been disproved! Thus logic disproved, wich is essential to science, thus science disproved. Funny. :headbang: I´ve not seen or met or whatever ANYONE else as stupid and short (if any) minded as him.

@ Bretonny: I´d like to know that too. ;P

Sure. I'll TG you to avoid hijacking the thread :)

Thanks.
I await the telegram eagerly. :)

He was in the 8th fucking grade. They are all stupid fucks. He is able to know better and they are just encouraging him to be a stupid shit.

Don't be ageist. Very few eighth graders are really stupid enough to believe in creationism.

This makes me glad my dad sent me to a public school even though my mother wanted me to go to a religious school. :)

Don't be ageist. Very few eighth graders are really stupid enough to believe in creationism.

Sadly, methinks you're wrong here. Even discarding personal experience, the unfortunate fact remains that, if polls on the subject are to be trusted, more than 50% of American adults are creationists (I can't remember if said polls specifically indicated young-Earth creationism, but I know that any possibility of evolution was precluded).

Somehow, with those numbers I imagine a sizable percentage of said adults' children are also creationists.

Sadly, methinks you're wrong here. Even discarding personal experience, the unfortunate fact remains that, if polls on the subject are to be trusted, more than 50% of the American public are creationists (I can't remember if said polls specifically indicated young-Earth creationism, but I know that any possibility of evolution was precluded).

*jaw drops*

Thank heavens I'm in the UK, where Creationists of any description seem to be much fewer...

He didn´t just think he disproved Darwin, he thought whole Evolution would have been disproved! Thus logic disproved, wich is essential to science, thus science disproved. Funny. :headbang: I´ve not seen or met or whatever ANYONE else as stupid and short (if any) minded as him.
that kid is a freaking idiot, and his parents should be slapped and sterilized.

I can't fathom......seriously.

Sadly, methinks you're wrong here. Even discarding personal experience, the unfortunate fact remains that, if polls on the subject are to be trusted, more than 50% of American adults are creationists (I can't remember if said polls specifically indicated young-Earth creationism, but I know that any possibility of evolution was precluded).

Somehow, with those numbers I imagine a sizable percentage of said adults' children are also creationists.

As much as I'd like to say I believe you, I'll play devil's advocate and assume that not ALL Americans are that stupid and ask for a source. ;)

Somehow, with those numbers I imagine a sizable percentage of said adults' children are also creationists.

Wrong! The kids will "rebel" by trusting actual science!

As much as I'd like to say I believe you, I'll play devil's advocate and assume that not ALL Americans are that stupid and ask for a source. ;)

not all......he said 50%. I actually do think about 50% of the general population are complete idiots.....the percentage, judging by the people I have encountered today might be even higher.


"We just asked this two weeks ago, on one's belief when it comes to evolution versus creationism. A three-part question that's been asked off-and-on in slightly different formats by Gallup over the last couple of decades, that asked respondents whether they believed that man was created . . . as we sometimes put it, in a time frame on it in the last 10,000 years, created by God in current form. That there was a process of evolution that was guided by God, or if there was a process of evolution for which God had nothing to do with it. Those are the three themes that are sort of developed by public opinion pollsters when they ask about this. America on this question is fundamentally conservative. 55% say that God created humans in their present form. The Gallup question which adds on within the last 10,000 years, gets a slightly lower number, but it is very close to half. Just under half. This is something that both majorities of Republicans and Democrats believe, and independents, they believe, it too. This is something for which education and religion matters: 75% of weekly church-goers, versus 35% of those who never attend, say that God created man as humans as they are now. Education matters as well. But, perhaps not so much as you would think, because well over one-third of college graduates are also strict creationists. And even 32% who have post-graduate training. So this is a very intense belief among Americans."

http://www.aip.org/fyi/2004/162.html

not all......he said 50%. I actually do think about 50% of the general population are complete idiots.....the percentage, judging by the people I have encountered today might be even higher.

it is an undisputable fact that the intellect of 50% of the population is below average

it is an undisputable fact that the intellect of 50% of the population is below average

And that 50% is above it.
It'd be nice to be in the upper quartile at the very least, though.

Edit: Well, actually, it depends on what sort of average you use. Unless you use the median you're not going to get exactly 50% on either side.

it is an undisputable fact that the intellect of 50% of the population is below average

:D I also read that 3 out of 4 people make up 75% of the population.

that kid is a freaking idiot, and his parents should be slapped and sterilized.

I can't fathom......seriously.

What about the kid? He should have his prize taken away. Stupid, arrogant, idiotic little jackass...

:D I also read that 3 out of 4 people make up 75% of the population.

And that 40% of sick days take place on Mondays and Fridays.

And apparently, death is fatal 99% of the time.
Oh wait... That doesn't fit with the trend, does it? Or even make sense...
:D

It could vary even within the UK, then, since I attend Caistor Grammar School in Lincolnshire and we have excellent teachers in all departments, especially the physics teachers (and we have one biology teacher who I would happily spend the rest of my life listening to; that man's an absolute genius).

How amusing. I may be thousands of miles from your location, in a different country... but I went to a school 'just round the corner' from you. All of our teachers were excellent, also - except the Chemistry department, unfortunately. I mean.. they weren't bad in a 'caves were formed in 2 hours by Charles Darwin' way... Lincolnshire Grammar schools are better than they have any realisitc right to be.

It'd be nice to be in the upper quartile at the very least, though.
you would think so....but it kinda sucks.
What about the kid? He should have his prize taken away. Stupid, arrogant, idiotic little jackass...
yeah.....he needs new parents.

it is an undisputable fact that the intellect of 50% of the population is below average

wrong!

it's actually 49.95%!

And that 40% of sick days take place on Mondays and Fridays.


Only if you assume a 5 day work week.

How amusing. I may be thousands of miles from your location, in a different country... but I went to a school 'just round the corner' from you. All of our teachers were excellent, also - except the Chemistry department, unfortunately. I mean.. they weren't bad in a 'caves were formed in 2 hours by Charles Darwin' way... Lincolnshire Grammar schools are better than they have any realisitc right to be.

Ain't that the truth? :D
Although they may not be for much longer; I assume, then, that you're originally British? If so, then might I ask whether you've been keeping up with the news regarding grammar schools recently?
It doesn't look good to me.

The Conservatives are all but abandoning grammar schools and 'twinning' is being proposed between grammars and failing comprehensives, making the already large burden that grammars face even heavier.

you would think so....but it kinda sucks.

yeah.....he needs new parents.

Indeed.
And I know what it's like, Smunkee ma'am. I am in a grammar school, in which I get very good grades even by grammarian standards.

Only if you assume a 5 day work week.

Good point. Although most working weeks that I know of are five days in length.
Now what about the deaths one? :)

Indeed.
And I know what it's like, Smunkee ma'am. I am in a grammar school, in which I get very good grades even by grammarian standards.
what is grammar school there? here it's another word for elementary school, for kids from like 5 to 10 years old.

it is an undisputable fact that the intellect of 50% of the population is below average
Incorrect.

It is an indisputable fact that the intellect of 50% of the population is below the median.

what is grammar school there? here it's another word for elementary school, for kids from like 5 to 10 years old.

It's like an ultra-selective secondary school in the UK.

Incorrect.

It is an indisputable fact that the intellect of 50% of the population is below the median.

I pointed that out earlier...
*sighs*

I'm cooking my dinner, and don't have time to read all 4 pages...but does anyone else find this a bit over the top (reading the dress code of the school)

12)If a school event requires a swim suit, all girls 3rd grade and above must wear a dark t-shirt that entirely covers the suit.

way to encourage girls to believe their body is something to be ashamed of.

At least those two things actually have something to do with Life Science. It would seem that - you know - actually having a project in the category might help.
Well as much as I would have (naively) hoped that to be the case, the outcome clearly demonstrates that your claim is simply not true. Not only does one not need a science project in the category to win the category, apparently one can win without even having a science project, (which I admit is counter-intuitive, but there you have it).

His experiment was probabily the most scientific of the three.
[snippage]
You can say that his intentions were wrong, but you cant deny he had a theory and tried to prove it.
Well if we cant deny that he had a theory and tried to prove it, then we cant deny that he went about things unscientifically. To be scientific he ought to have set out to disprove his theory.


what do stalactites have to do with evolution?
They are the basis of all evolution. By emitting radiocative particles into the atmosphere they trigger mutations (in live organisms) that if beneficial are selected for. This may sound odd but having proved it in an experiment in which I made not only rock candy but also fudge, candy floss and baked potatoes, I can assure you that it is a scientific fact.

Lincolnshire Grammar schools are better than they have any realisitc right to be.
I ooh i dont know about that

Well as much as I would have (naively) hoped that to be the case, the outcome clearly demonstrates that your claim is simply not true. Not only does one not need a science project in the category to win the category, apparently one can win without even having a science project, (which I admit is counter-intuitive, but there you have it).

Hehe.

Well if we cant deny that he had a theory and tried to prove it, then we cant deny that he went about things unscientifically. To be scientific he ought to have set out to disprove his theory.

Methinks you should replace the word "theory" in that paragraph with "hypothesis." This kid definitely hasn't been around long enough to develop or support a scientific theory. =)

They are the basis of all evolution. By emitting radiocative particles into the atmosphere they trigger mutations (in live organisms) that if beneficial are selected for. This may sound odd but having proved it in an experiment in which I made not only rock candy but also fudge, candy floss and baked potatoes, I can assure you that it is a scientific fact.

LOL!

Methinks you should replace the word "theory" in that paragraph with "hypothesis." This kid definitely hasn't been around long enough to develop or support a scientific theory. =)

I had no idea what to do about that, on the one hand the context is a discussion (in part) about science which indicates the usage (of the word theory) particular to science, on the other hand, what this kid was doing wasnt science, so this counter-indicates using hypothosis (he had no scientific hypothesis that I can detect), so I went with theory in quotation marks....:p

I had no idea what to do about that, on the one hand the context is a discussion (in part) about science which indicates the usage (of the word theory) particular to science, on the other hand, what this kid was doing wasnt science, so this counter-indicates using hypothosis (he had no scientific hypothesis that I can detect), so I went with theory in quotation marks....:p

Yeah, it is a difficulty. =)

not all......he said 50%. I actually do think about 50% of the general population are complete idiots.....the percentage, judging by the people I have encountered today might be even higher.


"We just asked this two weeks ago, on one's belief when it comes to evolution versus creationism. A three-part question that's been asked off-and-on in slightly different formats by Gallup over the last couple of decades, that asked respondents whether they believed that man was created . . . as we sometimes put it, in a time frame on it in the last 10,000 years, created by God in current form. That there was a process of evolution that was guided by God, or if there was a process of evolution for which God had nothing to do with it. Those are the three themes that are sort of developed by public opinion pollsters when they ask about this. America on this question is fundamentally conservative. 55% say that God created humans in their present form. The Gallup question which adds on within the last 10,000 years, gets a slightly lower number, but it is very close to half. Just under half. This is something that both majorities of Republicans and Democrats believe, and independents, they believe, it too. This is something for which education and religion matters: 75% of weekly church-goers, versus 35% of those who never attend, say that God created man as humans as they are now. Education matters as well. But, perhaps not so much as you would think, because well over one-third of college graduates are also strict creationists. And even 32% who have post-graduate training. So this is a very intense belief among Americans."

http://www.aip.org/fyi/2004/162.html

Here I was, trying to find the books where all the relevant polls were included as footnotes, and Smunkee manages to find the website that gives a summary of the exact polls I was looking for! :)

It's really easy to understand how so many Americans are creationists if you've lived in a really conservative part of the country for any length of time... :(

Here I was, trying to find the books where all the relevant polls were included as footnotes, and Smunkee manages to find the website that gives a summary of the exact polls I was looking for! :)

It's really easy to understand how so many Americans are creationists if you've lived in a really conservative part of the country for any length of time... :(

Although, to be fair, there are those who believe everything else evolved - just not human beings. It's a bit of an odd stance, if you ask me, but I think it is actually the official stance of the Catholic Church - that the theory of evolution applies to everything but human beings, and that we were created extra special by God in our final form.

I guess that's why the numbers drop when they add, "within the last 10,000 years" or whatever.

Although, to be fair, there are those who believe everything else evolved - just not human beings. It's a bit of an odd stance, if you ask me, but I think it is actually the official stance of the Catholic Church - that the theory of evolution applies to everything but human beings, and that we were created extra special by God in our final form.

From what I've seen, believing that humans were created in the last 10,000 years usually implies a literal interpretation of Genesis (and hence, young-Earth creationism), but experience is fallible, so you may have a point there.

Regarding the Catholic Chruch's position - actually, the Catholic Church used to be slightly more liberal than that, IIRC; the official position was that evolution created all animals and the human body, but God gave humanity the soul.

Of course, that's a moot point now, because the Catholic Church has changed that position (along with its position on a number of other issues of importance to American Dominionists, such as its opposition to the Iraq war) in the last 2-3 years, following Pope Palpatine I's ascension to the Papacy. The current position is based on ID - to writ, "any system of thought that denies or seeks to explain away the overwhelming evidence of design is ideology, not science". (New York Times op-ed by an influential Vatican member, July 20, 2005)

From what I've seen, believing that humans were created in the last 10,000 years usually implies a literal interpretation of Genesis (and hence, young-Earth creationism), but experience is fallible, so you may have a point there.

Regarding the Catholic Chruch's position - actually, the Catholic Church used to be slightly more liberal than that, IIRC; the official position was that evolution created all animals and the human body, but God gave humanity the soul.
Of course, that's a moot point now, because the Catholic Church has changed that position (along with its position on a number of other issues of importance to American Dominionists, such as its opposition to the Iraq war) in the last 2-3 years, following Pope Palpatine I's ascension to the Papacy. The current position is based on ID - to writ, "any system of thought that denies or seeks to explain away the overwhelming evidence of design is ideology, not science". (New York Times op-ed by an influential Vatican member, July 20, 2005)

That's what I was taught. Don't you just love how in Europe Catholics are quite often conservative (by the local standards), but over here they're liberal commie f***s?

If any non-disabled child reaches 8th grade without understanding these concepts, then every one of his teachers (science or otherwise) should receive a great big scarlet F.

NOBODY should be receiving prizes for such a failure.

So...he should win because he sucked slightly less than the other kids?

Forgive me, but I have standards. Grading on a curve is stupid when it comes to stuff like this.

If every single kid failed to learn the scientific method, then every single kid should fail. Nobody should get an A+ or an award for being marginally less of a failure.

I don't blame kids for being ignorant when the adults in their lives make it their mission to keep their children ignorant. I pity this poor kid, and every other child at that "school." The teachers, parents, and administrators are the ones who really deserve to get yelled at.

Man, I have no clue. The deal is that it looks like its a very small school/class, so maybe the kids didnt face a lot of competition on this one.

How many were on it? Something like 24 or so, I dont remember,

Anyway, yes, they should give it to the one that sucks less. Shit, the stuff all those kids did was pretty dumb. BUT not for their ages. You have to take that into account.

Btw, I think the projects of the other kids were far more interesting. Like the one about the sky color and how to clear algae from lakes, or something like that. These are interesting. But the evolution guy was competing against Puppy eyes dogs and calcium bones.

Indeed I won't. ;)

It certainly apperears he didn't.

Unknown.

Depends on the population sample.

Indeed. However, he was entered in a SCIENCE fair, not a Theological fair, and hence shouold have at least been familiar with the bare minimums.

Nope. Entry into SCIENCE fair requires a SCIENCE project, not an anti-sceince project.

Not at all. His hypothesis was that the certain basic geologic principles were incorrect. His experiment made no serious attempt to disprove the hypothesis. It was utterly unscientific.

Life Sciences = Biology It most certainly is not a "dumb name", and attempting an ad hom like that is foolish.

What's an "engenier"?

(Taredas, I don't watch Stargate...)

And you came up with all these conclusions from this?

As part of the science curriculum at the school, all 24 middle school students were required to create a science project, which counts as a test grade. They also had to keep a journal, recounting all of their deliberations while going through the scientific process.

Brian Benson, an eighth-grade student who won first place in the Life Science/Biology category for his project “Creation Wins!!!,” says he disproved part of the theory of evolution. Using a rolled-up paper towel suspended between two glasses of water with Epsom Salts, the paper towel formed stalactites. He states that the theory that they take millions of years to develop is incorrect.

Scientists say it takes millions of years to form stalactites,” Benson said. “However, in only a couple of hours, I have formed stalactites just by using paper towel and Epsom Salts.”

Sorry, but that is not enough information to get all those conclusions, nor most of the conclusions here on this topic. Which makes me believe most opinins here are heavily biased and not based on the information avaiable.

This is nothing but a witch hunt.

Btw, engenier is the word people who dont have english as their main language use when they make mistakes.

Life sciences... Ok, but his project went there just because it deals with evolution?

5*1 + 2*2, surely?

Mea culpa. I was gonna write (2 divided by 1/2) ansd lost the thread somewhere.

Your scientific genious astounds me!

I was taught early on, like in 5th grade... that the sky appears blue during the day because of the mixture of the gases and water in the atmosphere. Much like the one girls milk project when the light shines on it from certain angles the colors change. Rainbows are formed by the same phenomena when there is an abundance of water in the atmoshpere.

Well, I once wred that the sky is blue because of Cherenkov radiation, UV that is released when light moves into a medium where the speed of light is lower, eg the atmosphere. That appears to not be a significant factor after all.

You know how the most intense blue sky is in the desert, or generally when the atmosphere is hot and dry? The water vapour actually makes it paler (whiter but still blue.) Also from high-altitude pictures, the sky is a purer and purer blue verging to black as you get higher.

____________

If the girl had entitled her entry "Why God's Sky is blue" she would surely have done better. Her thesis could have gone something like "Hell is all hot and full of red flames and it's under the ground. Heaven, being up in the sky, is cool and made of blue, because blue is the opposite colour on the range of colours thingy. Also, I've seen a picture of God and he wears a blue robe. So the sky is blue because it is God's favourite colour."

I kept reading satellites instead of stalactites and I was trying to figure out how a kid formed a moon for a science fair project...

I can imagine the next news story: 'Child wins science fair project by proving the existance of God, be simply handing in a Bible for the project'.

:D I also read that 3 out of 4 people make up 75% of the population.
the overwhelming majority of the population have a greater than average number of legs.

I kept reading satellites instead of stalactites and I was trying to figure out how a kid formed a moon for a science fair project...
LOL, yeah, some kid won first place in a school science fair and all he did was create a moon in a few hours.

They give out prizes for anything these days....:D

Sorry, but that is not enough information to get all those conclusions, nor most of the conclusions here on this topic. Which makes me believe most opinins here are heavily biased and not based on the information avaiable.

This is nothing but a witch hunt.

Would you prefer it if we pointed out that this "award winning" research was probably plucked from the internet witthout any contribution of the child instead of focussing on the quality of the research ?

Note the word probably ;)

the overwhelming majority of the population have a greater than average number of legs.

True.

Let us suppose that in the UK there are 60,000,000 people.
Let us suppose that 5,000 have one leg.

That's (119,990,000 + 5,000)/60,000,000 = c. 1.9999167

Most people therefore have more than the average number of legs, as most have 2 as opposed to 1.999..., which is the average.


@Northern Borders:
Funnily enough, I think that the basis for all of those conclusions are pretty obvious in that text.
Or are you missing the fact that it says "He states that the theory that they take millions of years to develop is incorrect."
And "Scientists say it takes millions of years to form stalactites,” Benson said. “However, in only a couple of hours, I have formed stalactites just by using paper towel and Epsom Salts.”"
Disputing one of the fundamental precepts of geology. As Daistallia said.

The kid can be excused on the grounds that they're too young to know any better. The parents, teachers, and judges are brainless cretins.

I agree wholeheartedly.

the overwhelming majority of the population have a greater than average number of legs.whose number of legs?

If only creationists knew as much about reproduction as they do about other aspects of science.

Maybe he didnt understood it. Maybe the others didnt too. And I´m pretty sure most people DONT understand the scientific method. Just because you, Ilaer or anyone else knows it, doesnt mean the kid does.

And he doesnt need to know it, he just has to be better than the other ones. And when you compare his project to calcium kid and puppy eyes girl, you can probabily find more of the scientific method in his work than in the other two combined.

Even through he won first in Life Sciences (which is a pretty dumb name) he would probabily place last if he was directly competing against the engenier or physics guys.

He didn't just not do science, but he made the mistake of claiming that if I disprove one theory the other theory "wins".

John hypothesizes that shelflife of a potato is 12 hours.

I hypothesize that the shelflife of a potato is 18 Billion years.

After 13 hours the potato is fine. John is wrong, therefore I am right. Yes, when I was in 8th grade, I understood how unscientific that premise is.

Meanwhile, on what do you base your claim that the provably unscientific project was MORE scientific than the other projects?

He didn't just not do science, but he made the mistake of claiming that if I disprove one theory the other theory "wins".

John hypothesizes that shelflife of a potato is 12 hours.

I hypothesize that the shelflife of a potato is 18 Billion years.

After 13 hours the potato is fine. John is wrong, therefore I am right. Yes, when I was in 8th grade, I understood how unscientific that premise is.

Meanwhile, on what do you base your claim that the provably unscientific project was MORE scientific than the other projects?

Not only that, but the kid din't even disprove the theory. Epsom salts on a strip of paper towel are not stalactites. Perhaps he should have sat in a limestone cave in an area where there are no stalactites and tried to see if they would form within a few hours, days, or years. That, if it had happened, would have proven his hypothesis. Or more likely shown him how stupid the idea was.

Not only that, but the kid din't even diprove the theory. epcom salts on a strip of paper towel are not stalactites. Perhaps he should have sat in a limestone cave in an area where there are no stalactites and tried to see if the would form within a few hours, days, or years. That, if it had happened, would have proven his hypothesis. Or more likely shown him how stupid the idea was.

I'd be happy if he'd actually used the same materials even using a catalyst to speed up the process. This wasn't even close. And they put it in life sciences because he wrong connects two seperate theories and claims that by this connection he proves a third unrelated theory. It's just sad.

Amusingly enough, it doesn't stop certain posters from claiming it's the most scientific project since it ignored science completely.

I guess that puppy dog eyes one used the hypothesis "My dog has eyes therefore... oh, look shiny."

Darwins boat driver to the galpagos was creationist and he commited suicide when he learnt about it, Darwin was stuck for a few days.

Darwins boat driver to the galpagos was creationist and he commited suicide when he learnt about it, Darwin was stuck for a few days.

That's the dumbest thing I ever heard. Link? Darwin's work wasn't even that compelling. Why would anyone commit suicide over it?

EDIT: On review, he committed suicide way later because he felt responsible for it and its damage to creation, NOT based on the research alone and NOT while they were out.

Ain't that the truth? :D
Although they may not be for much longer; I assume, then, that you're originally British? If so, then might I ask whether you've been keeping up with the news regarding grammar schools recently?
It doesn't look good to me.

The Conservatives are all but abandoning grammar schools and 'twinning' is being proposed between grammars and failing comprehensives, making the already large burden that grammars face even heavier.


Originally British, yes. You even know my school, probably... since I'm pretty sure there are football games (real football, not this foreign muck) between them... at least there were in 'my day'.

http://www.carres.lincs.sch.uk/

In my day, it was Labour attacking the grammar school system, and the Tories were fighting a 'last stand'. It'd be a shame to see the system finally pulled down. :(


Good point. Although most working weeks that I know of are five days in length.
Now what about the deaths one? :)

I don't think I've ever worked a 5 day work week. :) It could be to do with the fact that I've usually either worked places with huge workloads, places with 'swing' or night shifts... or places (like entertainment venues) which don't folow a 'normal' schedule. :)

The deaths.. I don't know. It's just a statistic - and everyone knows 76% of statistics are made up on the spot...

what is grammar school there? here it's another word for elementary school, for kids from like 5 to 10 years old.

The last bastion of selective education. Grammar schools are (supposed to be) what happens when you realise that... while conventional schools do not comfortable allow for people who fall behind 'the curve'... they really aren't doing any favours to those before the curve, either.

That's the dumbest thing I ever heard. Link? Darwin's work wasn't even that compelling. Why would anyone commit suicide over it?

EDIT: On review, he committed suicide way later because he felt responsible for it and its damage to creation, NOT based on the research alone and NOT while they were out.

It was just something I heard and found funny, I imagined some random scientist sitting on some tortoise's head in torn up clothes waiting for somebody to rescue him.

Ahaha, funniest thing I've read in a long time.

Darwins boat driver to the galpagos was creationist and he commited suicide when he learnt about it, Darwin was stuck for a few days.

Thus proving natural selection works. :)

Anyway, yes, they should give it to the one that sucks less. Shit, the stuff all those kids did was pretty dumb. BUT not for their ages. You have to take that into account.

Btw, I think the projects of the other kids were far more interesting. Like the one about the sky color and how to clear algae from lakes, or something like that. These are interesting. But the evolution guy was competing against Puppy eyes dogs and calcium bones.

And both of those projects have the potential to hold infinitely more science than the garbage this kid turned in.

Sorry, but that is not enough information to get all those conclusions, nor most of the conclusions here on this topic. Which makes me believe most opinins here are heavily biased and not based on the information avaiable.

The fact that they call it a science project and the students were supposed to detail going through the scientific process doesn't lead to the conclusion that the project should be scientific and follow said process?

Life sciences... Ok, but his project went there just because it deals with evolution?

...except it doesn't. Thus, if the teachers placed it there - and especially if they gave him a prize for the project, it is clear that they don't any more of an idea what they are talking about than he does.

And both of those projects have the potential to hold infinitely more science than the garbage this kid turned in.



The fact that they call it a science project and the students were supposed to detail going through the scientific process doesn't lead to the conclusion that the project should be scientific and follow said process?



...except it doesn't. Thus, if the teachers placed it there - and especially if they gave him a prize for the project, it is clear that they don't any more of an idea what they are talking about than he does.

BIAS. Stupid reality biased towards logic and all.