61
   

Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

 
 
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Fri 22 Apr, 2011 06:30 am
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
China's increased demand for commodities will continue to lessen the supply and increase the price for copper and other building materials. Gold isn't one of them, and not at $1,500/ounce.


Which is a very pretty example of thinking in a box of your own design. A bit like Einstein with his "catching light" dragster.

It fails to take account of how the Yang addresses the Yin in an economic boom. Diamonds Are a Girl's Best Friend. Science with sex on Ignore. Puissant misogyny. Like evolution with sex not only on Ignore but pointedly so. Stubbornly. Fatuously. Anti-evolution at bottom.
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Fri 22 Apr, 2011 06:40 am
@farmerman,
Yeah!! But the modern version is a carapace of brilliantine words which in really Big Wigs can totally enclose the organism inside an impenetrable radiating shell. As with Prof. Dawkins.

It's more hygienic and comfortable than piles of horsehair on the noddle because the nits it attracts don't itch.

0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Apr, 2011 10:34 am
@spendius,
What do you mean by box? You need to show your words that has some relationship to my statement. You only go into tangents without any direct relationship.

How did you manage to complete your education in any institution of learning? Your answers make no sense to the topic under discussion.

When I talk about cars, you answer that includes Dawkins makes no sense to anyone except to yourself.
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Fri 22 Apr, 2011 02:01 pm
@cicerone imposter,
"His head's in a shed" is a well known expression here ci. I used box because I thought you might not know it. Imagine a box with a hole in the bottom for you to stick your head in and all the interior surfaces are mirrors. That sort of box. You need one if those to Ignore the causality of Yinning. I thought it very direct.

It applies to the topic because it shows that in the box Yinning doesn't impinge on your notions of evulution just as it doesn't on the gold price. But the gold price is affected by other things than just Yinning but evolution is affected by nothing else. Hence "sexual selection". Which means that people reading your thoughts on evolution should take those considerations into account before taking any notice of them. Which those who also have Yinning on Ignore, which is about as ridiculous as it's possible to get intellectually, might well agree with you. And those who see Yinning as the central plank of evolution theory won't agree with you.

Public explanations having to restrict themselves to saying that there are "controversial issues" for rather obvious reasons. Yinning is only discussed when the port and cigars come out and the ladies adjourn to the outer sitting room. The problem most of the great novelists have wrestled with during our Enlightenment era. Some scientists too only instead of jokes they use complicated sentences that only the initiates can understand. Veblen combines both.

My education is not complete either. That's a very typical thing for oms to say. They must assume their own education is complete to say it insultingly. Probably, by the look of it, at an early age. As if there is something inferior about not have completed one's education.

Less poetic than "box" but none the worse for that. And that might explain why my posts make no sense. There might be fifty years since your education was completed and came to rest. I feel that I have hardly got started.

I meant that Dawkins has his head in a shed too. Except when he's pretending he isn't being Yinned. I don't think he could do what he does if he hadn't.
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Fri 22 Apr, 2011 02:21 pm
@spendius,
I don't suppose you know ci. but Lady Docker had a gold toilet seat on the yacht. So you can see from that, as an extreme case, that the demand for gold by Yinners is a function of the economic state of play and potentially limitless or as near as makes no difference. From a plank with arse holes in it over a pit to the modern ladies' powder room in just over a century is "progress". Lady Docker's artwork being a symbolic prophecy. Ya dig?

So an economic boom in the far east will create a demand for gold, Yinners being the same the world over once they get yinning, and if the suppliers restrict supply the price could treble which would be a good thing because the larger the expense the better the compliment. There being nothing to replace gold not even if it is dearer. Have you ever heard Salvadore Dali say gold whilst salivating.

Gold bathroom fittings are "up there".
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Apr, 2011 04:13 pm
@spendius,
Your private use of words such as "box" that has no meaning beyond your local pub doesn't apply as anything but b.s. I'm sure you've already stuck your head in that hole, and found more **** than you imagined.

That some wealthy individual can have a toilet seat built with gold only shows its real use for that commodity.

Your understanding of supply vs demand doesn't exist; you're another one of the ignorant one who follow the crowd that's been buying up gold to the current pricing level of over $1,500/ounce.

Stupidity knows no bounds. When anyone tries to buy anything without "cash" in hand or in the bank, it only shows they are out of their depths to understanding the value of money.

Do the math, if you are capable.
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Fri 22 Apr, 2011 04:57 pm
@cicerone imposter,
I got in at $320 ci. I saw all this **** coming. And it isn't over with yet. Not when Obama thinks Assad is going to take any notice of his finger wagging homilies.

We have seen queues outside banks and they were bailed out. Maybe too big to fail and too big to bail out as well.

You're just mad because you didn't see it coming. And it was glaringly obvious.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Apr, 2011 05:00 pm
@spendius,
When do you think a good time to sell would be?
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Fri 22 Apr, 2011 05:10 pm
@reasoning logic,
I don't know. But I think I will when the time comes.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Apr, 2011 05:20 pm
@reasoning logic,
apparently spendius did not have much faith in GW Bush also.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Apr, 2011 05:50 pm
@farmerman,
You may have a valid point but what if he is using a global perspective?

When do you think that we may be able to synthetically make gold if ever?
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Apr, 2011 06:01 pm
@reasoning logic,
Theres a rule in investing. (Gold, by the way , is not an investment like stocks, because we are taxed on its gains as if it were a "collectible"). Anyway, back to the rule of investing.

Bulls make money
Bears make money
Pigs rarely make money.

As ci intimated, never buy and just hang on, buy and take incrimental profits, that way when gold's big correction comes, you wont lose everything, you will have cashed in at several
highs.

I subscribe to BArrons . It has never really made me a lot of money. BUT it has prevented me from losing sizeable chunks.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Apr, 2011 06:06 pm
@farmerman,
Thanks for the advice I will research what you have shared because I do think that much of what you share is credible
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Apr, 2011 05:07 am
@reasoning logic,
fm's advice is useless rl. GW Bush had nothing to do with my choices. He was as much a prisoner of circumstances as the rest of us.

Bulls and bears lose money as well as making it.

Read J K Galbraith's The Great Crash.

Remember one thing--if you know about something from reading about it everybody else does also. Barrons are not going to tell you anything useful. Anything useful they would keep to themselves. They sell hope rather than expertise. Salvation in this world. The Yanger's version of a beautification industry. It does nothing for me. fm's credibilty ebbed years ago. I know what Ignore means. The idea that it is "smart" is ridiculous.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Apr, 2011 05:29 am
@spendius,
Spendi is backpedalling because he didnt know that the price of gold was at 325 (last time) in 2002.
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Apr, 2011 05:53 am
LOUISIANA UPDATE
Quote:
Nobel laureates push repeal of Louisiana Science Education law
(The Associated Press, April 21, 2011)

More than 40 Nobel Prize-winning scientists are urging Gov. Bobby Jindal and Louisiana lawmakers to repeal a law that allows public school science teachers to use supplemental materials in their classrooms beyond state-approved textbooks.

In a letter, the Nobel laureates say the "Louisiana Science Education Act" of 2008 creates a pathway for creationism to be taught in science classes.

A Jindal spokeswoman says the governor opposes any attempts to repeal the law.

The scientists' letter was circulated Thursday by high school student Zack Kopplin, who has set up a blog pushing the law's repeal. Sen. Karen Carter Peterson, a Democrat from New Orleans, has filed legislation for the session that begins Monday to do away with the law.

Guidelines adopted by the state education board ban promotion of a religious doctrine in the supplemental materials.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Apr, 2011 05:59 am
@wandeljw,
This was exactly the same procedure that was follwed in Edwards v Aguillard. Except the number of Nobel LAureates in that one was only 33.

It would be even more compelling if several of the Churches and Religious Organizations would also call for repeal
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Apr, 2011 06:04 am
@farmerman,
I was looking over the LSA and its amazing that, in the Supreme Court decsison of Edwards and even Kitzmiller, the act of teaching these beliefs is considered religious (And in each decsision, the resources supporting Creationism and ID are clearly defined as religious). YET, in the Louisiana Act, there is a loophole that allows the use of outside resources to assist teaching "critical thinking".
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Apr, 2011 06:14 am
@farmerman,
Even worse, the governor, Bobby Jindal is opposed to its repeal.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Apr, 2011 07:17 am
@farmerman,
Quote:
Spendi is backpedalling because he didnt know that the price of gold was at 325 (last time) in 2002.


Oh yeah!! Tweet it from the tree-tops.

And it's a non-sequitur as well.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.42 seconds on 07/15/2025 at 10:08:29