Creationist To Head Texas School Board
Last week, Texas Governor Rick Perry appointed Don McLeroy to head the State Board of Education. Unfortunately for Texas schoolchildren, McLeroy has, for years, fought against the teaching of fact-based science in public schools, instead casting vote after vote in favor of his religious ideology. According to a recent Austin American-Statesman editorial:
In 2001, McLeroy and a majority of the board rejected the only Advanced Placement textbook for high school environmental science because its views on global warming and other events didn’t comport with the beliefs of the board majority. The book wasn’t factual and was anti-American and anti-Christian, the majority claimed. Meanwhile, dozens of colleges and universities were using the textbook, including Baylor University, the nation’s largest Baptist college.
In 2003, McLeroy voted against approving biology textbooks that included a full-scale scientific account of evolutionary theory. The books were approved.
Right wingers know it is easier to control ignorant people. Make sure those kids don’t know what real scientists are studying. This is pitiful, but, that’s Texas for you; right Mark?
..just what we need in America: A GODDAMNED Christian Sanhedrin!
(didn’t it work well in judeo times?!!?)
LOL! Leave it to Yahweh for a great analogy.
Effective 2011, they will not require exit exams to graduate. This would be when most of this year’s or next year’s incoming freshman students would need to demonstrate proficiency in science and math, among other things.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=11847602
In regards to Albatross 11:50,
Yay, now colleges have no measure for accepting these students and no measure of teacher effectiveness.
Exams are not there to teach, but to make sure that teaching is effective.
Kansas is not far behind Texas.
Ian,
These kids will have to go to Regent of Liberty University. They love the dumbed down kids.
In VA:
Despite proponents urging that intelligent design should be included in the school system’s science curriculum the school board of Chesterfield County Public Schools decided on May 23, 2007, to approve science textbooks for middle and high schools which do not include the idea of intelligent design. However, during the board meeting a statement was made that their aim was self-directed learning which “occurs only when alternative views are explored and discussed”, and directed that professionals supporting curriculum development and implementation are to be required “to investigate and develop processes that encompass a comprehensive approach to the teaching and learning” of the theory of evolution, “along with all other topics that raise differences of thought and opinion.” During the week before the meeting, one of the intelligent design proponents claimed that “Students are being excluded from scientific debate. It’s time to bring this debate into the classroom”, and presented “A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism”.[27][28 This came from Wiki.
Here’s more:
http://www.uncommondescent.com/laws/id-skirmish-in-virginia-public-schools/
Posted this on another thread last week re: Tacoma, WA
http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2007/07/dont_say_i_didn.html#more
To celebrate scary link day:
http://www.nwcreation.net/colleges.html
You can see how science is taught at Liberty u. here
I would also urge everyone before the start of the school year to read (or reread), and further explore The Wedge Strategy. For your reading pleasure:
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/2437/wedge.html
“In the materialist scheme of things, everyone is a victim and no one can be held accountable for his or her actions.”
In the evangelical scheme of things, as long as everyone says “JESUS” no one can or will be held accountable for his or her actions. This, after all, is what Jesus died for.
“Design theory promises to reverse the stifling dominance of the materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions.”
Ian, that list is frightening, and I’d wager it is not totally complete. Then let’s add the public schools that are sneaking it in the back door.
“When good people in any country cease their vigilance and struggle, then evil men prevail.”
Pearl S. Buck
One of the main problems for some kids is that they know that all the fundies in the class are already culturally conditioned bigots by that age and they don’t want to be ridiculed if they speak about the absurdities in creationism/ID.
So that would greatly reduce any real discussion about the subject of ID. Save it for college level philosophy.
The creationists/ID crowd know that the younger you brainwash them, the more successful you will be.
The main problem is that there is no evidence for the existence of a god to begin with, so there is nothing to teach.
Since their ideas can’t compete with the ideas of their scientific peers and withstand scrutiny, they take a different route. Vote them in at the local school-board level. Dishonest and devious. They hunger for control and will do ANYTHING to attain it.
Majority rule doesn’t work with scientific ideas. Ideas are vetted, not voted. Just because a majority of people think that the Earth is the center of the solar system does not make it so.
Dale said: “The creationists/ID crowd know that the younger you brainwash them, the more successful you will be.”
Precisely. Many quotes from fundamentalists can be found all over the internet that speak exactly to this idea.
The kids section in my local book store scares me for this reason.
See Spot.
See Spot Run.
See Spot disprove the stupid and blasphemous theory of evolution.
Last week, Texas Governor Rick Perry appointed Don McLeroy to head the State Board of Education. Unfortunately for Texas schoolchildren, McLeroy has, for years, fought against the teaching of fact-based science(opinion) in public schools, instead casting vote after vote in favor of his religious ideology(in her opinion).
Opinion, opinion, opinion.
so much for fact based reporting.
2+2=4 (opinion)
Gravity (opinion)
Round Earth (opinion)
My Opinion (fact)
Sorry for feeding the troll, just wanted to inject some humor.
That’s hilarious!
Good post, Alex.
We have a small group in my state (where Prof Ken Miller’s texts are used) trying to push for “alternative theories.” They are the same folks who think Bible classes would be good, and that ab-only is the only health ed we should have. They play on the predominance of Catholicism in the state to try to “persuade” their position.
Ian, please say that is your idea at sarcastic humor, and that I am just lacking in that today?
Dale,
Please post your reminder.
I don’t want to be a “fun-sucker” here, people, but wisdom is learning from your mistakes.
My 1:11, Ian, referred to the bookstore thing. That was more humor, right…please?
July 24th, 2007 at 10:47 am yahzoo = intolerance of anything Christian.
Your intolerance of anything Christian simply reveals the true hate that deathcon stand for.
Ian, the Earth is not round. It is an oblate spheroid. That is the opinion of very sensitive measuring equipment that has been used to make very precise measurements of the shape of the Earth.
I find it so fascinating how they conflate fact and fiction and then not even offer anything to back up their assertions.
“Hey everybody!!! Sciencey stuff is just opinion!! YAY!!! I haven’t studied it, nor do I even understand it!! But I think I do and that is all that matters!! YAY!!!” - Bill the troll.
Ian,
Troll Monitor Alert:
#1 If you ever, EVER, mention the troll again or respond to any of his inane posts, we will hunt you down, tear off your arms and legs and beat you with the bloody stumps.
#2 If you have any questions, see #1
Albatross, for goodness sake, yes I am kidding about not believing Gravity, etc
As for the book, I’m serious about seeing books along that line (Not that exact one no). But books that smack you in the face with hatred against science and aethiesm.
Sorry Dale. I shall refrain.
HA,
Again sorry for feeding the troll. Please let me keep my arms and legs…
(note for Albatross, thats not sarcasm, i don’t want this blog clogged either)
Yay, more entertaining links:
http://objectiveministries.org/kidz/
I’m pretty sure this is a joke site, but I honestly can’t say for sure. The line between jokes made about fundies and Actual fundie beliefs is pretty thin
Why shouldn’t I be suprised regarding so much of the ignorance and contempt for human reasoning that is demonstrated by the links that everyone has provided.
Frankly, I’ve read and heard enough about the overall poor academic achievements this nation’s public school children (especially in the fields of math and science) to conclude that this trend is not sustainable if we as a nation wish to maintain our leadership in technology and science. Already, way too many of this nation’s top high-tech employers are filling research, product development, and engineering positions with foreign-born applicants who have a much more sound foundational understanding of science and math than our graduates seem to have. Furthermore, some of these employers are even deciding to relocate their research and development facilities overseas so that they can be closer to stronger academically-achieving employees.
Instead of “teaching the controversy” perhaps our nation’s schools need to return to “teaching the fundamentals” because our nation is failing its children in that regard. Here is the reality that we need to smack these screwy relgious fundamentalists with; even if these rubes are able to convince some high school administrators, teachers, and school boards to water down its science curriculum with phony, religiously-inspired pseudoscience, it will not protect the cloistered faith of their children forever. Eventually, these children will attend universities; and some may decide to go into the sciences. There, they will (probably for the first time in their lives) learn how science is really done, and more often than not those students will have to compete against other students who do not share their rigid faith and are not handicapped by such religious-based blind spots. It will be in the universities that these students will be subjected to real-life “survival of the fittest” in an academic manner. Time will tell how this competition will affect the future growth and prosperity prospects for this country; but I am not too optimistic.
No world power lasts forever; just look at the Romans, the 16th Century Spanish, the 17th Century Dutch, and the 19th Century British.
July 24th, 2007 at 12:28 pm
dale Says:
You can see how science is taught at Liberty u. here
——————————————————
Once again it easier for dale to lie then tell the truth. Your link had NOThing to do with LU. I’m sorry what, …a joke, …its was a joke. ??????????
——————————————————
Colossians 1:17 (New International Version)
17He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.
——————————————————
John 1:3 (New International Version)
3Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.
Bwahahahaha. Great link Dale. Telling indeed.
Ian Thank you for this Link
http://www.nwcreation.net/colleges.html
Colleges & Universities
That Believe or Teach Biblical Creation Philosophy
This too Dale. A newsflash about teaching the controversy about Gravitational Theory.
“Intelligent Falling”:
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/39512
July 24th, 2007 at 12:42 pm dale
Just another bigoted opinion, and nothing more.
And yet more profundity!
http://www.myconfinedspace.com/2007/07/23/the-bible-motivation-poster/
Before Bill continues with his delusion that only he is the authority of all things biblical…
“For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,” declares the LORD. “As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts. Isaiah 55:8-9 (NIV)
Which means, you feeble-minded pumpkinhead, that the true magnitude of God is probably far beyond anything that your small mind could ever hope to comprehend. Further, I maintain that you completely lack the humility to truly appreciate God for what God is.
July 24th, 2007 at 12:42 pm
puppetmaster Says:
The main problem is that there is no evidence for the existence of a god to begin with, so there is nothing to teach.
This “problem” is what doesn’t existence.
Why do you continue to pretend this matters?
Finally, if your god truly is the mean, petty, spiteful, jealous, and deceitful god that you freakazoid-fundamentalists portray him to be, then such a god is not worth my worshipful respect.
Lately, I’ve been getting so angry at organized religion worldwide that I (***gasp***) am beginning to think that perhaps the atheists might be on to something.
I like your 12:42 post Dale. You are correct. There is as much evidence for a magical superman hiding in the clouds as there is for fairies and leprechauns. It’s incredible that people actually convince themselves that those things are real.
July 24th, 2007 at 12:45 pm
Alex Says:
Since their ideas can’t compete with the ideas of their scientific peers and withstand scrutiny, they take a different route. Vote them in at the local school-board level. Dishonest and devious. They hunger for control and will do ANYTHING to attain it.
Majority rule doesn’t work with scientific ideas. Ideas are vetted, not voted. Just because a majority of people think that the Earth is the center of the solar system does not make it so.
I wish I believed you just didn’t know any better. The FACT is you know that creation ideas ARE NOT ALLOWED to compete. Why do you continue to tell your lie?
Evolutionist are afraid to allow the truth.
What are these scientist so afraid of?
QUOTE
Guillermo Gonzalez has written 68 peer-reviewed articles, he’s the author of a college text on astronomy, so why is this talented teacher be rejected for tenure?
Gonzales’ “work has been featured in the magazines Science, Nature and Scientific American, which did a cover story.”
68 peer-reviewed articles.
Gonzales …“was rejected by officials despite his publication of 68 peer-reviewed scientific articles, nearly four times what his own department suggests as a standard for “excellence.”
Gonzales …“articles also have the highest normalized citation count among all of the astronomers in his department, a standard used to evaluate the work of professors. And he’s the author of a new college text on astronomy, “The Privileged Planet: How Our Place in the Cosmos Is Designed for Discovery.”
“It should be noted Gonzalez’s book does not discuss the evidence for design in biology, and thus it does not deal with Darwin’s theory of evolution, but that hasn’t spared Gonzalez from persecution,” West said.
And, “Gonzalez has said he does not teach intelligent design at the school.”
Why would such a talented teacher be rejected for tenure?
Here is the reason… The day after ISU’s president announced his rejection of Gonzalez’s first appeal, a member of ISU’s department of physics and astronomy published an article in the Des Moines Register openly admitting that Gonzalez’s support for intelligent design was the only reason he voted against tenure for Gonzalez.
end QUOTE
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56638
Just be true to yourself Tony. You are a great value to this blog and have all of our respect because of your clear thinking, great communication, and honesty.
I’ve posted this line of reasoning concerning the alleged global flood of Noah on a couple other threads that have always been ignored…
Now, let’s take a look at the story about Noah’s Global Flood, and see how it stands up to one bit of the fossil history. It is a well established and documented fact in the scientific fields of botany and paleobotany that flowering-type plants (called anthophytes) arose around the mid-Cretaceous period, or around 99-million years ago. For the millions of years before that time, the fossil record shows that only fern-type plants were in existence; no flowering-type plants were even around.
Now, YECs like to claim that the appearance of evolution in the fossil record is a result of sedimentation following the flood. Those animals that were slower (such as dinosaurs) that couldn’t escape the flood waters quickly enough wound up at the bottom, while the quicker animals could escape to somewhat higher ground. Since hominid fossils are the most recent finds, I guess that this must mean that some humans living at the time of the flood could tread water for some time before succumbing to the flood. However, this does not work for plants.
Plants are good for many things, but fleeing to higher ground is not one of them. The fossil record shows that flowering-type plants did not first appear until the mid-Cretaceous Period or so. However, within the great coal deposits created from the massive forests that were around during the Carboniferous Period (well over 200 million years before the Cretaceous) have revealed to researchers an abundance of club mosses, giant ferns, horsetail fossils, and similar non-flowering-type plants, BUT NOT ONE SINGLE FLOWERING PLANT FOSSIL. If Noah’s flood was a real event, the flood waters should have churned up all that plant material together and deposited it, more or less, into a single layer, which would have provided absolute proof of a simultaneous existence. Yet this evidence is nowhere to be found.
Am I ever going to get any creationist to address this lack of supporting evidence? Probably not, because there is none and the creationists ignore it. They are not just blowhards, but they are deceitful charlatans.
“Plants are good for many things, but fleeing to higher ground is not one of them.”
Now that’s funny.
Tony, the reason you won’t hear from the creationists is because they are not “ALLOWED” to refute science and compete for “equal time”. It’s a law you know. I think it’s even written in the Constitution.
I agree with Alex, It is a breath of fresh air to see someone who is true to their beliefs and doesn’t accept spoon fed facts.
Thanks Tony
Tony,
You could try agnosticism for a while
I considered myself a deist for many years, thinking that no one knows how the universe began, why not attribute it to a god? Now I just say, we don’t know because, to me, that is the most intellectually honest answer.
Thanks for sharing your feelings.
July 24th, 2007 at 1:07 pm
Ian Says:
2+2=4 (opinion) Gravity (opinion) Round Earth (opinion)
My Opinion (fact)
Sorry for feeding the troll, just wanted to inject some humor.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
the above is a clear example of the problem with trying to talk to members of the looney liberal left (LLL).
Poor Ian can’t help it; he believes a statement like “casting vote after vote in favor of his religious ideology(in her opinion)”, is an absolute fact. Sorry but its an interpretation of supposed evidence.
But worst of all he claims all of his opinions are what??? FACTS???
Like all of the LLL’s here at deathcon everyone is suppose to accept YOUR facts as the ONLY true.
Sooooo narrow minded. LOL
And that is where we need to draw the line and stand our legal ground; the Establishment Clause of the Constitution. We also need to defeat these mental midgets with both science and reason because the evidence is on our side.
WE HAVE THE FOSSILS, WE WIN
For any government entity or school to endorse or mandate the teaching of creationism, Intelligent Design, or whatever else it “evolves” into is a violation of not just the religious freedom of those who do not accept or believe in this warped theology, but also it is a violation of the rights of those who have no religious leanings.
“…we don’t know…”
Speak for yourself Dale. I have this new theory. It involves shrieking Veetles and blooming vasoliths. With just the right amount of frolent remastitude, I think it could work.
Time Releases Annual List Of Least Influential Americans
Hey look dale and albatross made times list.
Re: July 24th, 2007 at 2:07 pm
This article proves a point of Creationism. Men do have 1 fewer rib than women. This would lend credibility to the creation story of Eve.
http://biology.clc.uc.edu/Courses/bio105/ribs.htm
July 24th, 2007 at 2:12 pm
Tony Says:
Before Bill continues with his delusion that only he is the authority of all things biblical…
“For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,” declares the LORD. “As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts. Isaiah 55:8-9 (NIV)
=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=–=-=–=-==–==–=-=-=-=-
At NO time have I claimed to have any “authority of all things biblical”, You are 100% right we feeble-minded pumpkinheads cannot really understand “the true magnitude of God” because “the true magnitude of God is probably far beyond anything that (our) small mind(s) could ever hope to comprehend.”
July 24th, 2007 at 2:25 pm
Tony Says:
If Noah’s flood was a real event, the flood waters should have churned up all that plant material together and deposited it, more or less, into a single layer, which would have provided absolute proof of a simultaneous existence.
WHY a single layer?
Tony,
BTW, you summed up the fossill record very nicely there. Paleobotony is a very interesting science.
Thanks.
where does the Holy Bible claim that men and women have a different Number of Ribs???
be afraid, very afraid.
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56638
Tony,
I made a model of Noah’s flood for my kids a couple times. I took a 250 gallon oil tank and cut it in half. In the bottom half we made hills and valleys and planted plants in there: added rocks and sand layers. The we took a hose and squirted it there for a couple hours- 40 days and nights- and what was left was bunch of mixed up sand and mud and plants and rock. period. No layers.
Some people do not understand that simple modeling can reaveal much.
http://www.fs.fed.us/gpnf/volcanocams/msh/#
You are correct about your flood model. I did similar such experiments in college when I was studying hydraulics, hydrology, and the mechanics of open channel flows.
Hear that Bill? It’s called education and experimentation. Perhaps you should first learn something about how those basic concepts work.
He doesn’t need to waste his time on the “basic” stuff Tony. He’s well into “advanced” stuff at this point.
Please read this friendly reminder.
The other day there was a post by someone, Theresa, who said she sat in the shadows watching, had found our blogs interesting with a wide array of information and diverse discussions. She said that she felt compelled to post because of an explicit, deliberate instance of attention-getting blatant dishonesty. I almost missed her post because once again the blog had become heavily congested with mumbo-jumbo babble blather. Fortunately, it was copied and pasted, and I did see it.
I believe that it has been expressed many times by many posters, but never so eloquently as this. I will repost it, and remind all that we were pretty unanimously in agreement.
#
July 22nd, 2007 at 7:31 pm
dale Says:
To my Cronies (and anyone else that is sick of having a lying spammer take over this site,)
We have all mentioned this, and I am sure all have tentatively internalized it, but we have not carried through with the proper protocol for dealing with a troll.
So, listen up. You Will Be Tested On This.
Everybody likes to take a potshot at the troll. You are playing into his hand- quit it…. NOW.
Address your comment specifically to the person to whom you are responding or directing a comment (we don’t want to abandon the site completelyand give up all our trusted cronies and miss out on the interfacing , the good links and stuff.).
Never, ever again refer to the troll in any manner whatsoever (that incudes all grammatical tenses).
Do not read the troll’s posts lest they tempt you to damnation (we defer to the honor system on this one.)
Remember that reason cannot convince unreason.
Remember that you are dealing with someone who is on a mission from his supernatural friend (his suernatural friend has endowed him with the gift of pervasive obnoxiouness, combined with a great need for attention.)
Since I have taken it upon myself to plead for your cooperation on this matter, I welcome you to comment to me personally on any questions you may have concerning the above communication. If any other of you would like to take over the job of “Troll Monitor” please let me know and I will tender over and confer all the resposibilities unto said person.
Please be advised that if you violate any of the above recommendations, you will do so under the threat of torture and/ or death. In either case, I (or the “Troll Monitor in Charge”, ) will hunt you down rip off your arms and legs, and beat you with the bloody stumps; meaning, if you do something bad, you will be ridiculed to the maximum extent of our dispeasure over your troll-abiding activity.
If he becomes invisible to us, his dogma will have been run over by our Karma.
(This post was inspired by a missive from Yahweh on another thread, so blame him.)
Any questions?
OK
Finis
I wrote: “If Noah’s flood was a real event, the flood waters should have churned up all that plant material together and deposited it, more or less, into a single layer, which would have provided absolute proof of a simultaneous existence. “
To which, the uncommonly dense Bill responded: “WHY a single layer?”
As an engineer who has studied hydraulics, open channel flow, streambed erosion, and contraction scour to name but only a few subjects, and as an engineer and diver who has investigated first hand the effects of prolonged high velocity water flows against structures, and as an engineer who has responded to past regional flood emergencies to document the damages done, I have first hand appreciation as to just how powerful a force rapidly moving floodwaters can be. Bill continually displays his absolute profound ignorance when he speaks about things that he hasn’t any knowledge about.
Stick to cutting and pasting irrelevant gibberish (especially those little gems from World Nut Daily); that is about the best that any of us expect that you are capable of doing.
Thanks for the reminder Alba. I’m said all that I care to say to him and I am done with him.
Thank you, Tony. Your posts are always informative, articulate, and well-thought out. Sorry for stepping into the “monitor” role for the thread, but sitting back, I was seeing where we were heading.
Alex, that link “Summed up in 29 words,” was hysterical. Thanks. Would you also like to share more on the Veetle Theory.
Thanks all.
I’m confused, the troll is now claiming to be a part of the DefCon staff?
Yes TR. It is my experience that the trolls here commonly resort to dishonesty in an attempt to lend credibility to their point of view. By doing that, the particular bug you are referring to hopes the casual onlooker will be fooled into thinking that its assertions are authoritative, cogent, and official.
One would think that alone (deceptive representation) would encourage Clark to think about those user guidelines you mentioned before Alex. Posting under that pseudonym elsewhere serves sufficiently to smear.
Indeed Alba. More on shrieking Veetles later. I need to do more work on fladeum nortiflecks first.
This is also another good one from the Onion. Don’t know if anyone had seen it before.
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/41879
Now that was funny!
Didn’t Nathaniel”Natty ” Bumpo first predict that fladeum nortiflecks initially had right spin but such was transduced by gravitons?
good one Jo!
I have that as a wallpaper Jo. Very funny. I like this one too:
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/46712
Here’s another questionable Executive order:
http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/tomorrows-senate-0048.html
tony.
Q. Could a single catastrophic event lay down a thick stratification of pyroclastic rock of multiple layers?
A. Yes.
and the flood, being a single catastrophic event could have put down multiple layers.
An example of an “observable” catastrophic event would be Mt St Helens in the mid 1980’s
Tony:
Q :Could elf farts have lumps?
A: yes..and they could have layers of lumps too!
Tony,
That straem erosion stuff is too scientific for fundies. In fact, I think you have just supported a very important concept that I have been trying to work out. I’ll explain more later.
Thanks,
dale
Troll Alert: Troll Alert: Call To Action—————————————
Do not be tempted to respond to goofy half witted questions from trolls.
Q. Could a single catastrophic event lay down a thick stratification of pyroclastic rock of multiple layers?
A. Yes.
Spontaneous stratification in granular mixtures. By: Makse, Herman A.; Havlin, Shlomo. Nature, 03/27/97, Vol. 386 Issue 6623, p379, 4p, 3 diagrams, 5c; Abstract: Reports a size-separation effect which arises when a granular mixture is poured between two vertical plates. The spontaneous stratification of the mixture; The relationship of the stratification to the occurrence of avalanches
Spontaneous stratification as a possible mechanism for the formation of reverse graded layering in cinder cones , Cohen, Bosmat (Rutgers University, Department of Geological Sciences, Piscataway, NJ, United States); Bemis, Karen G. In: Eos, Transactions, American Geophysical Union, April 28, 1998, Vol. 79, Issue 17, Suppl., pp.332 Published by: American Geophysical Union : Washington, DC, United States
Stratification of granular matter in a rotating drum: cellular automaton modelling by Ktitarev, Dmitri V.; Wolf, Dietrich E.. Granular Matter, 12/01/1998, Vol. 1 Issue: 3 p141-144, 4p; Abstract: Abstract We propose a generalisation of the cellular automaton model introduced recently by Lai, Jia and Chan [Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 4994 (1997)] for simulating friction induced segregation in a rotating drum. Our model implements the spherical geometry of the drum explicitly. Therefore it can be used to investigate geometrical properties of the segregation phenomenon in contrast to the original version of the model. Our model reproduces the spontaneous stratification observed recently in experiments for more than half filled drums, as well as the transition to non-stratified segregation for higher rotation speeds. It predicts that stratification can also occur, if the drum is less than half filled.
July 24th, 2007 at 7:48 pm
dale Says:
Tony,
That straem erosion stuff is too scientific for fundies. In fact, I think you have just supported a very important concept that I have been trying to work out. I’ll explain more later.
Thanks,
dale
July 24th, 2007 at 7:53 pm
dale Says:
Troll Alert: Troll Alert: Call To Action—————————————
Do not be tempted to respond to goofy half witted questions from trolls.
LOLOL
Tony said:
Frankly, I’ve read and heard enough about the overall poor academic achievements this nation’s public school children (especially in the fields of math and science) to conclude that this trend is not sustainable if we as a nation wish to maintain our leadership in technology and science. Already, way too many of this nation’s top high-tech employers are filling research, product development, and engineering positions with foreign-born applicants who have a much more sound foundational understanding of science and math than our graduates seem to have. Furthermore, some of these employers are even deciding to relocate their research and development facilities overseas so that they can be closer to stronger academically-achieving employees.
NJ says: For the last 40 years our public school has taught Darwinian evolution exclusively. Now we are loosing our competitiveness?
Sorry Tony, It seems like you just put your foot in your mouth LOL!!!!!!
Q. how do you know if something isn’t working
A. when it’s not working LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
July 24th, 2007 at 1:07 pm
Ian Says:
2+2=4 (opinion) Gravity (opinion) Round Earth (opinion)
My Opinion (fact)
Sorry for feeding the troll, just wanted to inject some humor.
July 24th, 2007 at 1:16 pm
Alex Says:
Ian, the Earth is not round. It is an oblate spheroid. That is the opinion of very sensitive measuring equipment that has been used to make very precise measurements of the shape of the Earth.
I find it so fascinating how they conflate fact and fiction and then not even offer anything to back up their assertions.
“Hey everybody!!! Sciencey stuff is just opinion!! YAY!!! I haven’t studied it, nor do I even understand it!! But I think I do and that is all that matters!! YAY!!!” - Bill the troll.
July 24th, 2007 at 1:20 pm
dale Says:
Ian, Troll Monitor Alert: #1 If you ever, EVER, mention the troll again or respond to any of his inane posts, we will hunt you down, tear off your arms and legs and beat you with the bloody stumps.
#2 If you have any questions, see #1
July 24th, 2007 at 1:26 pm
Ian Says:
HA, Again sorry for feeding the troll. Please let me keep my arms and legs…
(note for Albatross, thats not sarcasm, i don’t want this blog clogged either)
July 24th, 2007 at 3:27 pm
Albatross Says:
Please read this friendly reminder.
The other day there was a post by someone, Theresa, who said she sat in the shadows watching, had found our blogs interesting with a wide array of information and diverse discussions. She said that she felt compelled to post because of an explicit, deliberate instance of attention-getting blatant dishonesty. I almost missed her post because once again the blog had become heavily congested with mumbo-jumbo babble blather. Fortunately, it was copied and pasted, and I did see it.
I believe that it has been expressed many times by many posters, but never so eloquently as this. I will repost it, and remind all that we were pretty unanimously in agreement.
# July 22nd, 2007 at 7:31 pm dale Says:
To my Cronies (and anyone else that is sick of having a lying spammer take over this site,)
We have all mentioned this, and I am sure all have tentatively internalized it, but we have not carried through with the proper protocol for dealing with a troll.
So, listen up. You Will Be Tested On This.
Everybody likes to take a potshot at the troll. You are playing into his hand- quit it…. NOW.
Address your comment specifically to the person to whom you are responding or directing a comment (we don’t want to abandon the site completelyand give up all our trusted cronies and miss out on the interfacing , the good links and stuff.).
Never, ever again refer to the troll in any manner whatsoever (that incudes all grammatical tenses).
Do not read the troll’s posts lest they tempt you to damnation (we defer to the honor system on this one.)
Remember that reason cannot convince unreason.
Remember that you are dealing with someone who is on a mission from his supernatural friend (his suernatural friend has endowed him with the gift of pervasive obnoxiouness, combined with a great need for attention.)
Since I have taken it upon myself to plead for your cooperation on this matter, I welcome you to comment to me personally on any questions you may have concerning the above communication. If any other of you would like to take over the job of “Troll Monitor” please let me know and I will tender over and confer all the resposibilities unto said person.
Please be advised that if you violate any of the above recommendations, you will do so under the threat of torture and/ or death. In either case, I (or the “Troll Monitor in Charge”, ) will hunt you down rip off your arms and legs, and beat you with the bloody stumps; meaning, if you do something bad, you will be ridiculed to the maximum extent of our dispeasure over your troll-abiding activity.
If he becomes invisible to us, his dogma will have been run over by our Karma. (This post was inspired by a missive from Yahweh on another thread, so blame him.)
Any questions?
OK
Finis
-1. July 24th, 2007 at 4:08 pm
-1. TR Says:
-1. I’m confused, the troll is now claiming to be a part of the DefCon staff?
-1. July 24th, 2007 at 4:17 pm
-1. Alex Says:
-1. Yes TR. It is my experience that the trolls here commonly resort to dishonesty in an attempt to lend credibility to their point of view. By doing that, the particular bug you are referring to hopes the casual onlooker will be fooled into thinking that its assertions are authoritative, cogent, and official.
-1. July 24th, 2007 at 4:24 pm
-1. Albatross Says:
One would think that alone (deceptive representation) would encourage Clark to think about those user guidelines you mentioned before Alex. Posting under that pseudonym elsewhere serves sufficiently to smear.
July 24th, 2007 at 7:53 pm
dale Says:
Troll Alert: Troll Alert: Call To Action————————————— Do not be tempted to respond to goofy half witted questions from trolls.
Over 800 wasted words
ya I’m the problem
July 24th, 2007 at 8:13 pm
NJ1962 Says:
Tony said:
Frankly, I’ve read and heard enough about the overall poor academic achievements this nation’s public school children …
NJ says: For the last 40 years our public school has taught Darwinian evolution exclusively. Now we are loosing our competitiveness?
Sorry Tony, It seems like you just put your foot in your mouth LOL!!!!!!
July 24th, 2007 at 8:13 pm
NJ1962 Says:
Tony said:
Frankly, I’ve read and heard enough about the overall poor academic achievements this nation’s public school children …
NJ says: For the last 40 years our public school has taught Darwinian evolution exclusively. Now we are loosing our competitiveness?
Sorry Tony, It seems like you just put your foot in your mouth LOL!!!!!!
Great point NJ
}0}
NJ1962,
Your post comes across to me as a well crafted and thought out statement. The type of questionn that you stated in your 8:13npm post are exactly like the questions I like to explore. Good post. I’ll be back as soon as I can, I have some kids here that are depending on “Unka dale” to entertain them for the next three days. I do like to thresch out some of these different value systems.
Are THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS Reliable?
http://www.worldinvisible.com/library/ffbruce/ntdocrli/ntdocont.htm
interesting reading…
Dale,
You said - “Right wingers know it is easier to control ignorant people. Make sure those kids don’t know what real scientists are studying. This is pitiful, but, that’s Texas for you; right Mark?”
Dale, I think this is all being blown way out of proportion. One man is not going change what is being taught in public schools. The “theory of evolution” will continue to be taught along with other scientific theories.
Dale,
Here are some words of a real scientist:
“My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior Spirit who reveals Himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble minds. That deeply emotional conviction in the presence of a superior reasoning power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe, forms my idea of God”.
July 24th, 2007 at 11:23 pm
this should be good.
Mark - Einstein’s quote from your 11:23 post ably expresses what many scientists feel. I’m sure you notice what his religion does not consist of: holy books, supernatural appearances, demons, angels, life after death, sin, damnation, etc. God is revealed in what “we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble minds,” not by adhering to irrational nonsense.
As for your 11:16, it is my understanding (as you are a Texan, please correct me if I’m wrong) that the Texas State Board of Education is one of the largest single purchasers of textbooks in the country. Its purchasing power is such that textbooks are edited with Texas standards in mind, and consequently the decisions made by Texas help determine content for books that are used throughout the US. That sounds like a lot of power to me. I am especially concerned that he appears to consider “other scientific theories” to include non-scientific religious dogma.
What’s another word for a half-truth?
What’s another word for a half-truth? The words that come to mind are perhaps propaganda or misinformation. A half-truth isn’t an out-and-out lie; it just a selection of parts of the truth. Just enough of the truth to misdirect the attention of people who are depending on the liar for guidance.
Deathcon is guilty of reporting half-truths. They are responsible for deceptive and distorted information that is being systematically spread to promote their evil doctrine of bigotry disguised as protecting the Constitution.
When the Answers in Genesis Creation Museum opening deathcon reported the protesters; later deathcon would trumpet a silly poll they made up, which while we’re on the subject, its only purpose was design to discredit the Answers in Genesis Creation Museum. Here is the worst part, This past Saturday the Answers in Genesis Creation Museum surpassed 100,000 paid admissions and deathcon has until now ignored this occasion.
I’m not foolish enough to hope that deathcon would be happy concerning the record-breaking attendance, however one would expect them to be truthful.
A successful Creation
100,000th visitor expected today; more parking needed
http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070721/NEWS0103/707210368
The theory of evolution is of no threat to me, as is the Gospel of Jesus Christ to any school child.
I’m not sure about your statement MJ, but I do believe that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is indeed a “threat” to anyone who is not Christian - if it is being taught in a public school. Though the law is clear, parents with the help of Constitutional lawyers, have had to fight endlessly the interjection of sectarian dogma into the public school classrooms.
NJ1962 says: For the last 40 years our public school has taught Darwinian evolution exclusively. Now we are loosing our competitiveness?
Sorry Tony, It seems like you just put your foot in your mouth LOL!!!!!!
NJ, I think that you statement is entirely false. Unless you have cites to show otherwise, of course. My opinion is that this “debate” has been ongoing for approx. 40 years. You might remember that a big SCOTUS case was decided 40 years ago, in which it was determined that it was unconstitutional for a law to forbid the teaching of evolution. Since then, the battles rage on. Who loses? One guess. Could it be that the back and forth decisions about what to teach is actually hindering the ability of the children to learn, thereby diminishing worldwide competitiveness? In 2004, the courts ruled (rightly so IMO) that the latest efforts of creationists with their newly packaged, new and improved, ID, was nothing more than creationism dressed in a tuxedo i.e. RELIGION!
You might want to do your homework here before attempting to shoot down Tony. I consider his posts to be very reasonable, rational, well thought out, and researched. I’m not sure I would say the same about most of yours. Yours seem to be based more on opinion than actual study.
I welcome information from reputable sources that can show that what you say is in fact the truth.
Oh, yeah, NJ, not to be petty, but are we “loosing competitiveness,” or are we losing it?
July 25th, 2007 at 2:02 am
Albatross Says:
You might want to do your homework here before attempting to shoot down Tony. I consider his posts to be very reasonable, rational, well thought out, and researched. I’m not sure I would say the same about most of yours. Yours seem to be based more on opinion than actual study
LOL
nothing more that one bigot, telling the other bigots how smart they are. Sad, so sad.
July 25th, 2007 at 2:06 am
Albatross Says:
Oh, yeah, NJ, not to be petty, but are we “loosing competitiveness,” or are we losing it?
yes, you are right. That is petty.
NJ, these are but a few of the major examples through time of the disruptive battles in the education of children.
With credit to People for the American Way:
Timeline: how creationism has “evolved”
The Creationism Period
When Darwin proposed the modern theory of evolution, creationists instantly opposed it on religious grounds. For years the creationism movement was clear in its message: evolution is wrong because it contradicts the Bible. Creationists in this period did not pretend to be concerned with science: they opposed outright any attempt to teach evolution in the classroom.
1859—The Origin of the Species is published
Darwin’s The Origin of Species sets forth the modern theory of evolution and its chief mechanism, natural selection. Many Christian fundamentalists of the day object immediately to what they see as the book’s contradiction of Biblical literalism.
1913—Flood geology first proposed
As acceptance of evolution grows, a Seventh-day Adventist and amateur geologist named George McCready Price writes The Fundamentals of Geology. Using profoundly flawed logic, he argues that the vast majority of fossils must have been created during the Great Flood described in the book of Genesis, and that geological dating methods must be “corrected” to conform to that fact. He then uses the newly “corrected” rock dating to “prove” that assertion about the fossils was correct. Initially, flood geology has few proponents even within the creationist community.
1914—Evolution Appears in Textbooks
George William Hunter’s A Civic Biology, the book that is later used in biology courses in Dayton, Tenn., is published. A Civic Biology describes evolution as “the belief that simple forms of life on the earth slowly and gradually gave rise to those more complex and that thus ultimately the most complex forms came into existence.”
1923—The First Anti-Evolution Bills
Led by three-time presidential nominee William Jennings Bryan, a campaign to outlaw the teaching of evolution in public schools succeeds in convincing the legislatures of Oklahoma and Florida to pass anti-evolution legislation. Bryan is unapologetic about the religious basis of his crusade. “What shall it profit a man,” he writes, “if he shall gain all the learning of the schools and lose his faith in God?” In 1925, Tennessee passes similar legislation, resulting in the famous Scopes Trial, pitting Bryan against legendary lawyer Clarence Darrow.
1940s—Teaching of evolution hits low
Due to the political, commercial, and legal attacks of Biblical literalists, the number of schools teaching evolution hit a new low point.
1947 and 1948—Supreme Court on Government Endorsement of Religion
In 1947 the Supreme Court makes clear that government may not aid religion generally, or prefer one religion over another. A 1948 ruling forbids religious instruction in public schools.
1950—Pope Pius XII rejects Biblical literalism
Calling evolution an “open question,” Pope Pius XII rejects literal Biblical creationism as the sole explanation for biological origins, acknowledging the importance of scientific principles in conjunction with spiritual faith.
1957—Sputnik
The perceived threat posed by Sputnik focuses America’s attention on the importance of a sound math and science education. Popular support for comprehensive science education spreads and leads even many ultra-conservative school districts to teach scientifically accepted evolution curriculum.
1961—The Genesis Flood is published
John v. Whitcomb, Jr. and Henry Morris publish The Genesis Flood, which attempts to demonstrate that Biblical literalism is supported by science. The book, which reintroduces Price’s flood geology, is met with near-unanimous criticism from the scientific community.
1966—Creationists Demand Equal Time
Religious activist Nell Segraves demands that the California State Board of Education grant equal time in California schools for creationism. She bases her request on a provision in the Civil Rights Act that allowed teachers to mention religion so long as they did not promote specific doctrines. The request is denied.
1968—Epperson v. Arkansas
In Epperson v. Arkansas, the United States Supreme Court invalidates an Arkansas statute that prohibited the teaching of evolution in public schools and universities.
The Creationism “Science” Period
As Americans came to value the teaching of authentic science in the science classroom, creationists changed their argument. Instead of opposing the teaching of evolution and science per se, they claimed that science proves that the first chapters of Genesis are literally true. The scientific community has consistently criticized this as pseudo-science.
1970—California Science Framework gives birth to creation science
Reacting to now widespread opinion and the Supreme Court’s finding in Epperson that science classes should teach scientific theories, the California State Board of education approves language couching “creationism” in scientific vocabulary. The board writes, “Creation in scientific terms is not a religious or philosophical belief.” This moves creationism from religion to pseudo-science.
1970—Creation-Science Research Center is founded
Continuing her effort to dress up creationism in scientific clothes, Segraves heads the effort to form the Creation-Science Research Center, which is affiliated with Tim LaHaye’s Christian Heritage College in San Diego. Henry Morris is also part of the effort but disagreements over the organization’s political role lead to the Center’s ending its affiliation with Morris and LaHaye in 1972.
1972—Institute for Creation Research is started
Henry Morris founds the Institute for Creation Research, affiliated with the Christian Heritage College, dedicated to refuting the theory of evolution and developing a scientific basis for the Biblical account of creation.
1974—Scientific Creationism
Morris publishes his book Scientific Creationism, a bedrock text of the movement, in two editions: one for public schools that makes no explicit references to the Bible, and another that includes a chapter on “Creation according to Scripture.” Creationists now argue that science can confirm the account of creation as given literally in the Bible.
1978—Wendell Bird Yale law student Wendell Bird publishes a strategy for introducing creationism into public schools across the country. His article, “Freedom of Religion and Science Instruction in Public Schools” in the Yale Law Journal, claims that “scientific creationism” is not religion and that not teaching it would violate the free exercise rights of Biblical literalists.
1981—Equal time bills After graduating, Bird works at the Institute for Creation Science on equal time resolutions that the Institute hopes will be adopted by school boards. These resolutions are eventually adapted for state legislators to introduce. Both Arkansas and Louisiana approve versions of these model bills. The bill in Arkansas alludes to a worldwide flood, but does not use any explicitly Biblical language. The Louisiana bill makes no reference to flood geology even though it provides the underpinning for “scientific creationism.”
1987—Edwards v. Aguillard Dealing a crippling blow to creation science, in Edwards v. Aguillard, the U.S. Supreme Court declares Louisiana’s “Creationism Act” unconstitutional. The law prohibited the teaching of evolution in public schools, unless “creation science” was also taught.
The Intelligent Design Period
After the failure of “creation science,” creationists change tactics again. This time the movement focuses less on teaching creationism, and more on attacking evolution. By claiming that evolution is not universally accepted in the scientific community, creationists seek to discredit Darwin’s theory simply by confusing the issue and muddying the waters.
1987—A Good Point…
Paul MacKinney, chairman of the Midwest Creation Fellowship, predicts that in the wake of the Supreme Court decision barring “equal time” for creationism, the movement will need to change its public relations and legal strategy in order to portray itself as a victim of discrimination. Soon after the Edwards decision was issued, the Institute proposes that opponents of evolution develop an “arguments against evolution” strategy, which is intended to undermine evolution, if not promote creationism outright.
1989—Of Pandas and People
Of Pandas and People: The Central Question of Biological Origins, by Percival Davis and Dean Kenyon, is published. The biology “textbook” promotes the idea that life must have been created by an “intelligent designer.” The book is widely promoted by Christian Right leader James Dobson.
1991—”Intelligent Design”
Darwin on Trial, by U.C. Berkeley law professor and born-again Christian Phillip E. Johnson is published. It becomes the handbook for the Intelligent Design movement and actually coins the term “Intelligent Design.”
1992—The Wedge Strategy At a Southern Methodist University conference called “Darwinism: Scientific Inference or Philosophical Preference?” a new strategy is proposed. The idea grows into the so-called “wedge strategy” set forth in a 1999 memorandum by the Discovery Institute (see below). The wedge strategy aims to insert religion into public schools as the first step towards returning American culture to a pre-scientific state that accepts religious, not scientific, explanations for natural phenomena.
1996—The Discovery Institute
The Discovery Institute establishes the Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture to promote Intelligent Design using the Wedge Strategy.
1997—Freiler v. Tangipahoa Parish Bd of Ed
In Freiler v. Tangipahoa Parish Board of Education, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana rules unconstitutional a public school board policy requiring teachers to read aloud a disclaimer of endorsement of the scientific theory of evolution whenever they teach about evolution, ostensibly to promote “critical thinking.” Besides striking down the disclaimer policy, the decision is noteworthy for recognizing that “Intelligent Design” is an alternate description of “creation science.” The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upholds the ruling and the Supreme Court declines to hear an appeal of the decision.
1999—Bleeding Kansas
The Kansas State Board of Education votes 6-4 to accept diminished science standards that removed virtually all reference to evolution.
2000—LeVake v. Independent School District
A state judge in Minnesota dismisses the case of Rodney LeVake v Independent School District No. 656, et al. High school biology teacher LeVake had claimed a constitutional right to teach “evidence both for and against the theory” of evolution, contrary to the school district’s science curriculum. The decision is upheld Minnesota Court of Appeals and further review is denied by the Minnesota and U.S. Supreme Courts.
2001—The Santorum Amendment
Phillip Johnson, a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute, helps draft the Santorum Amendment to what later becomes the No Child Left Behind Act, promoting the teaching of Intelligent Design. The amendment—which encourages science teachers to teach criticisms of evolution—is ultimately stripped from the bill, although Intelligent Design proponents consider the effort a victory.
2003—Johnson Comes Clean (Finally)
Johnson states on a Christian radio talk show that “Our strategy has been to change the subject a bit, so that we can get the issue of intelligent design, which really means the reality of God, before the academic world and into the schools.”
2004—Intelligent Design Comes to Dover
Lawyers for the Thomas More Center, a right-wing Catholic legal group, persuade the Dover, Penn., school board to teach Intelligent Design in science classes and promise to defend the school board from the inevitable lawsuit.
2005—Bush Sides Against Science
In August, President Bush states that schoolchildren should be taught about Intelligent Design along with evolution as competing theories. “Teach the controversy” becomes the latest mantra of Creationists.
2005—Court Rejects Intelligent Deisgn From October to December, in Kitzmiller v. Dover, a team of lawyers, on behalf of eleven parents of Dover students, argues that Intelligent Design undermines basic definitions of science and is nothing more than religious belief under a new name. The court rules that Intelligent Design is not science and, as with creationism, that teaching Intelligent Design as science violates the constitutional separation of church and state. Even before the ruling is made, all six pro–Intelligent Design Dover School Board members are voted off the school board and replaced by a pro-evolution slate.
2006—Kansas Tug-of-War
In 2002, an election had turned the board back over to pro-science members, who returned the state curriculum to scientifically accepted standards. A 2004 election changed the board’s make-up again. In November 2005, the board changes the state’s science standards to add substantial criticism of evolution. In 2006 primary elections, moderate candidates are again victorious, guaranteeing a pro-science majority after the November general election.
2006 —Evolutionary Biology Disappears from Federal Grant List
In a list of majors eligible for federal Smart Grants—named for the National Science and Mathematics Access to Retain Talent program—the Department of Education leaves off Evolutionary Biology. Majors are listed by Classification of Instructional Programs (CIP) codes, but the DOE leaves a blank line for number 26.1303, the CIP code for Evolutionary Biology.
Conclusions
Despite defeat after defeat, creationists have continued to attack science and refused to accept the constitutional mandate that prohibits government from endorsing any particular religious viewpoint. Over the course of the fight to ensure science’s critical place in the classroom, anti-Darwin activists have reshaped and renamed their tactics, but it’s clear that their goal—to discredit science and promote a specific religious worldview in public schools—has remained the same. No doubt creationists will continue their efforts as the country continues to stave off attacks on quality science as an accepted standard for schools and textbooks.
Mark said,
“The theory of evolution is of no threat to me, as is the Gospel of Jesus Christ to any school child.”
Mark, That is bullshit. Your “gospel” is bullshit. I don’t want them teaching bullshit to my kids in school. They can study that stuff in a college philosophy class. How would you like them teaching your kids Islam in school?
Most of the people of the world do not believe in your bullshit.
Keep religion out of government and keep government out of religion. OH! I almost forgot, that’s what the first ammendment does! Just think. If the founders had not been wise to the shortcomings of religion, we would have been involved in a perpetual civil war with all you religious nuts trying to gain dominion. We have the first ammendment and all the fossils. We win.
Alba,
Nice job. Awesome. Great post.
Noyatin,
Your 12:05 AM post sure got my attention. I had no idea of the ramifications aout the way the tetbooks are edited.
I will do some more research on this. Thanks.
Albatross: Excellent, well-cited 2;39a.m. post!
Mark,
Right. In other words, there are things we don’t know. You can blame it on god, allah, or any other two bit diety you want to. Makes no mind to me, as long as you don’t try to teach it as science in the public schools.
Dale, Noyatin is correct. The content of all textbooks, no matter what state they will ultimately go to, is heavily influenced by what the Texas officials want.
Dale said to MJ: How would you like them teaching your kids Islam in school?
How about Hinduism? We all now how a simple prayer in opening a congressional session went over. Maybe they should some time on Confucious - a very wise man.
Or in govt classes, some time devoted to social*sm, or Communism, less the witchhunts and propaganda.
Mark: “As is the Gospel of Jesus Christ to any school child.” Having been raised Catholic in the early (pre-Vatican II) Sixties, my school years were filled with the fear of being cast into Hell at any time. I remember being in confession and trying to make myself feel guilty about sneaking a cookie before dinner by telling myself that my actions added to Jesus’ suffering on the cross. I know that these experiences were not uncommon.
Now that I’m an adult, I think that the belief system foisted on me, which was passed off as the Gospel of Jesus Christ, was sick and stupid.
I would be appalled at having this or any other faith being taught by civil servants in public buildings at taxpayer expense.
Your thoughts?
Yup. I’m sorry, I also meant to speak to that. Noyatin is 100% correct on that point.
NJ, here’s another instance in the debate disruption, lest PFAW didn’t provide adequate example. This one New Mexico. http://www.nmsr.org/nm-stds.htm
In 1996, “creationist friendly” had become the standard, effectively STRIPPING the word evolution from the textbooks. 2002/2003 - by a measure of unanimous agreement, a 13-0 vote, and it was understood that religious “theory” had no place in science class. But what of those seven years of pseudoscience?
The point is that somebody loses, just like Tony said! Then there’s that ripple effect the hits the rest of us directly or indirectly.
But are your here, NJ, to try and understand the detrimental effects of teaching God as science? Nope. I didn’t think so.
Dale,
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
These words do not say keep “religion out of government”.
They do say that Congress shall make no law…………….
It is a restrictive on Congress.
Implied is that govt will not endorse or promote one particular religion. Allowing creationism into the schools is just that. You’re smart, Mark. Were all the judges who said it is religion just left leaning liberals? Or are they wasting their time and everybody else’s by having to reaffirm this over and again?
Nice avoidance of the questions.
Albatross,
Please show me in the US Constitution where it specifically states that a community of people cannot express their religious beliefs by placing a plaque or monument in a public building or having prayer in schools.
The fact is this - Congress SHALL PASS NO LAW respecting establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.
The twisted perversion of the intent of the US Constitution has never been higher than during this time when hating anything religious is vogue.
“The objective is to convince people that Darwinism is inherently atheistic, thus shifting the debate from creationism vs. evolution to the existence of God vs. the non-existence of God. From there people are introduced to ‘the truth’ of the Bible and then ‘the question of sin’ and finally ‘introduced to Jesus.’”
Phillip Johnson
Convince people? Don’t the rights as held BY the people say something about freedom of conscience? freedom FROM coercion?
Shift the debate to GOD??? And yet all the ID supporters are still trying to say the issue is science and not theology? See where it says and “finally introduced to Jesus?”
I usually hate to make reference to the Nazis (Mark does that best), but this is eerily Goebble(ish).
Mark, Mark, the conversation isn’t about your idol monuments. It is about creationism in the schools. It is about the fact that we are losing intelligence, and replacing it subversively with theology, and yet we still expect to compete effectively in the world?
Oh yeah, if you’re the Ruling Empire of the world it doesn’t matter how stupid you are.
Care to address the questions?
I suppose its IMPLIED that if the government thinks you’re dangerous they can kick the door in at your home and confiscate your home computer.
I suppose its IMPLIED that a cop can pull you over in your car and kick your ass if you disrespect him and the cop is immune from prosecution.
Its IMPLIED that Mexican women can sneak across our border, squat and birth a child, and that kid is an American citizen.
Troll Monitor Memorandum
___________________________
Well done everyone. I have gold stars pasted on your posts. There was one small slip but the offender was sufficiently contrite that I will only pull off one of his arms.
Thanks to TR and Jo.
Thanks to Mark and NJ too.
I did enjoy reading through the posts from last evening. Good stuff.
I will be taking my three seven year old charges in quest for Brook trout today. We are lucky up here. Most of the creeks are gravel bottomed due to the glacial action that occured here back when I was a kid. The Allegheny River is one of the longest gravel bottom rivers in the world which is cool because the creeks, streams, and river run clear except after heavy rains. Anyway I always take my bird book,forcepts, and 30X monoclular. The innate curiosity of kids is fascinating to me, and, the teacher sometimes learns more than the students!
Thanks all.
To your prayer question. Freedom of religion is freedom for all. Not a majority rule. So, again, would you have a problem with Islamic prayer in your child’s school? Hebrew? Hindu? It seems you prefer one flavor. The Constitution speaks worlds to that, Mark. Read it…just take off your bias lens before you do.
The Constitution does not EVER say you have freedom FROM something.
No, Mark, none of those things is implicit. In fact they WERE explicit, until the present administration decided to eliminate Habeus Corpus, and institute spy programs in the name of fighting terrorism.
So DO they spy on you? Yes. Can they come and take you and your computer? Yes.
I remember most of the RR saying, “I have nothing to hide,” so they were willing to sacrifice their rights for some protection. I do believe there is a famous quote, by one of the founder’s that speaks directly to people like that. Something to the effect of, “Those who would sacrifice their rights for protection deserve neither.”
But again, you digress. Freedom of conscience isn’t implied, and the subject of interpretive debate. It’s a given. Same with coercion.
How about non-Christian prayers, Mark? OK for your kids? You are so inclusive and tolerant aftar all that it really can’t be about wanting only one religion replacing science. School should be a 7 hr day of one belief system after another, right? No coercion, just balanced religious instruction. Who needs math and science, anyways?
Dale, have a great day. You’re right about the “teacher” learning that occurs!
Mark: One of the duties of the judicial branch is to determine how the Consitution applies to circumstances not in existence when the Constitution was written. Take the Second amendment as an example. When it was written, the framer’s understanding of “arms” was limited to muskets, flimtlock pistols, cannon, and other weapons of the late 18th century. Does the Consitution only protect these weapons? No- the principle underlying this amendment has resulted in decisions determining the extent to which individuals may own weapons of various types. Similarly, the principle underlying the “establishment” of a religion has been applied to various types of govenmental activities.
There were no public school systems when the First Amendment was adopted. When public schools came along, and when the country grew to include persons of many faiths and persons of no faith, and when the 14th amendment expanded the provisions of the Bill of Rights to the states, the question then arose as to whether using tax monies to pay for religious instruction was an “establishment of religion.”
And the Constitution DOESN’T say that a cop can’t pull you over and kick your butt. The determination that such specific conduct falls under the more genral protections of the Bill of Rights was made (amid great controversy) by “activist” judges using the 14th Amendment to apply the Bill of Rights to the states. Originalists like Justice Thomas would like nothing better than to roll back those protections.
Noyatin,
Your 9:10 post mirrors my own experience except I had rejected the myths by the time I was twelve years old.
Mark Jumper Says:The Constitution does not EVER say you have freedom FROM something.
Semantics. You cannot have your religious freedom with out having freedom of or freedom from. Two sides, same coin. The Constitution also doesn’t say, “OK, you can have your freedom of religion, but you must pick one to be signed up with.” Freedom of. Freedom from.
general
Mark,
“These words do not say keep “religion out of government”.”
So, the ol’ one way wall theory. Nice try.
Noyatin, good post. I have seen you have to post this same thing over and again. I guess the Constitution narrowly applies at the convenience of a select few on a case by case basis, as they see fit.
Perhaps they think it was written for them alone. Rights are hard to come by when you’re a second-class non-Christian, or even a second-class Christian of the “wrong” sort.
Yes, but that one way wall, Dale, is exclusive to a certain kind of religious interference only. Non-evangelical fundamentalists need not apply. Onward Christian soldier.
I can see it coming. The next think Mark will say is that the constitution is based on the ten commandments.
Albatross,
The US Declaration of Independence states that God Himself bestowed our rights and liberties upon us. The entire American political experiment is based on that unique premise. No other bulwark exists to safeguard the natural rights of human beings except Divine sanction. Remove God, and you also remove all claims to liberty, rights, meaning and purpose.
MJ said: The twisted perversion of the intent of the US Constitution has never been higher than during this time when hating anything religious is vogue.
Frustration rearing its ugly head? Actually, the clarifi