Sarah Palin wants creationism taught in science classes

I propose that we teach the "Virgin Birth" in science class (and I certainly dont mean pathenogenesis).

I believe that MMis aware why Creationism violates the US Constitution, hes just being a Republican jihadist.

I have read that not being able to get gold for your dollar bills violates the constitution fm.

"People in hell want ice-water too, but they ain't gonna get it", as my ex-boss used to say

No wonder he's an ex if he trotted out shite like that on a regular basis. He was probably referring to your demands for a raise or somesuch ros.

You can have no creationism in science classes as long as you leave evolution theory out as well.

Is spendi still trying to act retarded or what?

It's not an act; it's for real.

You telling me phlogiston's been falsified????!!!!!!





Next damn thing is you're gonna tell me Van Leeuwenhoek's li'l barbs on the pepper grains aren't there!!!



Or miasma............

Are you lot not fed up yet fishing for red herrings? It's so easy.

We've been over the topic of teaching creationism in science classes so many times on A2K. The answer remains the same.

Creationism is not science. Teaching Creationism, if considered an appropriate topic, should only be taught in Comparative Religions classes. Keep it the hell out of science classes.

BBB

What precisely are your qualifications BBB for seeking to determine a national educational policy for 50 million kids. Your post suggests none.

Well, I'd say that she knows the difference between what is Science and what isn't. Better then many on the right wing.

Cycloptichorn

Science of what?

What is your qualification for challenging my statement?

BBB

Intelligence. But we digress.

I know this may shock some of you, but I gotta agree that creationism has no business being taught in a science class. Conversely, I also believe that in teaching evolution, it should be made clear that it does not explain how life began, but rather how living organisms evolve. There is a subtle difference that I think is often lost on everyone.

Of course, I do not claim to know all the finer points of evolution theory or how it is being taught, so my above statement may not reflect the current status of evolutionary theory. Maybe science does now claim to know for a fact how life began.

That I'm on A2K and you made the statement. It was a statement that any old gump could have made and education experts will have heard it millions of times. I was wondering why they hadn't consulted you about what to do about the national science curriculum when 3/4 of the population don't particularly want biology taught scientifically and probably 99.9% if it was done rigorously without reference to personal sensitivities.

You are so clever at creating diversions that it's become funny.

BBB

That's one way of not answering. farmerman knows thousands.

The last thing science needs is to be defended by folk who don't know any science. You made the remark.

There's a lot more to biology that the birds and the bees.

Interestingly, this is exactly what we continually have to remind Creationists.

People who understand Evolution know this, so it must have been explained to them at some point when they learned the theory.

Since Creationists don't seem to know this, I don't think the problem is that it hasn't been explained to them (we've explained it ourselves in bazillions of posts right here on A2K and it still isn't sinking in). I think the problem is that they aren't listening (all the way back into high school). And I think the reason they aren't listening is because evolution isn't really what bothers them. What really bothers them anything in nature which doesn't match biblical literalism (and that's a whole lot of stuff, like carbon dating and fossils and Big Bang and plate tectonics and [gasp] evolution).

Simple solution. Agree to teach creationism in science classes when they agree to teach evolution at church. Until then, the freaks f@ck off.