Palin Wants Creationism Taught In Schools

Published on August 30th, 2008

Posted by KD Martin in General, Politics

L-McCain R-Palin

In a 2006 gubernatorial debate, the soon-to-be governor of Alaska said of evolution and creation education, “Teach both. You know, don’t be afraid of education. Healthy debate is so important, and it’s so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both.”

Asked by the Anchorage Daily News whether she believed in evolution, Palin declined to answer, but said that “I don’t think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class.” “I’m not going to pretend I know how all this came to be,” she said.

“It’s unfortunate McCain would pick someone who shares those particular anti-science views, but it’s not a surprise,” said Barbara Forrest, a Southeastern Lousiana University philosophy professor and prominent critic of creationist science. “She’s a choice that pleases the religious right. And the religious right has been the chief force against teaching evolution.”

Palin’s statements track with the official Alaska Republican Party platform, which support creation science and intelligent design by name, and says that “evidence disputing the theory should also be presented.”

When asked about Palin potentially being a step removed from the White House, Forrest responded, “We’d have a creationist as President. But that’s not new — we’ve already got one.”

We wonder if this will be discussed in the coming debates.

85 users responded in " Palin Wants Creationism Taught In Schools "

Subscribe to this post comment rss or trackback url

# 1 Higghawker said, on August 30th, 2008 at 4:11 am

Finally, someone with some smarts!

# 2 Darrell said, on August 30th, 2008 at 4:26 am

In an interview Thursday, Palin said she meant only to say that discussion of alternative views should be allowed to arise in Alaska classrooms:

“I don’t think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn’t have to be part of the curriculum.”

She added that, if elected, she would not push the state Board of Education to add such creation-based alternatives to the state’s required curriculum.

Members of the state school board, which sets minimum requirements, are appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Legislature.

“I won’t have religion as a litmus test, or anybody’s personal opinion on evolution or creationism,” Palin said.

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

# 3 Improbus said, on August 30th, 2008 at 4:29 am

This is the 21st century. Can we please stop living in the bronze age? Please?

# 4 Shubee said, on August 30th, 2008 at 4:29 am

Physicists already teach creationism. They call it the Big Bang. For example, please consider the following lecture by Stephen Hawking where the professor says, “The universe can spontaneously create itself out of nothing.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjBIsp8mS-c

# 5 moss said, on August 30th, 2008 at 4:40 am

Neat. We get most of the Talking Points from both the dimwit creationists and neocon nutballs layed out at the beginning of the Comments.

Lies, rationales, deception. The hypocrites parade. Anything is “reasonable” except reality and science. But, then, a significant portion of life’s discourse – by the superstitious – is based on feel-good self deception, as it is.

# 6 The Warden said, on August 30th, 2008 at 4:41 am

The great thing about becoming VP is that she will have no control over what is taught in the class room. And if she’s a real conservative, she’ll help break up the Federal strangle hold on education and let local communities start to dictate what is taught and hopefully then parents will get involved.

But I love how the leftists bloggers that John has hired keep nit picking at the little things Republican do yet stay silent on the Democrats.

Just gotta love disingenuous leftist bloggers.

# 7 Paddy-O said, on August 30th, 2008 at 4:46 am

“We wonder if this will be discussed in the coming debates.”

We wonder if anything of substance will be discussed in the coming debates… Probably not.

# 8 mathaway said, on August 30th, 2008 at 4:49 am

I think we should call each other names so that neither side really wants to listen to what the other side is saying. Then we should count up the votes and find someone willing to pass a law saying that the losing party is no longer allowed to discuss their view. After all, this country was founded on one person or group pushing their ideology on everyone else.

# 9 Digby said, on August 30th, 2008 at 4:58 am

It’s about F’in time we had a TWO hotties in the White House! Eight years of that cow Hillary was disgusting. And the Obama lady, what a nasty bitch! Yessiree, boys, I am a sexist and I VOTE!

# 10 Dr Dodd said, on August 30th, 2008 at 5:19 am

What an extraordinary turn of events! That crafty old fox McCain has out-changed Obama in picking Palin as his VP.

For the next few months, that whining sound you hear will be the Obama supporters responding to their upcoming defeat.

# 11 Hyph3n said, on August 30th, 2008 at 5:20 am

#4 Physicists already teach creationism. They call it the Big Bang.

Actually, there are several theories as to how the universe came about. They’re just tough to prove because everything you can see, taste or touch (and everything you can’t) was squeeze into an infinitesimal small point.

That’s a little bit different then saying that the dinosaurs died because they couldn’t fit on the ark.

# 12 Bigbob said, on August 30th, 2008 at 5:24 am

LOOKS LIKE GRANDPA AND GRANDDAUGHTER!!!!!

# 13 teaches said, on August 30th, 2008 at 5:27 am

why not teach both? nothing wrong with that…

# 14 Cursor_ said, on August 30th, 2008 at 5:32 am

Look if creationism is such a fairy story, wouldn’t smart kids trained in the public school systems of the USA know it is bunk???

Oh that’s right… public schools in the USA teach you go be good little morons that believe anything the news tells you, drink beer to excess and watch Dancing With The Stars.

Forgive me I almost forgot they teach to the lowest common denominator.

Cursor_

# 15 joaoPT said, on August 30th, 2008 at 5:53 am

Creationism is fine if you believe in God and His word.
But believing is faith. And faith can’t be taught.
The education system must have a science class and a theology class. Theology is very important to understand History. But theology should not be Christian theology. Creation myths should be taught in school, not only Christian creationism but Hindu, Jewish and Muslim, as also creationism along the history of man, Druidic and Greek /Roman mythology.

Faith should be kept out of school.

# 16 Paddy-O said, on August 30th, 2008 at 6:00 am

#15 “But believing is faith. And faith can’t be taught.”

Funny, but every scientific hypothesis taught about the origin of the universe has so many gaping holes that it requires a lot of “faith” to believe them. LOL

# 17 OnyxAlien said, on August 30th, 2008 at 6:17 am

What is faith, but a belief in something without absolute empirical evidence. What the majority people don’t realize is that evolusionism is as much a faith as creationism if not more so.

@11 – Who said the dinosaurs wouldn’t fit on the Ark? I believe they were in fact among the other animals.

# 18 Buzz said, on August 30th, 2008 at 6:18 am

Ask her what her sign is. Then interview her astrologer. Might as well teach astrology, too.

Then include a course in comparative crackpot belief systems.

No sense stopping there either. Let’s take up the kiddies time with endless classes in Flat Earthism, Earth-as-Center-of-the-Solar-Systemism, Sun Godism, voodooism, Easter Island Statueism, Cargo Cultism, Lascaux Cave symbolism and Scientology.

All are equally valid to be taught shoulder to shoulder with Creationism.

Let’s show that pesky Scienceism that it deserves a big back of the class seat. It’s not as smart as it thinks it is.

# 19 LegHorn said, on August 30th, 2008 at 6:20 am

Creationism is the idea that God created Adam and Eve and all that we see. This was written by scholars (smart guys) thousand of years ago and is known to be truth by the majority of the world.

Local village wise men with a bone through their nose spouting stories of their ancestry does not count as creationism.

Or you can believe all of the world started as a pea sized object that held all of the universe and then it exploded and created everything – oh really.

# 20 sirfelix said, on August 30th, 2008 at 6:24 am

Well, Palin has plenty of international experience according to Fox News:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2Tl1oG4ut0

# 21 doug said, on August 30th, 2008 at 6:24 am

#13. “why not teach both? nothing wrong with that…”

as #17 says, why not teach astrology in astronomy class?

because it is not science.

#16 “Funny, but every scientific hypothesis taught about the origin of the universe has so many gaping holes that it requires a lot of “faith” to believe them.”

The fundamental difference between science and religion is scientific theories are provable or disprovable. You could assemble a mountain of evidence to disprove Biblical creationism (already been done, in fact), and its adherents would not disbelieve. come up with a smoking gun that disproves the big bang or evolution, and scientists will seek something else that is consistent with the evidence.

and as far as the holes in scientific theories? scientists work to fill those in. religion demands that you not even try (remember doubting Thomas?). not the same. not even close.

# 22 Paddy-O said, on August 30th, 2008 at 6:26 am

#19 “Or you can believe all of the world started as a pea sized object that held all of the universe and then it exploded and created everything”

I read this one while studying far Eastern ancient religion. Or, something extremely close to this.

What religion did this come from?

# 23 Spiny said, on August 30th, 2008 at 6:26 am

Glad I live in the UK. I suppose to be fair though, she should be in favour of the theory of intelligent holding down* versus gravitational theory.

* Flying Spaghetti Monster (ragu be upon him)

# 24 xr said, on August 30th, 2008 at 6:26 am

Why not teach both? Sure… but one theory should be taught in science class, while the other believe belongs in religious education.

As Stephen Hawking has been mentioned, let me paraphrase his stance as read in ‘A brief history of time’: Evolution and evolutionary cosmology describe what happened to our best understanding, taking causality into account. There is no reason whatsoever that an almighty god could have created earth and everything on it within 6 days about 6000 years ago. Being almighty he could surely have made it look like an understandable system, and even evolution.

The point here is that science is a systematic description and modeling of observations. It aims to make predictions based on what we have observed in the past. This does not exclude the possibility of a higher power that may have implemented the ‘laws’ science finds now.

Any scientific theory has 2 requirements: 1. explain past observations, 2. predict new observations. Furthermore the theory should be adapted if observations do not fit within the existing description.

If I would have to evaluate creationism as a scientific theory I would say it is perfect in describing past observations (requirement 1) up to a point, but useless as a predictor of new observations (requirement 2), because god is an unpredictable component in the model. Furthermore, it has the awkward property that the current description tends to be taken as a perfect given, whereas new observations should at least have the possibility to lead to an adaptation of the theory.

A scientific theory inherently never claims to be perfect, or unchangeable; and that is just what creationism does claim: start all and end all. In that sense creationism is not a scientific description, and should not be taught as one.

# 25 joaoPT said, on August 30th, 2008 at 6:27 am

#16
These are theories. Theories are not believed, but proven… or not.
They’re as good as they hold true, in light of the known science.
Usually they are not disproven but become subsets. Like Newtonian gravitation mechanics are true for a restricted set of spatial and temporal conditions (they got you to the moon and back…) but cannot explain the universe at large…

# 26 Paddy-O said, on August 30th, 2008 at 6:29 am

#24 “These are theories. Theories are not believed, but proven… or not.”

Like the “big band theory” & the “god created it all” theory…

# 27 QB said, on August 30th, 2008 at 6:34 am

#26 That’s just silly and you know it.

# 28 joaoPT said, on August 30th, 2008 at 6:35 am

#19
The only difference is that science explains (or seeks to explain) how the universe could fit on a pea sized object, like #21 said.
Religion only asks you to believe in the written word.
The “wise men with a bone through their noses” bit was a cheap shot, and reveals more on your cultural relativism than your blind faith.

# 29 Paddy-O said, on August 30th, 2008 at 6:42 am

#28 “The only difference is that science explains (or seeks to explain) how the universe could fit on a pea sized object”

I’ve seen fairy tales attempt to explain ridiculous ideas also. I makes then no less, well, ridiculous.

# 30 J said, on August 30th, 2008 at 6:46 am

# 16 Paddy-O

False

17 OnyxAlien

False

# 19 LegHorn

False

# 22 Paddy-O

None

# 23 Spiny

LOL Amen brother lol

# 26 Paddy-O

“Like the “big band theory” & the “god created it all” theory…”

“The Big Bang” is a theory “God created it” is not!

If you can’t see the difference the you are more fucking stupid than I give you credit for.

# 31 qsabe said, on August 30th, 2008 at 6:48 am

Is it wise to teach superstition in schools. Gee the folks that are saying yes are the same folks who would get all uptight if the superstition being taught was coming from an Islamic point of view. How about three semesters of Wican, and afternoon classes in Hinduism. We are supposed to be the land of the free and doesn’t that mean my kids can be free from you imposing your superstitions upon them, or does it mean you are free to force feed your superstitions on others children. My what a quandary you have. I know, why not return to the old days, you know back before they put god on the money and teach kids the three R’s and leave the superstition up to the parents and churches to to use as their populace control agents.

# 32 xr said, on August 30th, 2008 at 6:55 am

#29
I believe… I believe that if God created the world he would have known about probability distributions, and math, and meson, photons and boson, and all the great things we just begun to understand recently.

I may even come to believe that the great pyramids of Egypt weren’t built by slaves, but planted there by god as a puzzle to keep us wondering.

However, if I want to build a new pyramid, it’s far more constructive to assume that he didn’t and try to figure out how man kind constructed it. And maybe we are dead wrong about how they were built, but at least it led us to an (alternative) way to get it done.

In mentioned it above: science doesn’t claim truth, religion does. Pure science describes how thing may have happened -knowing what we know- and tests that whether that model works in new cases: it’s a description of how thing may have happened in terms we can grasp.

I like to try and understand things I see, or at least have a working model. And I’m not arrogant enough to claim to understand god… so I try to keep him out of my models.

# 33 Jägermeister said, on August 30th, 2008 at 7:01 am

If creationism is to be taught in school, then why not teach the creation stories of all the other religions? The US school system would be filled with crap and the US can silently slip down to the bottom of the IQ pool.

# 34 LegHorn said, on August 30th, 2008 at 7:01 am

26
Big band theory – is that like when Paul McCartney went from the Beatles to the Wings and added a horn section?

#28
I not a smart guy, so even if the “scientists” did see seek to explain this I would be taking their word for it. So I am just to “ believe” the scientist?

Bone-in-the-nose referrers to people that have a verbal tradition – I realize now that I may have offended some of you.

# 35 Doodles said, on August 30th, 2008 at 7:02 am

http://do-dells.blogspot.com/

It’s all so obvious really …

# 36 smartalix said, on August 30th, 2008 at 7:02 am

not only are those defending creationism in school a bunch of either idiots or panderers, to have a someone who wants to lead us actually profess that shit in any way on a serious basis is pretty fucking scary.

We as a nation are in very real danger of becoming a second-rate nation in science and technology, and we have assholes trying to dumbe our children down further.

Paddy-o,

If you knew the math to confront the claims of physicists, feel free. the true mark of scence is that you can chgellenge anything as long as you can back it up in a repeatable and predictable manner. Go against faith and you could get killed by the ignorant masses.

# 37 Jägermeister said, on August 30th, 2008 at 7:05 am

#32 – xr – science doesn’t claim truth, religion does

Which religion has the correct version of God?

# 38 Michael said, on August 30th, 2008 at 7:07 am

You did notice, did you not, that she didn’t suggest teaching one or the either (evolution or creationism). Her statement was to teach both, and foster debate. If a student has a question try to answer it.

I dislike both McCain and Palin because of their general positions. I do, however, love and completely agree with Palin’s statement, “I’m not going to pretend I know how all this came to be.”

That statement in and of itself show more faith than any loud mouth preacher on the television. After all, what is faith but the opposite of certainty.

She’s a super right-wing conservative. It was a really bad choice by McCain. The only way he could have made a worse choice would have been picking Romney. Either way he has guaranteed he will not get my vote. I will not have a extremist (of either slant) running my country.

# 39 doug said, on August 30th, 2008 at 7:14 am

one more – since we are teaching creationism in science class, shouldn’t we also teach faith healing in health class?

# 40 Mister Ketchup said, on August 30th, 2008 at 7:16 am

#37 – Great point! I think they should get all of these religious groups together to fight it out. We could pay off the national debt from pay-per-view and popcorn sales.

# 41 QB said, on August 30th, 2008 at 7:16 am

This mindless debate misses a big point. It looks like Governor Palin has a limited understanding of science and technology. While the VP may not have a huge influence on policy and spending, it doesn’t bode well for American competitiveness.

She is obviously a lightweight in many ways but is a populist. John McCain selected her on his gut, some book he read about her, and one meeting. McCain is an angry, emotional, lazy populist who will make gut decisions like this.

# 42 xr said, on August 30th, 2008 at 7:17 am

#37
The answer to your question: I have no clue who has the correct version… but I do know all religions claim to be the only one to have it figured out.

I am not even too sure God exists (but that’s besides the point here). What I do know is that the larger religions do have a fairly large overlap in their fundamental ideas about how to deal with your fellow humans and (their) god. So maybe there is just one god, and mankind messed things up: Everyone believes in the same god, calls him differently and fights over ‘cosmetics’.

Then again… the core teachings of the Greek and Roman myths overlap considerably with the Bible too….

# 43 Jägermeister said, on August 30th, 2008 at 7:19 am

#38 – Michael – You did notice, did you not, that she didn’t suggest teaching one or the either (evolution or creationism). Her statement was to teach both, and foster debate. If a student has a question try to answer it.

Shouldn’t other pseudosciences also be taught (such as astrology, occultism, quackery etc)?

# 44 MikeN said, on August 30th, 2008 at 7:21 am

That was fast. Now bring out the she’s extreme anti-abortion talking points.

# 45 xr said, on August 30th, 2008 at 7:23 am

#40

Isn’t that kinda what’s been going on for at least 2000-3000 years? Except for popcorn and pay-per-view, of course… that has only been going on since the early days of the last century.

# 46 Jägermeister said, on August 30th, 2008 at 7:24 am

#42 – xr – What I do know is that the larger religions do have a fairly large overlap in their fundamental ideas about how to deal with your fellow humans and (their) god.

That’s because the three major religions (at least in the part of the world we live in) are all different versions of the same thing.

Ver. 1 – Judaism
Ver. 2 – Christianity
Ver. 3 – Islam

And they all hate each other, because they cater to the same clientele.

# 47 soundwash said, on August 30th, 2008 at 7:26 am

my kneejerk reaction to the headline was,
“great, the repubs actually outsmarted the
dems at their own game with this clever, near genius, chess-like move of a VP pick. then they shoot themselves in the foot straight off with this idiocy..

then i see its taken out of context from a two year old article..

(thanks #2 -Darrel, for the link)

KDMartin -20 lashes with a wet noodle to you..
DU is known for its humour and minor embellishments here and there..but when it comes posting actual news articles/headlines,
the majority of the DU bloggers, left or right, will note when the article being referenced is old news or taken out of context..

-i suggest you follow suite. -otherwise you only strengthen the common knowledge of the left always taking things waaay out of context just to make a “disingenuous point” as was said above.. -shoot straight or don’t shoot at all.

now, on with the bashing..

Palin has the potential to help get the repub party back on its feet. she embodies alot of the Reagan era principles, which were probably the best the repups had to offer in a long time..(say what you want, but America and the dollar grew very strong during his terms)

-however, the fact that she had pre-natal knowledge of downs syndrome kid cooking in her oven, and still birthed it, to me, is shear f’n stupidity on her part. period.

-that would make me question her logic.
(if i may be sexist here for a moment..yes, i know equating logic with woman is an exercise in humor at best, but has been known to happen.)

there is no rhyme or reason to birth defective humans if you have the ability to know before hand it has deformities of any kind.

-lord knows we have more than we need already running around on the planet.

imo, the Spartans had a good policy on defective babies.. (however, i’m biased,
-i’m greek)

-regardless, imo, religious and pro-life zealots have always been the repub parties major weakness.

as for dems, -they’re just socialists in sheeps
clothing. -’nuff said.

-but then, it really doesn’t matter, both parties are owned by BigBanks. one party just lies more about it than the other..and the other party sells you grandier, prettier marketed illusions..

no matter who’s Kool-Aid you drink, -it’s still Kool-Aid.

-s

(another dubious pre-coffee post)

# 48 Jägermeister said, on August 30th, 2008 at 7:31 am

#40 – Mister Ketchup

*LMAO* In the left corner we’ve got Rabbi Levin and in the right corner we got Ayatollah Sistani… FIGHT!

# 49 bac said, on August 30th, 2008 at 7:31 am

The difference between science and religion. Religion permits anything that the creator allows. If the creator allows it, a sky scraper can be built from the top down. Science states only those things that follow the laws of nature are permitted. So the sky scraper needs to be built starting at the bottom when gravity is relatively strong. The question is which sky scraper will actually get built.

I think an alternative to math ought to be taught. This will bring about the demise of the ability to count our fingers.

# 50 Alf said, on August 30th, 2008 at 7:41 am

Does God want Creationism taught in public schools? Or for that matter does God want Republican agenda?

The following was sent to me by a friend…the logic makes sense.

When discussing the Rep Convention, I think everyone should also mention that GOD has rendered his judgment. That is, Dobson called for people to pray to God for rain to rain out the Democrats acceptance speech in the outdoor stadium. He asked GOD to intervene is a nasty, negative, political way. The evening was perfect for the Democrats, not too hot, not too cold, not cloudy — perfect! And now, God is sending 2 hurricanes for the Republican Convention. C’mon, either they believe what they talk about or they don’t.

# 51 Paddy-O said, on August 30th, 2008 at 7:44 am

#49 “Science states only those things that follow the laws of nature are permitted.”

Not true. Take the big bang theory (not the one Clinton followed), natural laws have to be suspended for it to be true…

So, try again.

# 52 brendal said, on August 30th, 2008 at 8:03 am

BUAHAHAH! Egggsellent…get you all debating about God and Science while others rule the world…DIABOLICAL…and it works!

# 53 James Hill said, on August 30th, 2008 at 8:06 am

If this is the first serious attack again her, consider it a failure.

Anyone who views the teaching of creationism (as a negative) in school as a serious issue wouldn’t have voted GOP to begin with… regardless of the names on the ticket.

Personally, I see McCain scrapping No Child Left Behind and turning the DOE into a small group that just sends checks to state school boards.

# 54 Paddy-O said, on August 30th, 2008 at 8:14 am

#53 “Personally, I see McCain scrapping No Child Left Behind and turning the DOE into a small group”

Kinda like before the DoEd existed and schools started going into the crapper?

# 55 KD Martin said, on August 30th, 2008 at 8:16 am

then i see its taken out of context from a two year old article..

The story is news to many, and I see it is news to you also.

I’m neither liberal nor conservative, neither a D nor an R. The article was published by Wired and reported here for the edification of the readers of this blog, nothing more, nothing less.

# 56 Angel H. Wong said, on August 30th, 2008 at 8:32 am

I wonder how many years will it take for the US educational system to become as shitty as the one here in Honduras?

# 57 Right said, on August 30th, 2008 at 8:42 am

33 – I totally agree with you about the level of intelligence going down if creationism or intelligent design is taught in schools. That’s the quickest way to alienate your graduates from a real education there is. Imagine large companies reading the resumes where the applicants have high credits for courses in intelligent design? “Get back to us when you have a real education”. I’d love to see the time where companies would actively recruit atheists. Now there’s progress.

# 58 Balbas said, on August 30th, 2008 at 9:08 am

Just what the US needs for the 21st Century: another scientific illiterate in Washington.

# 59 QB said, on August 30th, 2008 at 9:10 am

Onyx said: “What the majority people don’t realize is that evolusionism is as much a faith as creationism if not more so.”

Wow, a broadly sweeping and unsubstantiated statement without support! You must be a creationist.

BTW, trying to paint science as a religion by using a non-word like ‘evolusinism’ is kind of lame.

# 60 soundwash said, on August 30th, 2008 at 9:16 am

#55 KD Martin:

-i still feel the title should have had some little snide “DUish”remark appended to it, -to note its age, perhaps.

in your defense, i had hyperlink underlining
disabled in my system and did not catch the hyperlink to the Wired article. -had i caught
that, i would not have barked at you as loud as i did. i instead, based my response on the article link provided by one of the posts above mine. -thinking you dug it up and
re posted it..

-for that, i apologize.

(and my pre-coffee posts tend be a bit more harsh as well..oh well)

-s

# 61 J said, on August 30th, 2008 at 9:25 am

# 51 Paddy-O said, on August 30th, 2008 at 7:44 am
“Not true. Take the big bang theory (not the one Clinton followed), natural laws have to be suspended for it to be true… ”

That is why it is a theory Paddy-it! It is only one theory about the beginning of the universe. What your “moranic” brain cant seem to grasp that creationism and intelligent design don’ t even fit the definition of “THEORY”. Here is a hint. A theory is not just a guess. It is also not just a biblical story.

# 62 Cirdan said, on August 30th, 2008 at 9:30 am

@59 There is a bunch of proof to disprove evolution too. People just cover their ears and go la-la-la to ignore the proof. The proof and arguments from the creationist side to disprove evolution is not taught in schools. They only teach one thing, so of course your going to believe what you’ve been taught for twelve years.

# 63 QB said, on August 30th, 2008 at 9:40 am

Cirdan, such as?

# 64 Skippy said, on August 30th, 2008 at 9:50 am

#62, please present this proof that disproves evolution. I’m guessing it’s as full of holes and inconsistencies as the bible.

# 65 Right said, on August 30th, 2008 at 9:56 am

I would love to see this proof presented as well. Please remember, Cirdan, to be scientific in your statements so we can analyze them properly.

# 66 QB said, on August 30th, 2008 at 10:11 am

Personally, I don’t really care about creationism per se. Of course, this stuff is best debated in Philosophy and Rhetoric but we don’t teach that in schools anymore.

The problem I have with the whole thing is that creationists won’t do the hard work to be taken seriously. Most of their arguments boil down to “If I squint hard enough, I see intelligent design”. All of it’s based on post hoc speculation and not research.

I’m a skeptic so what I want to be convinced. I want to see creationists put their money where their mouth is and propose experiments which would support their position and discount other explanations. That would require serious thought, logic, and a lot of hard work. If you want to be taken seriously, be serious.

The whole intelligent design position is whiney and self-centered. Creationists come off as just another group demanding their rights without the accompanying responsibility.

# 67 John Paradox said, on August 30th, 2008 at 10:40 am

Don’t forget to have Intelligent Falling in physics class.

J/P=?

All praise the FSM!

# 68 Jägermeister said, on August 30th, 2008 at 10:48 am

#62 – Cirdan – The proof and arguments from the creationist side to disprove evolution is not taught in schools.

Creationism – Dumbing down the population, one kid at the time.

# 69 Jägermeister said, on August 30th, 2008 at 10:51 am

#67 – John Paradox – All praise the FSM!

Hail to the FSM.

# 70 brendal said, on August 30th, 2008 at 11:11 am

She’s a politician with a J-school degree…she’s packin’ more with that than anytime she hits the shooting range…you’ll see. In fact, I’m surprised John hasn’t commented on this yet.

# 71 QB said, on August 30th, 2008 at 12:58 pm

Jagermeister, that’s hysterical. Squint and you’ll see God.

# 72 hhopper said, on August 30th, 2008 at 2:51 pm

“creationist science” = oxymoron

# 73 baremauler said, on August 30th, 2008 at 3:18 pm

Evolution is fact.
I take back what I said yesterday.
baremauler

If you have a friend, or emenmy, that could appreciate a couple fat guys beating on them, give us a call.

baremaulers

# 74 Cursor_ said, on August 30th, 2008 at 3:25 pm

The only reason why the people that only want evolution taught is because they know most americans are so dumb they would believe ANYTHING if it came from a teacher or someone with a lambskin on the wall.

This argument works for people that only want creationism.

No matter who’s dogma it is, it will still leave shit on the carpet.

Cursor_

# 75 R.O.P. said, on August 30th, 2008 at 6:17 pm

Sorry LegHorn, christians are in the minority in the world, so evidently by your logic, you are wrong!

# 76 bobbo said, on August 30th, 2008 at 6:31 pm

#68-69==Jag==how many two’fers do you get in a row on a thread? Both excellent.

“Behold, the atheists nightmare!”===and all I actually thought was “Yea, those two bozo’s.”

The argument goes by Intelligent Design and show the approach completely–not so much intelligent design as human imagination that a pattern or design exists. I had to laugh a few months ago I read the best response to the effect that banana’s of the type they used were completely human engineered from the wild stock available. Even though their are at least 250 species of bananas (from memory) the Chaquita Banana we find in stores is a human creation of directed breeding.

That clip should be shown everytime any ID argument is raised. Thanks.

# 77 Thomas said, on August 30th, 2008 at 8:24 pm

#51
> Not true. Take the
> big bang theory (not
> the one Clinton followed),
> natural laws have to
> be suspended for it
> to be true…

Also not true. The Big Bang Theory is really a scientific hypothesis that appears to fit the available data.

#62
> There is a bunch of
> proof to disprove
> evolution too.

Evolution is an observable fact. Your statement is the equivalent of saying there is proof that the sun does not rise and that objects do not fall.

# 78 Uncle Patso said, on August 31st, 2008 at 2:28 am

Just think of all the money we’ll save on medicine! We can get rid of Medicaid, Medicare and all those costly medical schools and arrogant, self-satisfied doctors. All those tons of medical school texts can be replaced with a Bible and your friendly local neighborhood faith healer!

Come on, you can’t argue against geology, physics, and more than one hundred years of biological science in one breath and FOR medical science in the other, can you?

# 79 Mister Mustard said, on August 31st, 2008 at 5:33 am

Hey. Regardless of her seemingly dunderheaded views on teaching creationism or ID (or whatever you want to call it) in the classroom, she DOES have a good grasp of the immigration issue:

http://tinyurl.com/59lfj9

# 80 Jägermeister said, on August 31st, 2008 at 5:43 am

#76 – bobbo – Both excellent.

Thanks.

not so much intelligent design as human imagination that a pattern or design exists

Imagination is an important cornerstone of any religion. One experiment to prove that it’s all in the head would be to get together 25 people who have seen Jesus and have them individually draw his image. After all, it’s such an important dude, so the image much be etched in their memory. I’m pretty sure that the beard would be the only thing the images would have in common.

# 81 Jägermeister said, on August 31st, 2008 at 5:53 am

#79 – Mister Mustard

Just imagine him being Mexican… no way he would get an honorary citizenship…

# 82 Mister Mustard said, on August 31st, 2008 at 6:08 am

#81 – Jägermeister

>>Just imagine him being Mexican… no way
>>he would get an honorary citizenship…

Well, I don’t know. If Cheech Marin weren’t already a citizen, I’ll bet he’d have a good shot at it with her,. Governor Palin does have extensive experience with the chronic, the bud, the blunts.

# 83 Jägermeister said, on August 31st, 2008 at 6:15 am

#82 – Mister Mustard

Cheech Marin is cool… but he gives JCD nightmares…

# 84 Steve Shafer said, on August 31st, 2008 at 7:56 am

Palin has spent 2 years as governor of a state whose population is a quarter that of Brooklyn. She is unqualified. Her limited intellect is shown by her belief that creationism should be given “equal time” in science classrooms with evolution. That McCain would pick an unqualified woman of limited intellect demonstrates that he is more interested in winning the election than providing competent leadership. That “social conservatives” hail this as a great candidate shows that they care more about their personal agenda than securing the future of our country.

# 85 Jägermeister said, on August 31st, 2008 at 8:06 am

#84 – Steve Shafer – …“social conservatives” … care more about their personal agenda than securing the future of our country.

Bush catered to these folks and got elected, so don’t be too surprised.

Leave Your Reply Below...

Comment Moderation is Active, so if your comment doesn't
show up immediately, please don't submit it again.

Special Deals 4U

25% off eHarmony subscription with code EHTECH
12-percent discount forever with code TECH
10-percent discount and free month using TECH10
10-percent or 30 dollars off weekly car rental!
Get 10-percent discount on car rental!
Get 10% off rental cars!
Get 10% off Dollar rentals!
Discounts on domain names!