Sarah Palin favors teaching creationism in schools.

[Sbane]

Well it seems like she held this position just to get some fundie votes, but she is very ignorant on the subject. I doubt she will try and promote creationism in the white house though so whatever I guess. But if she does..... oh boy. Anyways I am sure the base of the anti-science party will love this.

[Sbane]

It's a bad thing to most normal Americans.

Remind me to leave America when you are the voice for "normal" Americans.

Oh yeah Santorum is just adored by normal Americans eh? Is that why he lost by 20 points in PA? Oh wait that's because of "casey". I would bet anything even bugsy Rendell would have beat him by at least 10-15 points.

[Sbane]

It's a bad thing to most normal Americans.

Remind me to leave America when you are the voice for "normal" Americans.

Oh yeah Santorum is just adored by normal Americans eh? Is that why he lost by 20 points in PA? Oh wait that's because of "casey". I would bet anything even bugsy Rendell would have beat him by at least 10-15 points.

No where in my post did I say that he was adored by normal Americans.

New deal democrat said that normal americans are put off by Santorum and you seemed to disagree with him. As you can see from election results in your own state, only conservatives like Santorum while most liberals and moderates detest him.

[Sbane]

OK, here is what she really said:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://dwb.adn.com/news/politics/elections/story/8347904p-8243554c.html


I'm glad to know that liberals like sbane, stop sarah palin, Teh O.C.,, new deal democrat, oppose free debate.  Good job guys.

Sorry J.J but there is nothing to debate about. I would also love to debate gravity and other such facts but time is money. We shouldn't waste it having worthless debates about whether we descended from monkeys. If you really want to debate it so much then get into college and get a bio degree, then you can argue all you want with your professors. In high school having the debate from a religious point of view in a SCIENCE class is detrimental to the other students.

Edit: Thinking back to my High school days I remember we didn't even talk about this debate in intro bio. We did try and debate it in my AP bio class but there was nobody to debate the other side. So we just ended up just skipping class and playing poker. Good times.

[Sbane]

OK, here is what she really said:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://dwb.adn.com/news/politics/elections/story/8347904p-8243554c.html


I'm glad to know that liberals like sbane, stop sarah palin, Teh O.C.,, new deal democrat, oppose free debate.  Good job guys.

Sorry J.J but there is nothing to debate about. I would also love to debate gravity and other such facts but time is money. We shouldn't waste it having worthless debates about whether we descended from monkeys. If you really want to debate it so much then get into college and get a bio degree, then you can argue all you want with your professors. In high school having the debate from a religious point of view in a SCIENCE class is detrimental to the other students.

But you've got to admit when you read what Palin actually said it sounds much less alarming. Hers is the position of most conservatives. I don't agree with it, but it hadly makes her a far-right nutjob.

Yes regarding Palin I have already said she is extremely ignorant of the subject, but that is nothing new among conservatives. I do not think she would actually try and promote creationism so I guess she is "acceptable".

[Sbane]

Yes regarding Palin I have already said she is extremely ignorant of the subject, ...

And you are an expert?

I only learn what I am taught. And I have no reason to believe there is some huge liberal conspiracy out there to try and stop creationism from being taught in schools. In reality the debate about creationism and ID does not belong in the science classroom mainly because it cannot be tested scientifically. In fact the whole concept of god is not scientific. In my lab writing class we were taught how to identify what is a scientifically testable hypothesis. My professor asked is the question " was the universe created by a flying spaghetti monster?" a scientific question. The answer of course is no, because it cannot be tested. Now does that mean the universe was not created by a flying spaghetti monster? Of course not, but it just cannot be proved or disproved scientifically. Similarly ID pretends to show how god had a hand in the creation of the universe and the creatures in it but their argument is basically " since the universe is so complex there must be a hand of god/creator". This may or may not be true but it is not to be debated in a science classroom but rather in a religion/philosophy classroom. Whether or not god is our creator it is pretty obvious that evolution is how creatures change and adapt on our planet. Perhaps god is the one who came up with "evolution", perhaps not, but it just cannot be tested scientifically and thus that debate must occur outside the science classroom.

[Sbane]

Yes regarding Palin I have already said she is extremely ignorant of the subject, ...

And you are an expert?

I only learn what I am taught. And I have no reason to believe there is some huge liberal conspiracy out there to try and stop creationism from being taught in schools. In reality the debate about creationism and ID does not belong in the science classroom mainly because it cannot be tested scientifically. In fact the whole concept of god is not scientific. In my lab writing class we were taught how to identify what is a scientifically testable hypothesis. My professor asked is the question " was the universe created by a flying spaghetti monster?" a scientific question. The answer of course is no, because it cannot be tested. Now does that mean the universe was not created by a flying spaghetti monster? Of course not, but it just cannot be proved or disproved scientifically. Similarly ID pretends to show how god had a hand in the creation of the universe and the creatures in it but their argument is basically " since the universe is so complex there must be a hand of god/creator". This may or may not be true but it is not to be debated in a science classroom but rather in a religion/philosophy classroom. Whether or not god is our creator it is pretty obvious that evolution is how creatures change and adapt on our planet. Perhaps god is the one who came up with "evolution", perhaps not, but it just cannot be tested scientifically and thus that debate must occur outside the science classroom.

Which is why I have no problems with micro-evolution being taught in Science class, since it can be observed. 

Problem is that it is really too complex and unnecessary to be taught in an intro bio course in high school. Of course they could do that to shut up the creationists but that is not really the point of education.

[Sbane]

OK, here is what she really said:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://dwb.adn.com/news/politics/elections/story/8347904p-8243554c.html


I'm glad to know that liberals like sbane, stop sarah palin, Teh O.C.,, new deal democrat, oppose free debate.  Good job guys.

Sorry J.J but there is nothing to debate about. I would also love to debate gravity and other such facts but time is money. We shouldn't waste it having worthless debates about whether we descended from monkeys. If you really want to debate it so much then get into college and get a bio degree, then you can argue all you want with your professors. In high school having the debate from a religious point of view in a SCIENCE class is detrimental to the other students.

Thank you for demonstrating exactly how narrow minded liberals really are.

I had a chemistry teacher in HS who was convinced that the fact that we had liquid water proved (and it did to her) that God existed.  I didn't agree with her logic, BTW.

I had a geology instructor in college who always said that he'd look at other viewpoints.  I know he believed that a supreme being was involved in the universe.  We talked about it after class, at his invitation.  I know I cannot look at the ridges outside of Altoona with thinking of the 200 million years of upfolding and erosion that got them there, just as he taught.

I went to public high school and Penn State, not religious schools. 

I want to to really thank you, sincerely, for showing how really intolerant some of Obama's supporters really are.

How the hell am I intolerant? I just said that having a debate on evolution is akin to having a debate on gravity. It's a waste of time. These debates should be left outside the science classroom or conversations with your teacher or professor during your own time, not class time. I also think we should perhaps have religious studies classes where we can compare different creation theories from different cultures and then maybe we will realize that they were all wrong. Hell maybe we are still wrong. But we must use the scientific method to find out and frankly you cannot test creationism or ID since the argument is basically " creatures are too complex to have been created out of nothing". Of course we didn't get created out of nothing but rather bacteria, who are very good at existing. We can basically find them in any form of habitat and in fact we might be close to discovering some on mars. And when there are enough bacteria of the right type the atmosphere can become oxygenated and more complex life can form from there. So yeah how the f*** am I intolerant?

[Sbane]

How the hell am I intolerant? I just said that having a debate on evolution is akin to having a debate on gravity. It's a waste of time. These debates should be left outside the science classroom or conversations with your teacher or professor during your own time, not class time. I also think we should perhaps have religious studies classes where we can compare different creation theories from different cultures and then maybe we will realize that they were all wrong. Hell maybe we are still wrong. But we must use the scientific method to find out and frankly you cannot test creationism or ID since the argument is basically " creatures are too complex to have been created out of nothing". Of course we didn't get created out of nothing but rather bacteria, who are very good at existing. We can basically find them in any form of habitat and in fact we might be close to discovering some on mars. And when there are enough bacteria of the right type the atmosphere can become oxygenated and more complex life can form from there. So yeah how the f*** am I intolerant?

Since you said, "Of course we didn't get created out of nothing but rather bacteria, who are very good at existing."  My next question is "Okay, where did that bacteria come from?"

I can tell you two things will happen.  I'll keep asking you, "Okay, where did ______ come from?"  You, if you are honest, will say, "I don't know," or "Nobody knows."  I've been asking that question since I was three.     I keep getting the same answers, eventually.

Guess what I don't know where that bacteria came from. But since they were here about 3 billion years ago I guess it is a bit hard to find out. And honestly science just does not have the ability to find out but since there might be bacteria on mars, I am guessing there are some floating around the universe perhaps? I don't know what this has to do with ID of course. The problem with ID is that they are not saying "hey we don't know where these bacteria come from or how life was started" but they rather try and argue that since eyes are very complex, we must have been created by someone. Of course seeing is something incredibly important to many species and it makes sense that over hundreds of thousands of years more and more complex optical sensors were created by "mother earth". And these debates can be had in a upper div college course or in philosophy classes, but intro bio classes have a very different purpose. For that intro course it is very unnecessary to get into debates about evolution. And like I have said if there is a god then evolution is the tool that he uses to enact change, or perhaps this has already been planned somewhere. But this is a discussion to be had on political forums and philosophy classes and perhaps with college professors, not in a high school class. They just need to be taught what happens and trust me evolution is a proven theory. Just look up drug resistant TB.

[Sbane]

I can tell you two things will happen.  I'll keep asking you, "Okay, where did ______ come from?"  You, if you are honest, will say, "I don't know," or "Nobody knows."  I've been asking that question since I was three.     I keep getting the same answers, eventually.

I don't understand how this relates to ID.  If God is an "uncreated creator," then not everything needs a cause.  It makes no real sense to assume that there is a "one magical exception."  Logic is axiomatic--if God can be immune to it, why not something else, even non-sentient?  I've been asking that too, for a good long while, and I've been getting no answers. 

The question itself is good thing.  It teaches to think, and it shows are limitations.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why do we ask that question, "How does the universe work and how did it get here?"  Why are we, alone among species, asking that question?  IIRC, other species both prehistorically and currently, have larger brains, so it's not just a question of humans reaching a critical mass of brain cells.  Did some other, outside intelligence prompt us someway to ask the question?  I don't know, but I have to admit that possibility.

Science, at any rate, is about asking questions.  I do question the tolerance of those people who say, we shouldn't talk about the question, when asked.

Honestly our way of surviving on this earth is by being curious and asking questions. We have the ability to do critical problem solving and one of the reasons might be because we have usable hands. A dog or bear does not have any need for their hand except to walk but we have the ability to actually manipulate objects with our hands. Could be a reason why most primates are smarter than other mammals. Add to that our brain can get much hotter than other animals since our bipedal motion is a natural Air conditioner which helps keep our brain relatively cooler. Also notice how relatively weak we are when compared to other animals, even other primates. Thus if we didn't have this higher critical thinking ability, we would be f'ed. And so this is why we do ask so many questions and which led us to create the scientific method. Also I do not think anybody said questions about the universe should not be asked, it's just that questions about who created it just get us nowhere. It is better to ask how it was created and that in itself should lead us to whether it was created by a higher power or not. Problem is our technology is extremely primitive when it comes to space. It indeed is the next frontier and anybody who presumes to tell us we know everything out there or that we shouldn't ask questions about it is deluded.

[Sbane]

The question is, should students be prohibited from asking about it?  Should we in a reverse Scopes Monkey Trial situation?  To put a reverse spin on a recent thread, you don't favor jailing people who ask about it in class, do you (that's rhetorical, I don't actually think you do)?

I think you're the only person here asking that question.  I think everyone else thinks the answer is "no."

The first question has been answered by a few people on this thread who have said they do.  Sorry, but it has.

I don't think anybody has said that and I would think these debates do occur in classrooms across America all the time. I am sure most end with the teacher respectfully telling the student that in science class you learn what is proven theory at the current moment. Obviously a HS student of intro bio does not have the skills or expertise to challenge a well accepted scientific theory. But like I said if somebody cares so much about it they can become get their bio degree and argue with their professors as much as they like. Of course all these damn courses I have to take would just "brainwash" the lover of christ.

[Sbane]

The question is, should students be prohibited from asking about it?  Should we in a reverse Scopes Monkey Trial situation?  To put a reverse spin on a recent thread, you don't favor jailing people who ask about it in class, do you (that's rhetorical, I don't actually think you do)?

I think you're the only person here asking that question.  I think everyone else thinks the answer is "no."

The first question has been answered by a few people on this thread who have said they do.  Sorry, but it has.

I don't think anybody has said that and I would think these debates do occur in classrooms across America all the time. I am sure most end with the teacher respectfully telling the student that in science class you learn what is proven theory at the current moment. Obviously a HS student of intro bio does not have the skills or expertise to challenge a well accepted scientific theory. But like I said if somebody cares so much about it they can become get their bio degree and argue with their professors as much as they like. Of course all these damn courses I have to take would just "brainwash" the lover of christ.

Right here:

OK, here is what she really said:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://dwb.adn.com/news/politics/elections/story/8347904p-8243554c.html


I'm glad to know that liberals like sbane, stop sarah palin, Teh O.C.,, new deal democrat, oppose free debate.  Good job guys.

Sorry J.J but there is nothing to debate about. I would also love to debate gravity and other such facts but time is money. We shouldn't waste it having worthless debates about whether we descended from monkeys. If you really want to debate it so much then get into college and get a bio degree, then you can argue all you want with your professors. In high school having the debate from a religious point of view in a SCIENCE class is detrimental to the other students.

There are a few others as well.

JJ I was not saying that debate should be prohibited if someone asked a question about it. I just don't think it is the responsibility of high school bio teachers to bring up this topic for discussion. Now I would not have cared if there was a debate in my school since even in my suburban kinda republican city , most kids knew that evolution is a proven theory. Like I said my ap bio teacher even tried to start this discussion since we obviously knew a bit about biology and could discuss the topic intelligently. Nobody wanted to argue the other side though, oh well.