-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Another Creationist Teacher Bites The Dust
- Thread starter Skwim
- Start date
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
JustWondering2
Just the facts Ma'am
Funny MoF!! So you think it (ToE) should be debated in an 8th grade science class HUH? I'd like to be a fly on the wall for that discussion. Do you really think 8th graders know enough about science and it's methods to debate ToE? Or are you saying your side (creationist/YEers/bible fundamentalist/etc) would like to get a hold of our kids at an early age so you can plant the seed of your fairy tales before they are old enough to tell the difference, right? Go idea! Teach em myth instead of science so we can go back to the dark ages again!! You like medicine much? Leeches and blood letting? :no:
Lindsey-Loo
Steel Magnolia
This guy is a total nutjob. Apparently he was also branding his students with crosses.
So sick. I'm glad they fired him. A guy like that doesn't have any business around kids. What a psycho.
So sick. I'm glad they fired him. A guy like that doesn't have any business around kids. What a psycho.
croak
Trickster
I wonder why.
McBell
Unbound
There was essentially no public discussion by the Board after the executive session and little before it. What little discussion there was before the executive session was generated by Steve Thompson, Board member and public Freshwater supporter. Thompson said that he had recused himself from deliberations on the federal litigation (though not from administrative hearing deliberations) on advice from attorneys David Millstone and Sarah Moore (as had Barone), and he wanted to know what was different that allowed Barone to withdraw her self-recusal regarding administrative hearing matters. Thompson said I find a tremendous amount of hypocrisy in that decision.
The Panda's Thumb
I got admit, I just spent another 2 hours searching the internet for anything against evolution that was not labeled religious. The scientific community even says the only critism comes from the religious several sites calling for more atheism.
I can't even find one evolutionary biologist creating a path in error or for money apparently evolutionary biologists are the most uncorputable scientists and never make any errors.
It is just to perfect.
outhouse
Atheistically
you dont understand do you.
evolution is both fact and theory. :yes:
why would a scientist fight against facts?????
why should they ???
That evil spawn of evolution: Attornosaurus Rex
you dont understand do you.
evolution is both fact and theory. :yes:
why would a scientist fight against facts?????
Scientist routinely verify and challenge other theories and laws it is what makes science so great. Yet only religious nutcases can challenge evolution no real scientist would even want to.
Scientists pretty routinely make errors and their errors are exposed for all others to prevent future errors. Scientist are also caught tilling the pot or taking money to make a theory that helps the benefitor. Yet none of this happens in evolutional theory.
I understand completely. Its sad that men of reason don't see it.
Skwim
Veteran Member
Pulling crap out of thin air is no way to go through life, son.
As the evolutionist say prove me wrong.
It would take only one example. One example of a scientist challenging evolution and even proven wrong but he is not labeled as a creationist or a religious nutcase.
I will even accept a scientist that created an evolutionary error by mistake or for self promotion.
Of course from a credible scientific source.
If its all crap it should be fairly easy. 5 minutes tops.
camanintx
Well-Known Member
Let's see, there was Jean Baptiste Lamarck and his transmutation of species, James Mark Baldwin and his organic selection and Henry Fairfield Osborn and orthogenesis. None of them were labeled nutcases but they were all eventually proven wrong. The fact that no one has come up with a credible alternative in almost 100 years just speaks to the strength of the Theory of Evolution.
David M
Well-Known Member
That is because in science a scientific theory is a good as anything can ever get.
Thats because there is no evidence that contradicts the core concepts of the diversity of current species arising via descent with modification.
Yes, questioned by evidence. e.g. There was observed evidence that Newton explanation for gravity did not quite work on very large scales. However no credible questioner proposed that gravity was in fact angels pushing everything down.
It this is true, this guy shouldn't be fired; he should be fired ON!!!!:thud:
Gravity is also just a theory.
You know what a "theory" is in scientific terms don't you? A theory in science is an explanation for some part of reality that has been tested and is agreed upon by most scientists.
In the event that new evidence or information is found invalidating the currently accepted theory then that theory will be modified.
The usage by a scientist differs greatly from the non-scientists use of the word. A lay person (a non-scientist) might talk about a 'theory' as an unproven idea, or something the lay person is not certain of, but a scientist probably wouldn't.
camanintx
Well-Known Member
Such comments are totally uncalled for. Have you learned nothing from watching the news this last week?
tarasan
Well-Known Member
well considering not all christians deny evolution it would be more correct of you to talk about persecution of certian christian sects
Jacksnyte
Reverend
well considering not all christians deny evolution it would be more correct of you to talk about persecution of certian christian sects
Good point!