Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

@wandeljw,

wande-- I liked the "beneath the ground" line. The writer does deal in imagery so it's fair enough us conjuring up the imagery associated with "beneath the ground". I don't suppose it was just a cheap and easy rhyme for where the fossils are "found". As if we don't know where fossils are found.

And it was a bit "sugary". A nice tempting aura of sweet sickliness. Not like the stuff beneath the ground.

No poet there I'm afraid. Just another creep who thinks he's singing to stupid people in front of whom he is pretending there are easy answers.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Let him speak, will you? It's his thread. He knows what he said and he knows how any sane reader would likely construe it. You don't qualify, imho. That's 3 of you on this thread so far.

1 Reply

@electronicmail,

Nobody with even a passing familiarity with what you post would concede a point to you about what anyone, sane or otherwise, would construe from what other people write. You are rapidly acquiring a reputation for being the most clueless poster at this site. You apparently can't even read and understand the articles you link to the threads here.

2 Replies

@Setanta,

Quote:

So, the tea party senatorial candidate in Delaware who is calling for creationism to be taught in science classes is demonstrating her support for science?

There's an argument that says she is but unfortunately Setanta has it on Ignore as have a few others on here. Which procedure has no chance of demonstrating support for science as it is anathema to what science stands for.

Anybody making a scientific argument for teaching creationism in science classes is simply declared to be either drunk or on acid. And it's as good an argument as that for teaching evolution in science classes for adolescents because it is concerned with the same subject matter. Kid's brains.

Support for Science Competition. Tea Party 1 Setanta 0.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

EM, Two of the more prestigious elite universities reside in Texass and noone here has made any excuses for the idiotic activities of the state ed board, However, I dont think you can stigmatize an entire states student population . AS far as you "Knowing" TExas more than me or others, you are, as Setanta has said, slowly proving yourself to be more clueless than most and so, why should anyone accept your self congratulatory crap?

To, further, blame the teachers for the culture wars involving teaching evolution in schools, you are again talking right out your rectum , (which is beginning to appear to be the primary emitter of your communication efforts)

2 Replies

These anti-IDers do squabble amongst themselves a lot. First there's Ionus and now em. Neither batting for religion in schools.

Still--it allows fm to indulge a few minor variations on his obvious obsession. And to have a possible glimpse of real Texas public schools when the abstract utopian theorists have been cleared out of the way.

em was being poetic. He didn't mean nobody in Texas can read or doesn't want to learn anything. His image was for tone. The note from a strata a long way below these ivory towers of scientific excellence from whence issues a thin, high-pitched and attenuated squeal. Presumably for more funds leading ever onwards until government is entirely in the hands of expert scientists. I feel sure he didn't say such a thing about Texas public schools without having some first hand evidence.

1 Reply

And anyway- does--

Quote:

The TX public school students can't read and won't learn.

mean can't read and won't learn what these "educationalists" want them to. There's no chance of stopping the kids from reading what they want to read nor from eagerly soaking up learning like a sponge if it's what they want to learn.

They might well think that what adults want them to learn isn't worth their while. If the adults on these threads are anything to go by I don't think I would argue the point with the kids.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

. AS far as you "Knowing" TExas more than me or others,

The TX school board isn't the whole state of TX.

Quote:

To, further, blame the teachers for the culture wars involving teaching evolution in schools,

The teachers' union isn't "the teachers".

2 Replies

@electronicmail,

I think that youve bought the entire Teabagger line of bullshit. They have a curious antinomial way of developing their creed.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

They have a curious antinomial way of developing their creed

they **** chickens?

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

EM, Two of the more prestigious elite universities reside in Texass.... I dont think you can stigmatize an entire states student population .

The TX student population is not identical to the students in TX public schools.

Do you respond to posts or to voices in your head? Here I am agreeing with you no repeat NO taxpayers' money should go to teach religion in schools. What do you do if someone disagrees with you?

1 Reply

@electronicmail,

so whats so special about agreeing with me? I was commenting on your silly comments on teachers, unions, Texas ed, and inability of kids to read. Maybe you were just bemoaning your own ed experiences.
If you want to talk nonsense and you like to post baseless assertions, might I introduce you to our resident dyspsomaniac.

0 Replies

@electronicmail,

Quote:

The teachers' union isn't "the teachers".

fm knows what a teacher is em. All 3.2 million of the silly fuckers.

As I see it, from a scientific point of view, with that number of teachers and salaries being what they are, there is no way the average IQ of teachers significantly varies from the average in the general population. And in my experience there are as many below that average as there are above it. Maybe more due to sociological factors.

1 Reply

@spendius,

Quote:

As I see it, from a scientific point of view, with that number of teachers and salaries being what they are, there is no way the average IQ of teachers significantly varies from the average in the general population.

Were you drunk when you posted that. It makes absolutely no sense. You seem to be trying to sound like Neville Chamberlain. He too was famous for phraseological malaprops

1 Reply

@farmerman,

It makes sense to me. Assuming the number of teachers is what CBS News said it was in their report about the power of the teacher's union. What is your difficulty with it? Richard Hofstadter made the point in Anti-intellectualism in America, which I have read. It's self explanatory.

You should not assume that Mr Chamberlain's statements meant what it is seemingly convenient for you to think they meant.

No--I was not drunk. And you know I wasn't. If your arguments are posited on four stupidities which you believe for you own reasons, and on nothing else, there is nothing I can do about it. Do you subsist on delusions? You had em on acid to counter what he said. On what evidence was that based?

1 Reply

@spendius,

A poster called guigus wrote this on the "free will" thread--

Quote:

You are thinking as if the particle actually existed when it is just a possibility: you are confusing possible existence with actual existence, then turning possible existence in an attribute of actual existence, as if the latter preceded the former. It is the other way around: possible existence (the wave function) precedes actual existence (the particle).

Which perfectly describes your intellectual incoherence fm. Some would call it madness.

You confuse me possibly being drunk and em possibly being on LSD with me actually being drunk and em actually being on a trip. It looks to be the only argument you rely on. And what appears in a post has nothing to do with the state the poster is in from the point of view of the reader of it. It stands alone. You can't invent fantasies of your own to discredit it.

My sentence-

Quote:

As I see it, from a scientific point of view, with that number of teachers and salaries being what they are, there is no way the average IQ of teachers significantly varies from the average in the general population.

contains some subtlety, is concise and well expressed, and assumes intelligence in the reader and is not a typical expression of someone drunk.

And you do invent fantasies so often that it is fair to assume you do it all the time in your daily life. Like those women who imagine their husband is playing around because he might possibly be.

The twee assumptions you make about what would go on in the nation's classrooms if atheist Darwinians were put in charge of schools, a possible type of existence, is a more dramatic and dangerous manifestation of the paranoid condition and little to do with the vast range of actual existences which would result. It is just you playing with words to prop up your hatred of Christianity and it takes no notice of the actual kids in actual classrooms. Your hatred of Christianity is the totality of your position.

You are in indignant dispute with two anti-IDers now and you were instrumental in driving another (Frank Apisa) off A2K.

1 Reply

@spendius,

Quote:

You confuse me possibly being drunk and em possibly being on LSD with me actually being drunk and em actually being on a trip.

TRue dat. I cant deny my confusion since the symptoms are often overlapping. Please clarify, which are you? drunk or stoned?

2 Replies

@farmerman,

I'm neither and I'm wondering about your mental state. Why the invective?

farmerman wrote:

If you want to talk nonsense and you like to post baseless assertions,

You don't pretend to make accurate statements and you don't acknowledge corrections. Teachers v their union, entire state v public school enrollment, and so on.

Are you saying that the 85% admitted via HB 588 TX public high school grads in the entering class at UT Austin would have met the usual admission standards? That % excludes black males because all of them gained admission via athletic scholarship.
http://www.utexas.edu/news/2010/09/14/student_enrollment2010/

0 Replies

@farmerman,

How can anybody clarify anything for somebody as self-evidently stupid and as stubborn as you are fm? It's obvious that it is your own personal emotions which are in play and have been all along. And the same applies to the other members of your brainless claque. The Vatican is supposed to tumble to the ground because somebody alleged that a teacher in some remote location burned a cross on a kid's arm in a physics demo. I once singed a student's hair in a demo and we all laughed. It was, after all, a bit insignificant in view of the side-effects of certain scientific treatments which had been tested and peer-reviewed by experts.

The only objective here is to expose you to neutrals so they can evaluate the credibility of anti-ID. I don't try to have anything useful to say to bigots on either side of the fence. Nor do I expect to have.

You discrediting anti-ID and science is the reason some anti-IDers (em, Ionus and Frank Apisa that we know of) get you mad. And you them, which is understandable in view of the fact that they are shocked at anti-ID embracing the likes of you in its ranks and daily undermining their credibility: such as it is.

The only thing you know about critical thinking and empirical evidence is how to deploy the words as superiority symbols for audiences daft enough to think that's what they are.

I have never even seen LSD and many doctors recommend two pints of beer a day. The only reason you are obsessed with people being drunk or trippy is that it relieves you of answering their posts properly. It's a psychological lifebelt suitable for all occasions.

0 Replies

electronicmail & Pamela Rosa would make the perfect couple

email & rosa
sitting in a tree
L-Y-N-C-H-I-N-G

0 Replies

Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know