what was your quote. Judge jones wife is quite ill, so your reference backfired a bit.
I apologise.I didn't know that.Give her my best wishes if you can.
timberlandko wrote:Spendi, I doubt there are many folks who could produce quotes on the order of yours ...
Nor yet again want to do so . . .
Gee-that's witty Mr Setanta.How much do you charge for lessons? It's always been an ambition of mine to be able to hold my end up in intellectual discourse and inspire laughter and wonder in my companions.
Is there a secret or is it simply a natural gift beyond the capacities of mere mortals such as myself?
This just in:
Evolution Measure Splits State Legislators in Utah
Interesting in that Mormons see themselves as evolving creatures.
Joe(onward)Nation
aw ****, now Im gonna have to pay 5 bucks for a huge pile of wrist watch ads
Quote:The Utah bill's main sponsor, State Senator D. Chris Buttars, a Republican from the Salt Lake City suburbs, said he was not surprised by the debate it had inspired. He said ordinary voters were deeply concerned about the teaching of evolution.
"I got tired of people calling me and saying, 'Why is my kid coming home from high school and saying his biology teacher told him he evolved from a chimpanzee?' " Mr. Buttars said.
Why didn't he ask them to ask their dumb kid, "Really?" because the science of evolution doesn't even come to implying any such thing, then tell the little twerp to quithisbellyaching and go study.
Joe(looks a little apish)Nation
Thanks Joe, we usually get the NYT on Tues and Sundays but today we only got Wash and Lancaster Sun Paper. (article was in the Post).
Our house looks like a birdcage on Mon mornings because SOME PEOPLE DONT CLEAN UP THE FUNNIES>
Thanks for the news item, Joe Nation.
The Utah state senate bill seems to be another example of the "teach the controversy" anti-evolution tactic.
I am also waiting to hear the Appeals Court (11th Circuit) decision in Selman v. Cobb County School District. That is the appeal concerning last year's U.S. District Court opinion that a Georgia school district must remove their evolution disclaimer sticker from biology textbooks.
The most recent information on the Cobb County appeal is a January 5, 2006 report on the NCSE website:
Quote:The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued an interim ruling on January 4, 2006, in the lawsuit over anti-evolution warning labels in textbooks in the Cobb County (GA) school district. The ruling clarifies the court's position on whether or not it was misled by attorney Jeffrey Bramlett, representing the plaintiffs-appellees, during oral argument on December 14, 2005, before Judges Frank Hull, William H. Pryor, and Edward E. Carnes. According to an article in the Fulton County Daily Report, "At the end of the argument, Judge Edward E. Carnes recalled Bramlett to the podium and demanded that he file an explanation for what Carnes suggested was a deliberate effort to mislead the court about the timeline during which the school board decided to put the stickers in books. Bramlett filed a 127-page response a week after the argument, and on Tuesday school board lawyer Ernest Linwood Gunn IV filed his version of the facts."
Wednesday's four-page court order clarified the matter, concluding, "The Court...does not find that counsel misled it or attempted to do so. We issue this order to remove any implication that either counsel did."
Confusion continues, however, over when, and even whether, the Cobb County school board considered a petition with 2,300 signatures from avowed creationist Marjorie Rogers. On January 5, 2006, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported that school board attorney Linwood Gunn expressed doubts as to whether the petition ever existed. The article also notes that the newspaper reported on March 29, 2002, that " ... the day the school board adopted the stickers, Rogers told the board she had collected signatures from 2,300 people who were dissatisfied with science texts that espoused 'Darwinism unchallenged,'" and that a few days later, "...a Journal-Constitution reporter examined the petitions at the Cobb school system offices and took notes on names and phone numbers of some of the people who had signed." Furthermore, the article notes that on April 14, 2002, "... the Journal-Constitution again reported that the school board had agreed to insert the stickers inside science texts in response to pressure from several dozen parents who criticized the teaching of evolution. The article said the parents had presented petitions with 2,000 names of county residents who demanded accuracy in textbooks. The Cobb school board did not challenge the existence of the petitions at that time."
The Court is expected to rule on the appeal sometime this year.
You really do need to try to get your head round your "King Lear" mode of thinking now that your president has used the phrase "addicted to oil" in the State of the Union.
Your guilt at being officially designated "junkies" mainlining on Superbowls and Meets in Chicago and drivel like "Does God Exist?" and Bio-deisel fantasies is nothing but ordinary,everyday,Freudian repression at its most girlish.
The State.com (an on-line South Carolina news service) has provided a "FAQ" for the current evolution education controversy in their state legislature.
Quote:Q: Why is the state debating how it teaches evolution?
A: Every five years, the state must review its curriculum standards. This year, Sen. Mike Fair, a Greenville Republican who is a member of the state's Education Oversight Committee, proposed a change to broaden what is taught about the origin of man. South Carolina schools currently teach evolution exclusively.
Q: Who has the ultimate say over the science standards?
A: The 17-member state Board of Education, which has some policymaking authority over the state Department of Education. The Education Oversight Committee, created by the Legislature in 1998 to measure academic progress in the state's public schools, must review the standards.
Q: With the science standards in limbo, how are biology teachers approaching evolution?
A: No one has surveyed all the districts, so it's unclear. Some districts contacted recently by The State say they are abiding by the 2000 standard of teaching evolution exclusively.
Q: Is this debate political, scientific or religious?
A: All three. It's religious because many Christians have long believed public schools should teach creationism, or the Bible's version of the origin of man. It's a scientific debate, too. Although most scientists back the teaching of evolution exclusively in public schools, there are some who advocate teaching "intelligent design" in addition to evolution.
But it's also a political debate because religious conservatives hold great sway in Republican politics in South Carolina. Those making the biggest push for alternatives to evolution are either elected Republicans or Republican appointees.
Don't you think that the Superbowl was something of a high religious festival complete with elaborate rituals,noise and colour,an adoring crowd of worshippers and a large dollop of dough safely in the bank.
I know I was flying a fancy watching it in the pub on a giant plasma but I sensed a true Faustian religious undertone.Dionysian without the grubby aspects.
I should think so too at only $600 a ticket.
How could a bunch of monkeys ever have managed that lot no matter how advanced they got and they've had a long time to get advanced.
God said "Let there be light" and lo there was light.
How could monkeys have light."Light",the word,is a symbol we men use.Monkeys are hopeless at symbolism.They could never have got their little heads around "The Firmament".
Something said-let there be a word for this stuff that shines down upon us.We'll find out what exactly it is later.Well-nearly exactly.
So "light" was created right there and then.It took seven days to put names to obvious parts of the rest of it.Less obvious parts are still being named.
All other religions except our's,the Faustian,twist the meaning of these symbols for various purposes.
We use them in a refined way,empirically tested and stamped BEST YET by our eminent scientists.
It isn't religion that is responsible for all the woes.It is the various purposes.You might as well blame the hammer when you crack your finger with it as blame religion.
wandel. Maybe the present strategy is not so much to deal with the precedent set in PA as it is to overwhelm the other districts until there arises a levelling out of judicial decisions.
I see that there is a new organization laughingly called "The Research Institute for Science and Religion run by a dude named William M Murphy. Hes come out totally swinging that all the basic findings and evidence of science that underpin evolution are wrong. He poses nothing in their place , hes just critiquing.
His background is a BS in some field like electronic and then hes gone into a Doctor of Divinity. He represents more a "project manager" rather than one of the key scientists.
spendius, we do enjoy our circus. However, unlike British soccer and /or Nascar, nobody dies.
Not so true FM. In the early 20th century Theodore Rex commissioned a study to determine why 18 college football players were killed during games in, I believe, 1903, The commission recommended a rule change and the 'flying wedge' was outlawed.
But then they still used leather helmets with no chin guards until the 40's.
Interestingly, even today the numbers of permanent crippling injuries and deaths resulting from Rugby is less then that caused by American football, although both are strong contact sports (unlike soccer supposedly is). There is a theory that this is the result of the protective equipment in football (protective equipment in Rugby is rubber buttons on the jersey). The theory says that when you're wearing a helmet, shoulder pads and your opponent is wearing the same, you tend to run full blast into each other, whereas in rugby you only hit your opponent hard enough to knock them off balance. Although the number of broken bones and minor concussion are more common in Rugby, you don't have as many broken necks resulting in quadra and paraplegics and massive brain trauma.
And most soccer deaths occur off the field.
Rap
Any full contact sport entails statistically significant risk of injury to participants, and many other sports do as well - skiing, for instance, or motorsports.
One in the role of specatator, not participant, is far more likely to be injured - or worse - during festivities arising from a soccer match than from anything involving an NFL game or a NASCAR event ... so much for European refinement.
cheezit, I was bein a smartass. I wasnt even serious. If I ever ask you guys for the time, Im sure Im gonna get a lecture on how to build sundials.
