Federal Judges are stupid idiots

[Bodhi]

The facts are:

Evolutionism is theory.

Creationism is a "religous" theory.

No one is arguing this.


So, the inclusion of a sticker to say that the "evolution" is not a fact and is indeed a "theory" does not seem to be a problem to me...

I think the printing that "evolution" is indeed fact is misleading, and it should be taught as it applies as a well supported theory based on evidence thus far gained.

Now, had the sticker said that evolution was a theory, and that people should look to creationism as the fact, then, the courts would be correct in having it removed.  It does not mention creationism in the least.

I fail to see where the issue is, other than that some one believes the sticker implies that creationism is the alternative.  The only way I can see them thinking this way is that the stickers were placed there by a church group...

Hmmm, so let's see if I got this straight?  Stating fact, that indeed evolutionism is a theory is incorrect, but stating incorrectly that evolutionism is indeed fact is ok...  wow, I guess I need to go to law school, maybe I can learn how they do that... maybe I could get my mortgage company to believe that $1200 is really in "fact" $2400...    <--- for you RPM

[JB73]

i have a theory liberal males actually have two buttholes, but i can not prove it, because i will never look at another man's butt. yet until you torchure me and make me look my theroy holds fast, unproven.

so where does that leave us?

science itself is a theroy, as discussed in the thread about "things you can not prove"



just to throw a curve, think about that for a second, don't dismiss it as you want to. if everything is SO complex, how can we even be here with all the variables involved?

if you Really believe scientific theroy is scientific fact, then the theroy of thing moving from order TO chaos instead of the reverse negates evolution as an even valid concept.

here endeth my contribution to this dicussion

[Bodhi]

Originally posted by JB73
i have a theory liberal males actually have two buttholes, but i can not prove it, because i will never look at another man's butt. yet until you torchure me and make me look my theroy holds fast, unproven.

Incorrect 73...

A theory has to be founded on some sort of evidence that there is "two butt holes on liberal males"...

So, you would have to seen some or have a witness to colaborate the existence of your theory that liberals are "two butt holed males".

Now fact would include that liberals are indeed butt heads, but that is undisputed.  

[mietla]

Originally posted by SaburoS
It's only a matter of time before we unlock all of life's mysteries.

You are in  a good company. That's what Laplace said some time ago. All we need to do is to measure the current state of the Universe and then we can predict the future.


Physics of late 19-th century was a "dead" science except for some minor unexplained details like failure to prove an existence of aether.

[Gunslinger]

prominent scientist once had a theory that the earth was flat.  Then it was theorized that the earth was the center and all celestial bodies revolved around it.  These theorys were all proven wrong because people actually studied it.

it still doesnt solve the problem of chicken or the egg

now as far as the "two anused liberal male" this theory was studied until a court order stoped it citing gay rights and defimation legistlation.

[J_A_B]

"Prove that julious ceaser existed.....prove that king tut existed.....just the same, other than historical text you cant prove these people actually existed."

Is Zeus real?   Is Anubis real?   They figure prominently in historical texts, too.

How about Hamlet?  Antigone?  Beowulf?  Ymir?  




J_A_B

[weaselsan]

Originally posted by Samiam
Again, "theory" carries a scientific meaning here.

Creation is not a theory. It consists of no (none, zero, zilch) hypotheses than can be proven scientifically. Creation is a belief.

Evolution is not a belief. It is a scientific theory. This theory is supported by thousands of proven and multiply verified  facts.

You are telling me that it is not a proven possibility to "seed" life on a planet? To purposely transport and seed life elsewhere...that it has never happened....but life crawling out of a primordial ooze makes sense...no wonder our education system is in a shambles.

[Gunslinger]

Originally posted by J_A_B
"Prove that julious ceaser existed.....prove that king tut existed.....just the same, other than historical text you cant prove these people actually existed."

Is Zeus real?   Is Anubis real?   They figure prominently in historical texts, too.

How about Hamlet?  Antigone?  Beowulf?  Ymir?  




J_A_B

I allways thaught hamlet was a fictional character?

no I can't prove that Zeus was real anymore than I can prove that Jesus, Ceaser, pharrow, or king tut were real.

[AKS\/\/ulfe]

This thread is retarded, and so is everyone who is posting in it. I am not excluding myself. Retards.
-SW

[rpm]

Originally posted by eskimo2
As a Catholic school teacher (read into that what you will), I agree with the verdict.  Anyone concerned that the teaching of evolution to students is misleading, is basing their concerns on their own religious beliefs.  Public school curriculum should not be influenced by curriculum.  People who are concerned that curriculums should be aligned with their religious beliefs should send their children to private schools and leave public schools, their students, teachers, and curriculum alone.

eskimo

We have a WINNER!!!

Guns, you and I see eye to eye on a lot of things. Unfortunately, this isn't one of them.

[JB73]

wulfie, you missed a few threads started by me, don't let me down now but not calling everythign i post retarded


btw hows the crummy job going? feel good to post about how miserable things are on bulletin boards?

[DREDIOCK]

Ahh the  E vrs C arguement.

A thread sure to be closed at some point as this debate tends to go downhill fast.



I will now take this opportunity to say

IM IN

Beyond that. I have no problem with the judges ruling.
If they dont have stickers on books disclaiming Creation as a theory and not fact, nor should they on evolution.


I personally beleive that the truth in the matter lies somewhere inbetween both theories as the truth usually does

I vaguely remember seeing the whole tornado/747 idea  debunked somewhere some time ago.
Dont remember by whom though.

In any event the sheer arrogence of both sides and their arguements is always amusing.

To me it makes for an interesting and often amusing discussion but thats about it.
In the end it we will probably never know for sure and doesnt really matter.
We're here

[Gunslinger]

Originally posted by rpm
We have a WINNER!!!

Guns, you and I see eye to eye on a lot of things. Unfortunately, this isn't one of them.

I just don't see how this has ANYTHING to do with religion.  I think the stickers would be benificial to both religious and none relgious types.

[JB73]

Originally posted by DREDIOCK
If they dont have stickers on books disclaiming Creation as a theory and not fact,

ok i lied im bakc in the thread...

they dont have stickers because they are not even allowed to MENTION creation as a possibly theroy.

in fact teachers have been fired for bringing up the subject.

[Ouaibe]

Why do you need to put a sticker on a book? Isn't the role of the teacher to do this?
Are the studiants so stupid that they need a sticker to have some mind?