4/4 Texas Lt. Gov. candidates want creationism in classrooms

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by lamprey263 (22453 posts) -
#2 Posted by chessmaster1989 (28963 posts) -

Creationism does not belong in a science class.

#3 Edited by LittleMac19 (1638 posts) -

Dumb but I'm not surprised, being from Texas myself I predict the sheep will accept this willingly.

#4 Edited by Aljosa23 (24315 posts) -

Anxious to see how the Republican PR on OT spin this.

#5 Posted by The-Apostle (12108 posts) -

I would've preferred being taught that rather than force-fed evolution. >_>

#6 Posted by THE_DRUGGIE (24942 posts) -

I would've preferred being taught that rather than force-fed evolution. >_>

Was it because you didn't have to think that much to ace the test?

#7 Edited by The-Apostle (12108 posts) -

@The-Apostle said:

I would've preferred being taught that rather than force-fed evolution. >_>

Was it because you didn't have to think that much to ace the test?

No, it's because I believe evolution is crap.

#8 Posted by Master_Live (13636 posts) -

I would've preferred being taught that rather than force-fed evolution. >_>

Come on Apostle, Evolution is backed by research and evidence; it is the unifying theory of biology. Creationism is fine for a religious studies class.

#9 Edited by The-Apostle (12108 posts) -
@Master_Live said:

@The-Apostle said:

I would've preferred being taught that rather than force-fed evolution. >_>

Come on Apostle, Evolution is backed by research and evidence; it is the unifying theory of biology. Creationism is fine for a religious studies class.

Yeah, researchers basically say, "It looks old. It must be 10000000000000000 years old." >_>

#10 Posted by THE_DRUGGIE (24942 posts) -

@THE_DRUGGIE said:

@The-Apostle said:

I would've preferred being taught that rather than force-fed evolution. >_>

Was it because you didn't have to think that much to ace the test?

No, it's because I believe evolution is crap.

And that's because..?

#11 Posted by mattbbpl (10553 posts) -

@Master_Live said:

@The-Apostle said:

I would've preferred being taught that rather than force-fed evolution. >_>

Come on Apostle, Evolution is backed by research and evidence; it is the unifying theory of biology. Creationism is fine for a religious studies class.

Yeah, researchers basically say, "It looks old. It must be 10000000000000000 years old." >_>

The evidence for evolution is far beyond that level of rationale so this shouldn't be mistaken as giving your statement any credibility, but....

How does the evidence for Creationism trump that?

#12 Posted by Makhaidos (1611 posts) -
#13 Edited by speedfreak48t5p (6215 posts) -

LOL@Texas

LOL@religion

LOL@America

#14 Posted by bob_toeback (11267 posts) -

Seems to me that we'll still have a plethora of atheists regardless of religious homes and schools. Maybe it's not "right" to teach it in school, but people will find what they want to find true regardless.

#15 Edited by 4myAmuzumament (1743 posts) -

I would've preferred being taught that rather than force-fed evolution. >_>

You're a more informed person because you were force-fed the truth. Appreciate what your teachers did for you.

#16 Posted by DarkGamer007 (6021 posts) -

@THE_DRUGGIE said:

@The-Apostle said:

I would've preferred being taught that rather than force-fed evolution. >_>

Was it because you didn't have to think that much to ace the test?

No, it's because I believe evolution is crap.

The nice thing about facts and science is that they are true whether you believe in them or not.

#17 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (3687 posts) -

@THE_DRUGGIE said:

@The-Apostle said:

I would've preferred being taught that rather than force-fed evolution. >_>

Was it because you didn't have to think that much to ace the test?

No, it's because I believe evolution is crap.

Apostle has the downs.

#18 Edited by Zelda187 (524 posts) -

@Master_Live said:

@The-Apostle said:

I would've preferred being taught that rather than force-fed evolution. >_>

Come on Apostle, Evolution is backed by research and evidence; it is the unifying theory of biology. Creationism is fine for a religious studies class.

I'm not the most religious guy myself, but evolution is not a fact that is etched in stone.

Hence why it's called the "theory" of evolution.

#19 Edited by Aljosa23 (24315 posts) -

@Zelda187 said:

@Master_Live said:

@The-Apostle said:

I would've preferred being taught that rather than force-fed evolution. >_>

Come on Apostle, Evolution is backed by research and evidence; it is the unifying theory of biology. Creationism is fine for a religious studies class.

I'm not the most religious guy myself, but evolution is not a fact that is etched in stone.

Hence why it's called the "theory" of evolution.

llolololol

learn what scientific theories are, man

#20 Edited by StrifeDelivery (1283 posts) -

@Zelda187 said:

@Master_Live said:

@The-Apostle said:

I would've preferred being taught that rather than force-fed evolution. >_>

Come on Apostle, Evolution is backed by research and evidence; it is the unifying theory of biology. Creationism is fine for a religious studies class.

I'm not the most religious guy myself, but no...evolution is not "fact".

Hence why it's called the "theory" of evolution.

Ok...

Do you question Cell theory?

How about Kinetic theory of gases?

The common definition of theory is not the same within the science literature.

#21 Edited by Zelda187 (524 posts) -

@DarkGamer007: Again, evolution is not a fact. It's a theory.

I'm not religious, and I'm not atheist either.

I'm more in the agnostic camp. As in, I believe our tiny little human brains can't even begin to comprehend how the universe functions and how life or time itself originated.

Scientists are humans no different than you or me. More educated? Sure, but these are the same people who till this day still can't tell me whether a tomato is a fruit or a fucking vegetable.

#22 Edited by Master_Live (13636 posts) -

@Zelda187 said:

@Master_Live said:

@The-Apostle said:

I would've preferred being taught that rather than force-fed evolution. >_>

Come on Apostle, Evolution is backed by research and evidence; it is the unifying theory of biology. Creationism is fine for a religious studies class.

I'm not the most religious guy myself, but no...evolution is not "fact".

Hence why it's called the "theory" of evolution.

Is that so? Is the theory of gravity "fact"?

#23 Posted by Master_Live (13636 posts) -

@The-Apostle said:

@THE_DRUGGIE said:

@The-Apostle said:

I would've preferred being taught that rather than force-fed evolution. >_>

Was it because you didn't have to think that much to ace the test?

No, it's because I believe evolution is crap.

Apostle has the downs.

Watch yourself.

#24 Edited by Zelda187 (524 posts) -

@Aljosa23: Learn what the definition of "theory" is. It's basically an educated guess.

The Big Bang "theory" basically says that all of life on Earth, from a microorganism to a blade of grass to intelligent life originated from a giant fucking explosion.

Sorry, I don't just automatically accept those "theories" as facts.

And lets just say that's true. Science still can't explain to me where all that black matter came from, how the first star formed in the sky, how the first speck of dust appeared in space or how time itself originated.

Hell, even Einstein once famously said that to totally dismiss the idea of a "God" or higher power existing is just foolish.

#25 Edited by MakeMeaSammitch (3687 posts) -

@MakeMeaSammitch said:

@The-Apostle said:

@THE_DRUGGIE said:

@The-Apostle said:

I would've preferred being taught that rather than force-fed evolution. >_>

Was it because you didn't have to think that much to ace the test?

No, it's because I believe evolution is crap.

Apostle has the downs.

Watch yourself.

no, Apostle isn't a bright user, everybody is aware.

#26 Posted by plageus900 (927 posts) -
@Zelda187 said:

@Aljosa23: Learn what the definition of "theory" is. It's basically an educated guess.

The Big Bang "theory" basically says that all of life on Earth, from a microorganism to a blade of grass to intelligent life originated from a giant fucking explosion.

Sorry, I don't just automatically accept those "theories" as facts.

And lets just say that's true. Science still can't explain to me where all that black matter came from, how the first star formed in the sky, how the first speck of dust appeared in space or how time itself originated.

Hell, even Einstein once famously said that to totally dismiss the idea of a "God" or higher power existing is just foolish.

Sorry, but creationism isn't backed by scientific research, therefore it doesn't belong in a science class.

#27 Edited by LostProphetFLCL (16981 posts) -

You see this Texas? It's shit like this that makes it so nobody likes you....

#28 Edited by Zelda187 (524 posts) -

@plageus900: Never said it did.

All I said is that, in the grand scheme of things, no one has a fucking clue how the universe functions or how life originated.

Scientist are constantly changing their "theories" and "educated hypotheses" by the day it seems. Just 70-80 years ago scientists thought you were batshit crazy if you even entertained the idea that it was possible to venture past the Earth's stratosphere. That kind of shit was restricted solely to sci-fi novels.

#29 Posted by plageus900 (927 posts) -

@Zelda187 said:

@plageus900: Never said it did.

All I said is that, in the grand scheme of things, no one has a fucking clue how the universe functions or how life originated.

Scientist are constantly changing their "theories" and "educated hypotheses" by the day it seems. Just 70-80 years ago scientists thought you were batshit crazy if you even entertained the idea that it was possible to venture past the Earth's stratosphere. That kind of shit was restricted solely to sci-fi novels.

Ideas and theories advance and change with continued research. There isn't one scientific shred of evidence that supports creationism, therefore it can't be put forth as a scientific theory and should not be taught in class. If you want to entertain religious ideas on your own time, that's perfectly fine by me.

#30 Posted by coolbeans90 (21305 posts) -

The-Apostle is probably the dullest fuck I've seen on this board.

#31 Posted by Zelda187 (524 posts) -

@Zelda187 said:

@plageus900: Never said it did.

All I said is that, in the grand scheme of things, no one has a fucking clue how the universe functions or how life originated.

Scientist are constantly changing their "theories" and "educated hypotheses" by the day it seems. Just 70-80 years ago scientists thought you were batshit crazy if you even entertained the idea that it was possible to venture past the Earth's stratosphere. That kind of shit was restricted solely to sci-fi novels.

Ideas and theories advance and change with continued research. There isn't one scientific shred of evidence that supports creationism, therefore it can't be put forth as a scientific theory and should not be taught in class. If you want to entertain religious ideas on your own time, that's perfectly fine by me.

My critique isn't aimed towards the belief that evolution and not creationism should be taught in classrooms.

My beef is with the "holier than thou" elitist, atheists who immediately talk down to people who have some religious beliefs as if they're a bunch of drooling, knuckle dragging, cave dwelling fucking imbeciles when the reality is...no one knows the true answer to any of this shit.

#32 Posted by coolbeans90 (21305 posts) -

The-Apostle is probably the dullest fuck I've seen on this board.

@Zelda187 said:

@plageus900: Never said it did.

All I said is that, in the grand scheme of things, no one has a fucking clue how the universe functions or how life originated.

Scientist are constantly changing their "theories" and "educated hypotheses" by the day it seems. Just 70-80 years ago scientists thought you were batshit crazy if you even entertained the idea that it was possible to venture past the Earth's stratosphere. That kind of shit was restricted solely to sci-fi novels.

That's pretty much why I don't think gravity exists.

#33 Posted by xdude85 (4315 posts) -

-

#34 Posted by Master_Live (13636 posts) -

@Zelda187 said:

@plageus900: Never said it did.

All I said is that, in the grand scheme of things, no one has a fucking clue how the universe functions or how life originated.

That is so weak. Scientist do try to explain how the universe functions and how life originated but for some reason you just can't get your head around that.

#35 Posted by plageus900 (927 posts) -

@Zelda187 said:

@plageus900 said:

@Zelda187 said:

@plageus900: Never said it did.

All I said is that, in the grand scheme of things, no one has a fucking clue how the universe functions or how life originated.

Scientist are constantly changing their "theories" and "educated hypotheses" by the day it seems. Just 70-80 years ago scientists thought you were batshit crazy if you even entertained the idea that it was possible to venture past the Earth's stratosphere. That kind of shit was restricted solely to sci-fi novels.

Ideas and theories advance and change with continued research. There isn't one scientific shred of evidence that supports creationism, therefore it can't be put forth as a scientific theory and should not be taught in class. If you want to entertain religious ideas on your own time, that's perfectly fine by me.

My critique isn't aimed towards the belief that evolution and not creationism should be taught in classrooms.

My beef is with the "holier than thou" elitist, atheists who immediately talk down to people who have some religious beliefs as if they're a bunch of drooling, knuckle dragging, cave dwelling fucking imbeciles when the reality is...no one knows the true answer to any of this shit.

This thread topic isn't about bashing your personal religious beliefs, its about 4 herp derps from Texas that think Christianity should be taught in schools.

#36 Posted by Zelda187 (524 posts) -

@Zelda187 said:

@plageus900: Never said it did.

All I said is that, in the grand scheme of things, no one has a fucking clue how the universe functions or how life originated.

That is so weak. Scientist do try to explain how the universe functions and how life originated but for some reason you just can't get your head around that.

Yes, science TRIES to explain.

Just as religion TRIES to explain.

Bottom line, neither one brings solid, concrete proof to the table to support their arguments.

#37 Edited by Master_Live (13636 posts) -
@Zelda187 said:

@plageus900: Never said it did.

All I said is that, in the grand scheme of things, no one has a fucking clue how the universe functions or how life originated.

Scientist are constantly changing their "theories" and "educated hypotheses" by the day it seems. Just 70-80 years ago scientists thought you were batshit crazy if you even entertained the idea that it was possible to venture past the Earth's stratosphere. That kind of shit was restricted solely to sci-fi novels.

That's pretty much why I don't think gravity exists.

Of course it doesn't or how would airplane elevate?

#38 Posted by Zelda187 (524 posts) -

@Zelda187 said:

@plageus900: Never said it did.

All I said is that, in the grand scheme of things, no one has a fucking clue how the universe functions or how life originated.

That is so weak. Scientist do try to explain how the universe functions and how life originated but for some reason you just can't get your head around that.

I've seen a bunch of goofy fucking scientists, who are supposedly some of the most respected in their fields, try to detail arguments about how they're totally convinced, without a shadow of a doubt, that aliens not only exist but have visited us numerous times.

Seriously, watch Ancient Aliens sometime.

Not a shred of evidence in sight...they just "know". LOL

But afterall, they're scientists right? Therefor, their word most be gold.

#39 Edited by Master_Live (13636 posts) -

@Zelda187 said:

@Master_Live said:

@Zelda187 said:

@plageus900: Never said it did.

All I said is that, in the grand scheme of things, no one has a fucking clue how the universe functions or how life originated.

That is so weak. Scientist do try to explain how the universe functions and how life originated but for some reason you just can't get your head around that.

I've seen a bunch of goofy fucking scientists, who are supposedly some of the most respected in their fields, try to detail arguments about how they're totally convinced, without a shadow of a doubt, that aliens not only exist but have visited us numerous times.

Seriously, watch Ancient Aliens sometime.

Not a shred of evidence in sight...they just "know". LOL

But afterall, they're scientists right? Therefor, their word most be gold.

Can you point me toward peer reviewed research papers detailing this claims?

#40 Edited by Zelda187 (524 posts) -

@Master_Live said:

@Zelda187 said:

@Master_Live said:

@Zelda187 said:

@plageus900: Never said it did.

All I said is that, in the grand scheme of things, no one has a fucking clue how the universe functions or how life originated.

That is so weak. Scientist do try to explain how the universe functions and how life originated but for some reason you just can't get your head around that.

I've seen a bunch of goofy fucking scientists, who are supposedly some of the most respected in their fields, try to detail arguments about how they're totally convinced, without a shadow of a doubt, that aliens not only exist but have visited us numerous times.

Seriously, watch Ancient Aliens sometime.

Not a shred of evidence in sight...they just "know". LOL

But afterall, they're scientists right? Therefor, their word most be gold.

Can you point me toward peer reviewed research papers detailing this claims?

Seriously? LOL, look it up for yourself.

The show has been running for what? 10 years now?

Professors from prestigious academic universities like Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Princeton, USC, UCLA, UMASS, Northwestern, etc.

They basically take theologies from the Bible and apply them to alien lifeforms as if that makes them so much more realistic and believable.

These same scientists, who say that there's really no limit to what the human brain can achieve, constantly contradict themselves by saying that "oh no, there's no way a group of 20,000+ ancient hebrew slaves could've built the pyramids, nah...had to have been aliens".

#41 Posted by plageus900 (927 posts) -

@Zelda187 said:

@Master_Live said:

@Zelda187 said:

@plageus900: Never said it did.

All I said is that, in the grand scheme of things, no one has a fucking clue how the universe functions or how life originated.

That is so weak. Scientist do try to explain how the universe functions and how life originated but for some reason you just can't get your head around that.

I've seen a bunch of goofy fucking scientists, who are supposedly some of the most respected in their fields, try to detail arguments about how they're totally convinced, without a shadow of a doubt, that aliens not only exist but have visited us numerous times.

Seriously, watch Ancient Aliens sometime.

Not a shred of evidence in sight...they just "know". LOL

But afterall, they're scientists right? Therefor, their word most be gold.

Can you point me toward peer reviewed research papers detailing this claims?

Annnnd....... /thread

#42 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (3687 posts) -

@Zelda187 said:

@Master_Live said:

@Zelda187 said:

@plageus900: Never said it did.

All I said is that, in the grand scheme of things, no one has a fucking clue how the universe functions or how life originated.

That is so weak. Scientist do try to explain how the universe functions and how life originated but for some reason you just can't get your head around that.

Yes, science TRIES to explain.

Just as religion TRIES to explain.

Bottom line, neither one brings solid, concrete proof to the table to support their arguments.

one sorta has evidence....

#43 Posted by THE_DRUGGIE (24942 posts) -

@Zelda187 said:

@Master_Live said:

@Zelda187 said:

@Master_Live said:

@Zelda187 said:

@plageus900: Never said it did.

All I said is that, in the grand scheme of things, no one has a fucking clue how the universe functions or how life originated.

That is so weak. Scientist do try to explain how the universe functions and how life originated but for some reason you just can't get your head around that.

I've seen a bunch of goofy fucking scientists, who are supposedly some of the most respected in their fields, try to detail arguments about how they're totally convinced, without a shadow of a doubt, that aliens not only exist but have visited us numerous times.

Seriously, watch Ancient Aliens sometime.

Not a shred of evidence in sight...they just "know". LOL

But afterall, they're scientists right? Therefor, their word most be gold.

Can you point me toward peer reviewed research papers detailing this claims?

Seriously? LOL, look it up for yourself.

The show has been running for what? 10 years now?

Professors from prestigious academic universities like Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Princeton, USC, UCLA, UMASS, Northwestern, etc.

They basically take theologies from the Bible and apply them to alien lifeforms as if that makes them so much more realistic and believable.

These same scientists, who say that there's really no limit to what the human brain can achieve, constantly contradict themselves by saying that "oh no, there's no way a group of 20,000+ ancient hebrew slaves could've built the pyramids, nah...had to have been aliens".

I'd really hate to burst your bubble (who am I kidding, I LOVE bursting bubbles!) but non-peer reviewed papers and statements can come out of any institution, regardless of how prestigious it is.

#44 Posted by the_bi99man (11028 posts) -

@Zelda187 said:

@Master_Live said:

@Zelda187 said:

@plageus900: Never said it did.

All I said is that, in the grand scheme of things, no one has a fucking clue how the universe functions or how life originated.

That is so weak. Scientist do try to explain how the universe functions and how life originated but for some reason you just can't get your head around that.

I've seen a bunch of goofy fucking scientists, who are supposedly some of the most respected in their fields, try to detail arguments about how they're totally convinced, without a shadow of a doubt, that aliens not only exist but have visited us numerous times.

Seriously, watch Ancient Aliens sometime.

Not a shred of evidence in sight...they just "know". LOL

But afterall, they're scientists right? Therefor, their word most be gold.

Please don't tell me that you're lumping in the attention-grabbing, ratings-generating, lowest-common-denominator-catering idiots on Ancient Aliens with the plethora of legitimate scientists who back the theory of evolution.

History channel (along with discovery, animal planet, science channel, basically everything labeled as 'scientific' on cable TV) has been out of touch with real science for years. It's just fucking reality shows and mockumentaries, aimed at the same morons who watch everything else on TV.

#45 Posted by coolbeans90 (21305 posts) -

@Zelda187 said:

@Master_Live said:

@Zelda187 said:

@plageus900: Never said it did.

All I said is that, in the grand scheme of things, no one has a fucking clue how the universe functions or how life originated.

That is so weak. Scientist do try to explain how the universe functions and how life originated but for some reason you just can't get your head around that.

Yes, science TRIES to explain.

Just as religion TRIES to explain.

Bottom line, neither one brings solid, concrete proof to the table to support their arguments.

That is incorrect.

#46 Edited by Nibroc420 (13567 posts) -

@Zelda187 said:

@plageus900: Never said it did.

All I said is that, in the grand scheme of things, no one has a fucking clue how the universe functions or how life originated.

Scientist are constantly changing their "theories" and "educated hypotheses" by the day it seems. Just 70-80 years ago scientists thought you were batshit crazy if you even entertained the idea that it was possible to venture past the Earth's stratosphere. That kind of shit was restricted solely to sci-fi novels.

In order for something to become a scientific theory, it requires 99.99% certainty.

We're not 100% sure how electricity works, but the lights in our houses work, our computers work.

We're constantly coming out with more and more efficient cars, but that doesn't mean that the first car "was wrong", simply because it wasn't perfect.
We're constantly improving on what we've learned. This is science.

Religion is the practice of saying "I have a belief that is completely unfounded, but I would like to believe it because it makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside, and an Omnipotent God lifting me up to heaven is a nicer way to think of death"

#47 Posted by Barbariser (6704 posts) -

Can't tell if Zelda is trolling or really badly educated.

#48 Edited by plageus900 (927 posts) -

Can't tell if Zelda is trolling or really badly educated.

I don't think he's trolling but I do think he's letting his emotions cloud his reasoning.

#49 Posted by Nibroc420 (13567 posts) -

@Zelda187 said:

@Master_Live said:

@Zelda187 said:

@Master_Live said:

@Zelda187 said:

@plageus900: Never said it did.

All I said is that, in the grand scheme of things, no one has a fucking clue how the universe functions or how life originated.

That is so weak. Scientist do try to explain how the universe functions and how life originated but for some reason you just can't get your head around that.

I've seen a bunch of goofy fucking scientists, who are supposedly some of the most respected in their fields, try to detail arguments about how they're totally convinced, without a shadow of a doubt, that aliens not only exist but have visited us numerous times.

Seriously, watch Ancient Aliens sometime.

Not a shred of evidence in sight...they just "know". LOL

But afterall, they're scientists right? Therefor, their word most be gold.

Can you point me toward peer reviewed research papers detailing this claims?

Seriously? LOL, look it up for yourself.

The show has been running for what? 10 years now?

Professors from prestigious academic universities like Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Princeton, USC, UCLA, UMASS, Northwestern, etc.

They basically take theologies from the Bible and apply them to alien lifeforms as if that makes them so much more realistic and believable.

These same scientists, who say that there's really no limit to what the human brain can achieve, constantly contradict themselves by saying that "oh no, there's no way a group of 20,000+ ancient hebrew slaves could've built the pyramids, nah...had to have been aliens".

History also did shows on Dragons and Mermaids.

However, as with ancient aliens, they let everyone know, there's no real evidence...

#50 Posted by plageus900 (927 posts) -

So I tried my hand at making filet mignon. I have to say its delicious.