Bush: Intelligent Design Should Be Taught

Frank Apisa wrote:

Hey Woiyo...be careful.

Yogi is a Jersey boy! He's allowed.

Actually born in St. Louis, but most well known in Jersey.

Have you visited his Museum?? Just as good a Cooperstown and Yankee Stadium itself IMO.

0 Replies

Come on now, Bush ain't got not'in on Yogi!

"We've had a great weekend here in the Land of the Enchanted."?-Albuquerque, N.M., May 12, 2003 (New Mexico's state nickname is "Land of Enchantment.") Enchantment adjective form used instead of noun

"We've got hundreds of sites to exploit, looking for the chemical and biological weapons that we know Saddam Hussein had prior to our entrance into Iraq."?-Santa Clara, Calif., May 2, 2003 (Thanks to Michael Shively.)

"I think war is a dangerous place."?-Washington, D.C., May 7, 2003 event? improper noun use

"I don't bring God into my life to?-to, you know, kind of be a political person."?-Interview with Tom Brokaw aboard Air Force One, April 24, 2003

"You're free. And freedom is beautiful. And, you know, it'll take time to restore chaos and order?-order out of chaos. But we will."?-Washington, D.C., April 13, 2003 Noun confusion

"Perhaps one way will be, if we use military force, in the post-Saddam Iraq the U.N. will definitely need to have a role. And that way it can begin to get **** its legs, legs of responsibility back."?-the Azores, Portugal, March 16, 2003 back up on Dropped words

"I know there's a lot of young ladies who are growing up wondering whether or not they can be champs. And they see the championship teams from USC and University of Portland here, girls who worked hard to get to where they are, and they're wondering about the example they're setting. What is life choices about?"?-Washington, D.C., Feb. 24, 2003 Unclear references

"Now, we talked to Joan Hanover. She and her husband, George, were visiting with us. They are near retirement?-retiring?-in the process of retiring, meaning they're very smart, active, capable people who are retirement age and are retiring."?-Alexandria, Va., Feb. 12, 2003 (Thanks to Dennis Doubleday.)

"Columbia carried in its payroll classroom experiments from some of our students in America."?-Bethesda, Md., Feb. 3, 2003 payload Sounds-like

"And, most importantly, Alma Powell, secretary of Colin Powell, is with us."?-Washington, D.C., Jan. 30, 2003 wife object adjective applied to subject

"The war on terror involves Saddam Hussein because of the nature of Saddam Hussein, the history of Saddam Hussein, and his willingness to terrorize himself."?-Grand Rapids, Mich., Jan. 29, 2003 his people improper object

"When Iraq is liberated, you will be treated, tried, and persecuted as a war criminal."?-Washington, D.C., Jan. 22, 2003 (Thanks to Chad Conwell.) Saddam & Co. improper object

"Many of the punditry?-of course, not you (laughter)?-but other punditry were quick to say, no one is going to follow the United States of America."?-Washington, D.C., Jan. 21, 2003 pundits improper noun use

"One year ago today, the time for excuse-making has come to an end."?-Washington, D.C., Jan. 8, 2003 came improper verb use

"I think the American people?-I hope the American-I don't think, let me?-I hope the American people trust me."?-Washington, D.C., Dec. 18, 2002

"The goals for this country are peace in the world. And the goals for this country are a compassionate American for every single citizen. That compassion is found in the hearts and souls of the American citizens."?-Washington, D.C., Dec. 19, 2002 (Thanks to Michael Shively.)

"There's only one person who hugs the mothers and the widows, the wives and the kids upon the death of their loved one. Others hug but having committed the troops, I've got an additional responsibility to hug and that's me and I know what it's like."?-Washington, D.C., Dec. 11, 2002 ?

"In other words, I don't think people ought to be compelled to make the decision which they think is best for their family."?-Washington, D.C., Dec. 11, 2002 (Thanks to Stephanie Nichols.) able verb inversion

"Sometimes, Washington is one of these towns where the person?-people who think they've got the sharp elbow is the most effective person." ?-New Orleans, Dec. 3, 2002 (Thanks to Michael Shively.) elbows improper cliche

http://www.dslextreme.com/users/markpoyser/uggabugga/2002/bushisms.htm

0 Replies

woiyo wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
Hey Woiyo...be careful.

Yogi is a Jersey boy! He's allowed.

Actually born in St. Louis, but most well known in Jersey.

Have you visited his Museum?? Just as good a Cooperstown and Yankee Stadium itself IMO.

Never have visited it. Yogi is one of the most interesting "personalities" ever. And he managed to cash-in big-time on his famous sayings.

I love the guy.

Where is the museum? (Here in New Jersey???)

0 Replies

"I know how hard it is for you to put food on your family.".G.W. Bush -Greater Nashua, N.H., Chamber of Commerce, Jan. 27, 2000

http://members.aol.com/mike6099/curny.jpg

0 Replies

D'artagnan wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
D'artagnan wrote:
The hair-splitting by some of the righties on this thread is amusing to watch. "Show me where he said we should teach intelligent design."

Speaking of intelligent design, I think we need some coming from the White House...

Yes, what you call hair-splitting, most other people call the conventional rules of debate. If you want to maintain that someone said something, yes, you actually have to produce a quotation from the person saying it. Oh, poor you, expected to adhere to the age old rules of honorable debate.

The quotation was cited repeatedly earlier in this thread. And I read the same quotation in the paper this morning. Does it need to be posted here again?

The Bush quotation originally posted was merely this:

Quote:

I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought," Bush said. "You're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, the answer is yes.

I myself posted the more complete quotation, and even from that, it is not entirely clear what he is advocating. However, my above remarks refer only to your remarks:

D'artagnan wrote:

The hair-splitting by some of the righties on this thread is amusing to watch. "Show me where he said we should teach intelligent design."

The only thing that's amusing here is your opinion that it is unfair to ask someone to support his accusation.

0 Replies

I'm curious as to why "intelligent design" merits presentation as a "different school of thought"? Because Bush's fundamentalist constituency demands it?

What if another subculture insisted that the sun revolves around the earth? Should that be taught as a "different school of thought"?

And they say liberal are relativists...

0 Replies

D'artagnan wrote:

I'm curious as to why "intelligent design" merits presentation as a "different school of thought"? Because Bush's fundamentalist constituency demands it?

What if another subculture insisted that the sun revolves around the earth? Should that be taught as a "different school of thought"?

And they say liberal are relativists...

I personally think ID is utter nonsense that need not be mentioned in any school, however, the point I tried to make in this thread was that Bush did not clearly advocate presenting them as scientific theories of equal stature. If you go by what Bush actually said (as if you would), it was kind of a non-answer as though he was trying to please everyone.

0 Replies

My previous post concerned what he DID say, Brandon. That students should be "exposed" to ID.

0 Replies

D'artagnan wrote:

My previous post concerned what he DID say, Brandon. That students should be "exposed" to ID.

Yes, and my previous post answered it. His use of the word "exposed" is not very specific.

0 Replies

Brandon9000 wrote:

D'artagnan wrote:
My previous post concerned what he DID say, Brandon. That students should be "exposed" to ID.

Yes, and my previous post answered it. His use of the word "exposed" is not very specific.

Well, with all due respect, that's what I meant earlier by "hair splitting."

If the teachers expose students to ID, then presumably they are meant to discuss it. On the one hand, one the other hand...That sort of thing.

0 Replies

D'artagnan wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
D'artagnan wrote:
My previous post concerned what he DID say, Brandon. That students should be "exposed" to ID.

Yes, and my previous post answered it. His use of the word "exposed" is not very specific.

Well, with all due respect, that's what I meant earlier by "hair splitting."

If the teachers expose students to ID, then presumably they are meant to discuss it. On the one hand, one the other hand...That sort of thing.

Until he says that it should be presented in a science class on an equal footing with evolution, he cannot be justly accused of saying that. He might have meant that it should be given a two minute discussion in some non-science class.

0 Replies

Brandon9000 wrote:

Until he says that it should be presented in a science class on an equal footing with evolution, he cannot be justly accused of saying that. He might have meant that it should be given a two minute discussion in some non-science class.

Well...I was giving some credence to your arguments here, Brandon...but you may have gone a bit too far in that paragraph.

Bush did indicate he thought it should be considered alongside evolution theories....and that is not likely to be taught in non-science classes.

I realize any skilled debater...and I consider you to be one...could attack this comment. But the thrust of Bush's (non) remarks...although carefully worded so as to allow plenty of wiggle room...seem to indicate he sees it appropriate to intrude this stuff into a science based class.

0 Replies

Brandon9000 wrote:

Until he says that it should be presented in a science class on an equal footing with evolution, he cannot be justly accused of saying that. He might have meant that it should be given a two minute discussion in some non-science class.

Well...I was giving some credence to your arguments here, Brandon...but you may have gone a bit too far in that paragraph.

Bush did indicate he thought it should be considered alongside evolution theories....and that is not likely to be taught in non-science classes.

I realize any skilled debater...and I consider you to be one...could attack this comment. But the thrust of Bush's (non) remarks...although carefully worded so as to allow plenty of wiggle room...seems to indicate he sees it appropriate to intrude this stuff into a science based class.

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
Until he says that it should be presented in a science class on an equal footing with evolution, he cannot be justly accused of saying that. He might have meant that it should be given a two minute discussion in some non-science class.

Well...I was giving some credence to your arguments here, Brandon...but you may have gone a bit too far in that paragraph.

Bush did indicate he thought it should be considered alongside evolution theories....and that is not likely to be taught in non-science classes.

I realize any skilled debater...and I consider you to be one...could attack this comment. But the thrust of Bush's (non) remarks...although carefully worded so as to allow plenty of wiggle room...seems to indicate he sees it appropriate to intrude this stuff into a science based class.

If he didn't say it, he didn't say it. He said only what can be found in his quotation, that the kids should be exposed to different ideas. That is a very vague recommendation. We can't say for sure what he was advocating unless he says more.

0 Replies

Brandon9000 wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
Until he says that it should be presented in a science class on an equal footing with evolution, he cannot be justly accused of saying that. He might have meant that it should be given a two minute discussion in some non-science class.

Well...I was giving some credence to your arguments here, Brandon...but you may have gone a bit too far in that paragraph.

Bush did indicate he thought it should be considered alongside evolution theories....and that is not likely to be taught in non-science classes.

I realize any skilled debater...and I consider you to be one...could attack this comment. But the thrust of Bush's (non) remarks...although carefully worded so as to allow plenty of wiggle room...seems to indicate he sees it appropriate to intrude this stuff into a science based class.

If he didn't say it, he didn't say it. He said only what can be found in his quotation, that the kids should be exposed to different ideas. That is a very vague recommendation. We can't say for sure what he was advocating unless he says more.

Well...he was very, very, very careful not to say it....I'll give you that.

So I guess we all have to play dumb...in order to be considered patriotic...and respectful to the president.

Brandon!

Open your eyes.

He said: ""I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought," "You're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, the answer is yes."

Obviously he is saying that ID should be taught (or mentioned) alongside the theory of evolution.

Where would the theory of evolution be taught?

In English class...in phys ed...in home economics?

He was saying that it should be covered in a science class.

That is all I said.

I did not assert he wanted it taught as co-equal.

Merely that your suggestion that he might have meant that it be touched on in a "two minute discussion in some non-science class"...was naive.

My exact wording was: "Well...I was giving some credence to your arguments here, Brandon...but you may have gone a bit too far in that paragraph.

Bush did indicate he thought it should be considered alongside evolution theories....and that is not likely to be taught in non-science classes. "

Right?

0 Replies

Bush knows intelligent design is rubbish. Brandon is right though, Bush didn't want to come right out and say it and disturb the Evangelicals who supported him, so he phrased his response carefully.

0 Replies

I'm not sure that Bush believes ID is rubbish, but who knows. I've a feeling that he's perfectly capable of believing whatever BS his core audience wants him to believe...

0 Replies

intelligent design, if it must be discussed in public schools, really belongs in a religious history or philosophy class, i.e. an elective class.

as free duck pointed out earlier, the truth is we don't know for certain just how this universe came into being. yes, there is a lot of scientific evidence for what came after the big bang, such as evolution, but in origin we have nothing solid to point at and say "this all exists because xyz put it into motion". even the theory of a previously existent universe that was compressed to the size of a grapefruit which then exploded with a big, big bang does not address how that previous universe, or universes, came into being.

what i'm saying is, a science class should stick to items that are either proven science or theoreticals based on scientific methods. in essence, when discussing natural history and science, it makes as much sense to chime in with "i like cheerios better" as it does to make claims of a an intelligent design.

not saying that intelligent design offers no brain teasers, just that it is not science.

but, put id in the same comparative religion class with buddhism, hinduism, islam, judeaism, christianism, sun worship, celtism, shinto, odin and scientology and the dynamic changes completely. it becomes fully appropriate to the discussion.

and as others here have mentioned, if it was decided to include intelligent design in public school science classes, all of the above beliefs, and others not listed, would also have to be discussed equally.

that wouldn't leave much time to disect frogs, grow mold or any of that cool science stuff in the science class, would it ?

0 Replies

http://www.bartcop.com/monkey-monkey.gif

0 Replies

ee-ee-ee-oo-oo-oo-ah-ah-ah !!!!!!

0 Replies

Bush: Intelligent Design Should Be Taught

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know