Kentucky Republicans passed education legislation in 2009 that made it easier to compare the state’s students to other states. Now they’re very upset that the results came back Stupid.
[...]
“I think we are very committed to being able to take Kentucky students and put them on a report card beside students across the nation,” said Republican Sen. David Givens. “We’re simply saying to the ACT people we don’t want what is a theory to be taught as a fact in such a way it may damage students’ ability to do critical thinking.”

So, learning to think critically about religion is bad while not doing so with science is good? Huh.



  1. Mr Fix- says:

    Simply fix. Just add a Bible Study section to the test and weight it the same as the biology / science portion.

    • Dean says:

      and while we’re at it lets add astrology, energy healing and divination.

    • observer says:

      Adding a Bible Study section would just prove that they don’t really know that much about the Bible either.

    • dusanmal says:

      So close but so far from the real solution. It is to have Science study AND separate Religion study (not a single religion, teaching fundamentals about most prominent few religions would be satisfactory curriculum). In Public Schools. Because vast majority of people served by Public Schools and in the nation are religious by their own opinion. Denying that education causes all this hoopla. What is denied – social forces push against (pretty much equivalent of Newton’s Law). Than and only than you can ask only questions from the explicitly Science angle in Science tests and only Religious questions in Religious testing. Than and only than people will not feel denied and will not push for intermingling two vastly separate tracks along the seam where they virtually touch. Only than for example can student see that Science approaches issues as creation from completely different viewpoint and with different meaning vs. Religious approach, method and meaning of similarly named objective. Only than pupils can understand both sides fully and know how to distinguish seemingly same questions when asked from two different disciplines. This would help not only on Science/Religion issue but in their lives in general.

      • Lymphnode says:

        “than” ???

        • What? says:

          Exactly.

          Learning, it’s worthwhile.

          • mayor bloomburger says:

            wow dunsumal, what you’re saying would make a lot of sense if their wasn’t separation of Church and State in this country, the precedent against what you’re saying hadn’t been established over and over in the Supreme Court, and there were not tens of thousands of churches and libraries all over the US where children can learn about religion during their free-time for free. On the other hand, maybe the US should be run like a theocracy …. like the Vatican City, or Iran.

  2. bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

    From the link, what does this mean?: “Rather predictably, the Kentucky GOP is madder than a plumber in a Chipotle.”

    The link in the link is a more interesting read emphasizing more of the religious angle: http://kansascity.com/2012/08/15/3763138/kentuckys-gop-lawmakers-question.html

    The school is confusing/conflating a number of issues: The ACT score is about a students ability to succeed in academics at the college level. How saved the students are or how happy they will be in Church on Sunday or persecuting homosexuals or women who want to abort babies requires a different kind of test.

    School should have known that from the get go.

    Silly Hoomans.

    • Uncle Dave says:

      The Chipotle plumber would presumably have a lot of clogged toilets after the food rushed through the patrons. Definitely stretching the Mexican food meme.

  3. msbpodcast says:

    Poor fucking repubes.

    It doesn’t matter how dumb they think we are, when we refuse to actually swallow their effluvia, (like those students did,) they’re in trouble.

  4. msbpodcast says:

    I love the quote from the article: Yes! Let’s teach students about how Chuck E. Cheese made the Earth out of popsicle sticks three years ago. We don’t want to damage them.

    LMFAO

  5. MadDogJack says:

    All these problems with Iran’s nuclear bomb potential are all for nothing! E=MC2 is all imaginary…Einstein MADE IT UP! Newton made up the theory of gravity. The idea that the Earth revolves around the sun was MADE UP! The idea that bacteria can become immune to antibiotics because of natural selection of characteristics sound like evolution so it MUST be wrong!
    Idiots.

  6. NewformatSux says:

    What a stupid article. Kentucky is full of bureaucrats who spend all day writing tests. 20 years ago they fell into the outcome-based education trap, and passed all sorts of school reforms. Every student gets tested every year with special statewide tests. Why do they need to pay the ACT for more tests?

    • What? says:

      Because it can’t be manipulated by those Kentucky bureaucrats? Because nationally recognized colleges and universities don’t trust states to accurately measure students’ academic achievements?

      • mayor bloomburger says:

        Which is why the have the SAT and AP tests, because grades don’t mean diddly-squat to colleges if you can’t get over a 3 on an AP or break 1000 on the SATs

      • NewformatSux says:

        That’s what the regular ACT and SAT as well as AP exams are for. Kentucky tests students every year, and insists that schools show improvement or they will be taken over by the state. They even make students do a writing portfolio across all subjects. They don’t need the ACT to write tests for them.

  7. orchidcup says:

    Critical thinking is okay as long as it is not applied to the Bible.

    I get it.

    • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

      This wasn’t the time you got it.

      But I’m certain you will, one day….right after physical death.

      Then you will see clearly.

      Evolution doesn’t occur in our experience, its a theory.

      The fossil record contradicts all life came from a single origin.

      Everything in life goes contrary to the any evolutionary principle.

      Its like saying the universe is shrinking, even though we know it is expanding.

      • Johan says:

        You really should look up the difference between a hypothesis and a theory in the scientific senses. Theory doesn’t mean what you think it means. And yes, evolution does happen in “our experiences” (whatever that means). Mutations are part of evolution, and mutations happen every day.

        • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

          A mutation is not evolution from one “kind” of life, to another.

          Just change within a species.

          Most mutations are harmful to the survival of organisms.

          The latest fossil finds, particularly those in China, show life didn’t evolve slowly from a few species…the diversity of life exists in the earliest fossil record.

          http://usstore.creation.com/catalog/evolution-fossils-still-p-900.html?osCsid=100cj9inoe9ev3r011baevlmq7

          • Joan Dvorak says:

            creation-dot-com?

            I bet THAT’S objective.

            Evolution is actually pretty simple, and simply understood. Anybody who doesn’t get it has to work at not getting it.

          • So what says:

            Alfie as usual your third grade knowledge of evolution is showing again. The majority of of mutations are neither harmful nor beneficial as they are not expressed within the population. Your DNA has mutations within its code that are there due to the combination of your parents DNA. These are random, as long as the base pairs line up AT CG or GC TA the strands will match up. If they did not you would not have survived your initial attempt at conception.

            Only when a population is stressed in a way in which a mutation may be beneficial will that mutation be expressed, and only if that mutation provides for greater survivability of offspring.

            I suggest you try and keep up by reading all of those books that I have recommended before. I would also suggest you try Edy and Johansen’s “Blueprints” pages 95-98 do a very nice job of explaining the evolution of the eye that you always have a problem with.

        • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

          A critical thinker can ask one fundamental question, and evolution is destroyed.

          If evolutionary process accounts for diversity of life we see, then the principle can be observed in reality all around us, and in the laboratory in careful experiment.

          But it can’t.

          Therefore evolutionary process cannot account for the diversity of life all around us.

          • So what says:

            Alfie said “Stupid is as stupid does, clearly.” Clearly you are the the ultimate expression of that statement.

            Even when given the question and the answer you cannot ask the correct question let alone fathom the answer.

            That you cannot observe evolution only proves that you’re blinded by your own obstinance.

          • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

            You render the theory “non falsifiable,” which means it proves nothing.

            Its elementary common sense, a principle so prevalent it could account for the myriad of life we see all around us, plant, animal, insect, microbial and more….

            That it would be like gravity…clearly evident in our reality, affecting life right before our eyes.

            Yet evolution beyond minor mutation, can’t be replicated in the laboratory….and certainly isn’t seen in organism around us…

            We cannot see a clear example of evolution, in anything alive today.

            Its just a theory, a hypothesis…speculation…one which violates the clear and present fact nothing is evolving right now, before our eyes….nothing.

            Its an absurd, non critical theory that has been rendered “non falsifiable” by its proponents.

          • So what says:

            Alfie you complete redefine the term stupid.

  8. Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

    The theory of evolution rests upon the absence of critical thinking.

    And it is irrelevant to biology, especially as it doesn’t occur except in the minds of the uncritical.

    • Tippis says:

      …and in nature. In fact, we have more proof and understanding of evolution than we have of gravity.

    • Hyph3n says:

      Even your brain is the result of billions of years of evolution and natural selection. Too bad you don’t use it. Don’t know many biologists, do you?

      • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

        Clearly you never heard the other side of the story.

        Until I did, I believed in evolution, its assumed to be true in school and directly affirmed.

        But simple facts contradict it completely and these cannot be ignored if you are a critical thinker.

        For example, the human eye is useless unless all its parts function perfectly. Therefore the eye, with all its complexity, must have evolved in one generation…for it to be beneficial to the organism’s survival.

        That is impossible via random chance.

        • Hyph3n says:

          You are spouting Creationist chatter and not the facts or the theories. Wikipedia actually has a very good description of how the eye formed:

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_the_eye

          The quick version of it is it started with light sensitive nerve ending then developed into a pin-hole-like camera.

          Let me ask you this: if God just “created” everything, why do all mammals have essential the same type of eye which are different from insects or octopuses? Why didn’t he “mix” it up? I would love me some compound eyes.

          • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

            Smearing creationism doesn’t prove it wrong, it only evidences your bigotry.

            It is a fundamental fact of our existence, nothing is evolving now.

            To suppose it happened, somewhere sometime somehow, but not now….isn’t a scientific theory predicated upon fact…its wishful thinking God doesn’t exist.

          • Hyph3n says:

            No, I’m proving creationism wrong by proving creationism wrong. No smearing necessary.

            Organisms are still evolving. When a disease develops a resistance to a drug, that is evolution. Big things, like you and me, take much longer to acquire changes. Just because you can’t crack open a beer and watch it, doesn’t mean it’s not happening.

        • So what says:

          “the human eye is useless unless all its parts function perfectly.” That would depend upon the purpose of the eye. So alfie, do you know what the correct answer is to the question, what is the purpose of the human eye?

    • Slartibartifaust says:

      For Taxed to have used his brain, ,would have cut into his ‘Bible indoctrination’ lessons.

      If people want to have something to blame their troubles on, give them a reason to practice bigotry and discrimination in a socially acceptable way, or be something as an unrealistic goal, then religion is the answer. You really do not see the atheists and agnostics trying to convert everyone else to their way of thinking and believing, they just want to be able to live without religious indoctrination being shoved down their throats.

      • Mextli: ABO says:

        “You really do not see the atheists and agnostics trying to convert everyone else to their way of thinking and believing…”

        Yes you REALLY do. Just Google the word Atheists. They are as strident as any religious organization.

      • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

        Its Bible liberation, and I don’t blame my troubles on progressives, the most pervasive bigots known to man.

        Everything you do is about race, every Government act specifies the particular groups that are being targeted.

        Affirmative action rests upon bigoted premises the “inferiors” simply cannot compete successfully with their “betters.”

        Yet you wouldn’t go to a brain surgeon, whose credentials rested upon affirmative action.

        We now have an affirmative action campaigner in Chief….none of this policies helped the economy, the only ones that worked were equipping drug cartels with guns and blasting a hole in Arizona’s border…

        Then trying to entice more illegals entry, by granting them food stamps and legal residency via the Dream act….which doesn’t check on the claims…

        After all, Holder doesn’t even what us to check their ID when they vote for Democrats.

        I suppose Progressives have a brain, but its on crutches, limping along from one “feeling good about myself” to another, reality be dammed.

  9. Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

    Its circular, believers in evolution make the tests, and overlay upon reality, their theory. Then they test to determine how well their self deception is believed.

    Stupid is as stupid does, clearly.

    • Tippis says:

      …except that science doesn’t work that way. Faith does (well, apart from the test since none must be needed).

    • Slartibartifaust says:

      Faith does not welcome questioning of what is stated, where as science not only welcomes it, questioning is very much encouraged.

      • Mextli: ABO says:

        “Faith does not welcome questioning of what is stated…”

        In a word Bullshit! Educate yourself and read some St. Augustine.

    • Hyph3n says:

      Circular? As oppose to Creationists who use the Bible to prove the… Bible?

      Evolution is based on observations and facts. When Darwin proposed the theory, we had yet to discover DNA. Every time a disease develops resistance to a drug, or new medicines are tested on monkeys, we are proving the Theory of Evolution.

  10. smartalix says:

    Frankly, these people are going to force their children to reap the bitter, stunted harvest that results from crap education. Kentucky will remain a laughable backwater for the forseeable future, sadly. The only jobs (if they’re lucky) available that they are qualified for will be non-union minimum-wage assembly or service jobs.

  11. Dallas says:

    the first two words “Kentucky Republicans” caused me to have an automatic eye roll. I’m sure I’m not alone

    • NewformatSux says:

      It’s true. All the big names in history are not Kentucky Republicans. Lincoln left for Illinois. Zachary Taylor was a Whig, as was Henry Clay. Alban Barkley was a Democrat. Carl Perkins was a Democrat who carved out exceptions for his district from teh Civil Rights Act. However Cassius Clay was one of the founders of the Republican Party, and his namesake Mohammed Ali later supported Ronald Reagan’s reelection.

      • Dallas says:

        Not sure where you were going with that but I see you agree. It does indeed seem those two words together implies something wierdis about to be said.

  12. NobodySpecial says:

    Of course it’s only number THEORY that the test scores should add upto 100%. Perhaps with enough faith in Kentucky percent should mean out of 30 – then they have done rather well.

  13. There is an old expression among law enforcement officials when dealing with teachers & left wing University Professor types – that the more education the stupider you ( they ) get
    There aught to be a law so to speak

    • NobodySpecial says:

      This post was typed on a computer with a CPU hand carved from silicon by the poster and an operating system that his grandma got out of the almanac.

  14. I Wonder says:

    Ah, the search for truth!

    Tough assignment since, like a fruit fly who lives only 24 hours, we, in a thousand lifetimes, have accumulated only an infinitesimal amount of knowledge.

    Is this knowledge “truth”?

  15. NewformatSux says:

    The science tests the Kentucky bureaucrats came up with were horrible. Lots of liberal talking points strewn into them. There’s a rubber taste in the water, and a tire factory nearby.
    Discuss the change in woman’s fashion and the change in their roles in society. How do we save the fish dying from manmade pollution in the Pacific Ocean?

    • Dallas says:

      You can’t help them back peddle now so it’s best for you to avoid this topic and go for easier pickings.
      It’s time Dvorak throw a bone in here. The Michele Obama vacation plan can and should be warmed over and served.

      Oh and how do we save the fish dying from manmade pollution in the Pacific Ocean? Well, the BEST WE CAN ! Silly you!

  16. Sheila says:

    Reminds me of a Lewis Black monologue,
    the one where he talks about Arkansas school
    system…… too funny

    survivingsurvivalism.com

  17. ECA says:

    THE PROBLEM..

    has the Theory been PROVEN??
    if YES..
    REMOVE THE WORD THEORY..

    • So what says:

      Science doesn’t work that way and the caps lock key is that little key on the left middle of your keyboard.

  18. John says:

    Too many worthless college degree’s too. Not enough technical degree’s being handed out to American’s. All we want to do is sit at a desk and draw a salary. Business degree’s are a joke. Dime a dozen. Hey American’s, when you go to college and spend all the money that you will owe for decades. At least get a degree that will give you a paycheck that allows you to pay those loans back.
    Education in this Country sucks and its not a teacher problem. My wife is a 4th grade teacher, has 28 kids three of which are special needs. Yet we expect them all to become bright productive adults later in life. Good luck with that!

    • NobodySpecial says:

      We don’t use the word special anymore – they are “people from Kentucky”

  19. Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

    Before we go any further, I should illustrate just how uncritical you folks are…

    You suppose oil came from dead dinosaurs etc…and call it a “fossil fuel” and therefore believe “hook line and sinker” the proposition its running out.

    Never do you stop to think they have been claiming its running out, since the 60s. and predicted by now we would be out of oil.

    Nor did it occur to any of you “how many dinosaurs were in Saudia Arabia to make so much oil.” Ditto other deserts of the world.

    AND NEVER do you wonder how “organic carbon” got on Mars and other planets….rendering the likelihood we will find “fossil fuels” on some of them probable.

    Fact is, we have more known oil today than anytime in history, but you uncritical thinkers keep spouting the liberal progressive lie we are running out…

    Its sad really.

    All around us is an overwhelming mass of irrefutable evidence there must be an intelligent creator….this kind of intelligence in design doesn’t happen by chance…

    But that requires critical thinking…something sorely lacking on this blog.

    You can resume calling me an idiot….Its fun, and the irony doesn’t escape the sort of folk I like to converse with.

    • bobbo, atheists in charge could not make the church look any worse says:

      Alfie – you are an idiot.

      …..unless you mean to be telling us that God is constantly creating oil for our use? We are made in his image after all directly raising the inference that God uses oil to heat hell?

      Is that what you are trying to tell us Alfie?

      Ha, ha. If you weren’t such an idiot, your message would be plainly stated for us all to marvel and give hosanna’s to.

      Just to footnote one issue: organic carbon does not mean “coming from life” but indeed may be a precursor, concomitant, or irrelevant process to it.

      You would be amused/informed by that if your weren’t an idiot.

      Idiot Human Beings.

    • So what says:

      Alfie said “But that requires critical thinking…something sorely lacking on this blog.” The closest you have come to thinking is looking up the word in the dictionary so you could spell it.

      What is the purpose of the human eye?

  20. Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

    Ok, I plainly state it. You have uncritically accepted the premise “fossil fuels” come from organic carbon.

    So much so, when the same carbon is found on planets which never had dinosaurs, you persist in calling it “organic carbon.”

    This means oil is not a product of the planet only, but was added to the planets during their formation, perhaps by an exploding star.

    This means oil coats the planet, is found everywhere…and its impossible we run out anytime soon, as the earth is 2/3rds water and we have not exhausted the reserves on the 1/3rd above water.

    It also means we will find the miracle oil to use when exploring space….planet hopping…and it may even exist outside of our solar system.

    Yet you let them spend billions trying to make much less efficient means of energy, work….and allow them to force you into go cart cars, and soon pay perhaps $15.00 a gallon….all because you are uncritical…don’t appreciate the gift oil is, and organic biodegradable product from which comes the myriad of products from plastics to cheap energy that makes modern life liberal love so much…and allows them to tweet idiocy to each other in tweet land….etc

    • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

      In the same way you uncritically accept the lies about oil, so you do with the stupid proposition chance created order…when all our experience testifies you cannot roll sevens fast enough, for that to happen.

      Whatever order chance creates, it will also destroy as any box of alphabets will illustrate.

      Suppose you have a mindless “hand” that scoops up alphabets into a box, shakes the box and then spills them out.

      Eventually you will see “order: ABCDEFG etc”.

      And the evolutionists beams joyfully, “see, chance can create order….life.”

      BUT chance is mindless, there is no intelligence that tells the hand to stop after the order is created….so the same process of scooping up the Alphabets…scrambling them in the box, continues unabated….destroying the order it just created.

      Therefore “whatever chance creates, it will also annihilate.”

      There is only on possible reason for the intelligence manifest in everything throughout creation…especially in life in all its forms….an intelligent creator.

      • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

        Especially this being a matrix, where pixelation occurs at the sub atomic level analogous to pixelation in a sim.

        Everything is quantum, till we look at it, just as in a simulation.

        Clearly it couldn’t be more correct to say:

        20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: (Rom 1:20 KJV)

        17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. (Col 1:17 KJV)

        • Hyph3n says:

          You are an interesting cat. Yes, we find simply “organic” molecules all over the universe. They’re not tough to make. All we need is a little hydrogen, carbon and an energy source. The early Earth was covered in them, and under the right circumstances, the molecules can replicate themselves. This would become much later DNA.

          Oil is a different thing. It is not simple methane. We do not find that on other planets (where is it on Mars or Venus or asteroids?)

          I’m happy to talk quantum mechanics or the Law of Thermodynamics if you would like too.

          • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

            You’re half way there:

            The presence of methane on Saturn’s moon Titan and in the atmospheres of Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune is cited as evidence of the formation of hydrocarbons without biology,[1][38] for example by Thomas Gold.[2] (Terrestrial natural gas is comprised primarily of methane). Some comets contain “massive amounts of an organic material almost identical to high grade oil shale (kerogen),” the equivalent of cubic kilometers of such mixed with other material;[61] for instance, corresponding hydrocarbons were detected during a probe fly-by through the tail of Comet Halley in 1986.[62]

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin

            Not a fossil fuel:
            http://youtube.com/watch?v=bJdNqYeVwX4

            You cannot rule out extra terrestrial oil.

            As for quantum mechanics, I cited an aspect of it scientists believe correct.

            I have to take their word on this.

            Do you say they are wrong?

            The Second Law is my friend, nothing is growing more complex….nothing is evolving, everything follows the second law…its all devolving…

            Prove that wrong, show where the 2nd law is contradicted.

            Thanks in advance.

          • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

            And it was recently said they found the Higgs…but in reality they found a particle with inertia, not mass. The suppose the two are here related. They might not be.

            I can believe a matrix would have a Higgs like particle to “simulate” mass via inertia through the ether….

            But mass hasn’t been found by the LHC.

          • So what says:

            “As for quantum mechanics, I cited an aspect of it scientists believe correct.

            I have to take their word on this.”

            Alfie not only are you an idiot, you’re also a hypocrite.

            By the way evolution does not violate the second law of thermodynamics see “It’s a wonderful life a history of the Burgess Shale” by Stephen J. Gould.

          • So what says:

            P.S. What is the purpose of the human eye?

          • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

            re the quantum state super hot or super cold, observable…its not just theory.

            I cited the graphite experiment, on youtube there is Dr. Quantum and the double slit experiment…

            All documenting everything is in a quantum state, not fixed.

            Pixelation is thus common to both sims, and us.

            So in the infinite Mind of God, all things consist, have their being, coherence:

            28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; (Act 17:28 KJV)

            17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. (Col 1:17 KJV)

            All this confirms the God of the Bible cannot be of human invention…being finite, and macro…we would never invent a God so wonderful….infinite:

            27 But will God indeed dwell on the earth? behold, the heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain thee; how much less this house that I have builded? (1Ki 8:27 KJV)

            The God of the Bible doesn’t exist in space-time, space time is in Him and He gives it coherence.

        • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

          Begging the question:

          P.S. What is the purpose of the human eye?

          You failed to address how the human eye, with all its parts fully functional, could “appear” in one generation.

          BECAUSE its impossible the eye developed over many generations as none of the parts individually are beneficial mutations.

          For example, having a hole in your head, as you know, lets the air in….

          • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

            By the way evolution does not violate the second law of thermodynamics see “It’s a wonderful life a history of the Burgess Shale” by Stephen J. Gould.

            Of course it does, the Second Law is evident everything as entropy, decay…going from the complex to the simple.

            Even human language, contrary to the liberal progressive anti-colonialists (Obama’s America 2016) and marxist loons….the more ancient langues like Chinese etc are more complex than English.

            Everything tends downward t a simpler state, a state of rest.

            Where you brain is. at the nadir of the field.

          • So what says:

            For a critical thinker you missed the thinking part again. Function is part of the design. If you can’t explain the purpose you will never understand the function. As such you cannot understand the evolution of the eye.

            As usual you can’t even answer a simple third grade science question and resort to religious babbling.

            If you actually knew anything about biology let alone evolution or heaven forbid third grade science you would understand that speciation is not the same as diversity, and that diversity has been decreasing over time as expected by the second law.

            “Everything tends downward t a simpler state, a state of rest.” Alfie if you get any simpler they will have to feed you with a tube.

          • So what says:

            P.S What is the purpose of the human eye?

          • Hyph3n says:

            What is the purpose of the human eye? Am I missing something? It’s to see. Animals that had in had a huge advantage over animals that didn’t. And who said anything about it appearing in one generation? It started out as a little sensitive nerve probably on single cell organisms. Then as a depression to give some directionality, then pin hole camera like, so on and so on over millions of years. We see those forms of eyes in other creatures… We can trace the evolution. And it makes more sense then just appearing on a Saturday.

            Evolution doesn’t violate the Second Law of Thermodynamic, but creating the universe in seven days 4000 years ago sure as Hell does (plus practically every other law of physics.)

            There is nothing in that law that says one part of a system can not become more ordered so long as the entropy in the entire system increases. In 5 billion years, when the Sun expands to engulf the Earth, our world will be quite a bit more disordered then it is now.

            Let me ask a few questions: if the universe is only 4000 years old, how do we see stars millions of light years away? Why do South America and Africa look like they once fit together? And why did God put all the animals into neat categories… Why do we not see cats with eight legs or furry snakes?

          • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

            Yes, you are missing facts. You cannot produce evidence for your “sensitive nerve” become one of the thousands of different kinds of eyes we find in various animals. As far as we find fossils of animals, they have eyes.

            Moreover, you assume 7 days of equal length to days today, but physicists suppose time dilation was in play during the first moments of creation, during “inflation.”

            http://creation.com/new-time-dilation-helps-creation-cosmology

            However, considering the infinitude of God, its clearly implied God took His time savoring every moment of creation:

            31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day. (Gen 1:31 KJV)

            God restrained Himself, took much more time than He needed, 6 days to create all things, when He could have done it instantly.

            Evolution is the direct opposite of entropy, which is the 2nd Law in action. Nothing in our experience evolves. A building left to itself doesn’t become a skyscraper, it becomes rubble. Radiation decays, as does everything in our experience.

            You propose a system can become more ordered as entropy increases….can you cite any examples.

            Assuming creation is your example, is circular reasoning and begging the question entirely.

            Moreover, I am convince we are in a “Matrix” analogous to a computer simulation, therefore “apparent age” is no problem.

            For example, God could imagine a universe 80 billion light years big, and it would be so instantly….in an nanosecond of time. To us, thinking the present is the same as the past, would get it wrong thinking light actually traveled to us….when in reality, God created all instantly, including the traveling light.

            “Inflation” in a Matrix would be instantaneous….the moment God imagined time-space as being 80 billion light years big (if not more), it would be exactly that in an instant of time.

            You ignored pixilation at the micro level indicating this is a matrix. A matrix would explain why “mass,” something truly solid…doesn’t exist in reality, only as a proposition.. Hence the Higgs was born to fill the void….and now they have found a particle that manifests “inertia”….but mass remains only an idea.

            However, if this isn’t a matrix, there remains LOTS of evidence for a young earth and solar system, for example .mountains would be level from erosion if these were millions of years old etc….and the seas as salty as the Dead Sea….

            As for God putting everything “according to its kind”, why would He mix things up and not enjoy making things unique, different?

            Your arguments fail to prove any of your points….but feel free to try again.

          • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

            In other words, everything said about the Higgs could be 100% correct, but its still not mass.

            Its a particle that manifests an attribute of mass, inertia.

            Would not a matrix require a Higgs to simulate mass?

            Yes, it would.

          • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

            In the interest of full disclosure, I’m well read but not a physicist.

            In fact, I never completed high school.

            So I do rely upon the expert opinions and hypothesis of others

            As for Greek and Hebrew, what little I know is self taught. But thanks be to God, there is a plethora of original language helps that allow everyone to check the accuracy of any translation. And I rely upon those authorities also.

            So I don’t claim to be anyone, I only claim to be right.

          • So what says:

            “What is the purpose of the human eye? Am I missing something? It’s to see.”

            Yes you are missing something.

            Alfie if you can’t understand the question how can you ever hope to understand the answer.

            What is the purpose of the human eye?

          • Hyph3n says:

            Wow… Where to start? How about entropy. When crystals form they create a more orderly system. When you draw a royal flush from a deck of cards (which happens once out of every half million times) a more orderly system is created. Neither violates the concept of entropy.

            In my theory of how the eye developed, we should see simpler forms of the eye in more primitive animals, and although they may be different types of eyes, related classes such as mammals should have similar types of eyes. We do. In your theory, it is only God’s will that created eyes, so there is no erase for a mouse not to have compound eyes or a snail not to have baby blues.

            If God create an eye out of nothing, then have Him do it again right in front of me to prove it. That would convince me.

            If you truly believe we live in a Matrix reality, then why does reality follow any laws? Why do we need DNA? Why couldn’t it be God’s will that cause cells to divide? Why did God put galaxies millions of light years away? Why are there other stars anyway? Why isn’t it just holes in a celestial sphere?

            I can make predictions about the world around us. I can tell you what the universe will be like in 15 billion years. They may be wrong, but they are still testable (for the most part) predictions. Beyond the rapture, what can you predict?

            I just don’t understand why Creationsist bother. Modern physics has plenty of wild theories of it own (look up reality being a 3D projection off a 2D surface) and none of it discount the existence of God. Sorry, God if He or She exist may not be an old man in robes living on the cloud– but He/She would be something much more interesting.

            So you’re God is so powerful, he could create the universe in an instant, but he couldn’t use the Big Bang and evolution to do it?

  21. bobbo, atheists in charge could not make the church look any worse says:

    Alfie – urine idiot.

    Eye see this constantly from you: the idiocy of the religious mindset: there is only one answer.

    “Oil” most likely has many sources of origination, not just one. For grin hypo #1, lts say its 3% compression of H, C, O deep within the earth, .o1% squashed dinosaurs, 95% single celled aquatic life, and 2% bog material.

    Does this add up? You do the math and tell us why you want to focus on one process rather than understand them all in context?

    Everyone knows, eyes are to find the beer.

    • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

      irrelevant, immaterial and therefore incompetent.

      That oil can originate many ways ONLY supports its likely to be found extra-terrestrially.

      What a dork.

    • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

      Bobbo, they built a huge collider to find a particle that exhibits inertia passing through the Higgs field….but we would have saved them lots of time and effort if we just sent your brain to them…

      When put on top of a razor’s edge….it looks like a pea rolling down a four lane highway.

  22. Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

    The next time you all are flapping your limp wrists in the moonlight, playing grab ass with the daisy chain…

    Consider what all this means, nothing is being done in a “corner,” everything is being observed:

    14 And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places.
    15 And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains;
    16 And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:
    17 For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?

    (Rev 6:14-1 KJV)

  23. Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

    For a critical thinker you missed the thinking part again. Function is part of the design. If you can’t explain the purpose you will never understand the function. As such you cannot understand the evolution of the eye.

    There you go again, opening your mouth only to change feet.

    Your argument is circular, a fallacy. ” A synonym of “function” is purpose, so in effect you argue “If you can’t explain the purpose you will never understand the purpose.”

    Babble, and circular reasoning.

    And you are begging the question, obviously sight is beneficial to the survival and reproduction of an organism.

    Your problem is, you can’t get to a fully functional eye, in one generation.

    There are hundreds of parts to an eye, and if any of them fail to exist or function correctly, then the organism in blind and there is no benefit to having eyes…which means the characteristic won’t be passed down…

    Of course, evolutionists understand the impeccable nature of this argument, hence they redefine evolution to make it non falsifiable….

    But that also makes it unsound for anything.

    • So what says:

      Alfie What is the purpose of the human eye?

      Please no help from the rest of the class.

      If you do it for him he will never learn to do for himself. He will think it’s normal for someone to hand him the answer and fail to learn to think.

      • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

        Stop wasting my time and state your case, make your argument.

        State what you claim is the eye’s purpose, and then explain how that is relevant to whatever proposition you are putting forth.

        Then I will devastate your argument, and make an observation about your brain or lack thereof.

        • So what says:

          Testy testy as I said before if you cannot under stand the question how will you ever under stand the answe

          What is the purpose of the human eye?

          I will give you a hint it’s not to ‘see”.

          • So what says:

            Oops should have been under and answer. Darn kindle keyboard.

          • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

            Debate doesn’t work that way…

            Its clear you don’t have the intellectual tools to state your case clearly, and then defend it.

            Here’s an example of an argument.

            Why can’t So What mind his own business?
            1)No mind
            2)No business.

            Although in the form of a question, the premise clearly is “So What can’t mind his own business.”

            The two irrefutable proofs of that proposition, # 1 & #2, followed.

            That’s how its done.

  24. Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

    So you problem is you want to argue a point, but don’t know how. Usually you make claims, but don’t support them….and suppose that is convincing.

    A statement without proof is not convincing. It can be entertaining, but its not meant to convince…to prove a point.

    For example, this is a claim without supporting proof:

    “Next to So What’s head, his jaws are the biggest bones in his body.”

    Notice the lack of proof for the claims. While true nonetheless, it was not an argument.

    I await your argument about eyeballs with much anticipation…that it will leave us all LOL for its sheer stupidity.

    So, Go ahead, state your argument….make my day.

    • So what says:

      Alfie you said “In the interest of full disclosure, I’m well read but not a physicist. In fact, I never completed high school. So I do rely upon the expert opinions and hypothesis of others.”

      Alfie that’s the second time I have seen you use your stated lack of formal education as an excuse and an excuse is exactly what it is. You never throw that one out until after you have exhausted all of your other avenues. You know, bluff, bluster, and bible verses. Do you expect slack because you said you didn’t finish high school? If you are you’re barking up the wrong tree with this group, and you damn well won’t get it from me.

      Every day I work with water and wastewater operators who never completed high school. They operate multimillion dollar water and wastewater treatment facilities; they understand the complexity of the chemical and physical reactions used to treat drinking water and the population dynamics, ecological, and physical nature of activated sludge and facultative wastewater treatment. I’ve been doing this work for over twenty years and they still surprise the hell out me at how well they can hold there own with or surpass operators and regulators with better educations. The difference between you and them is they want, no a better term is they are passionate, to learn something. You clearly are not.

      “I’m well read” No, I actually suspect you’re not. Tell the class what was the last book on evolution that you read, not webpage, not an article, not a blog, a real book. I mean read, not skimmed, glanced, or noticed, read from cover to cover. I mean one that is not an attack, critique, or religious demonizing of evolution, a book that provides the reader with the history, concept, and evidence of the theory and process of evolution in a simple concise manner. I personally have suggested at least a dozen to you, not one of those books is an attack on creationism or religion. They are straight forward non technical reasonably entertaining tomes for the general public that offer only explanation and the evidence that you can take or leave, all of them are available on Amazon and most can be found in a reasonably well stocked public library. Have you broken the spine on even one?

      “So I do rely upon the expert opinions and hypothesis of others.” You appear to only read and rely on opinions from experts that coincide with yours. Personally, I am an atheist yet I have read the Bible, the Koran, and The Book of Mormon. I just finished up Strobels “The Case for the Real Jesus”. I will admit I am a sucker for the History Channel whenever they do one of those Saturday evening god themed nights (Hell the devil’s domain, Books banned from the bible), I find them damn entertaining. I am a biologist, so yes, I do believe in evolution, yet I have read “Darwin’s Black Box”, “Evolution a Theory in Crisis”, and “The Case Against Evolution” even if I do not agree with the position I at least I take the time to investigate the other side. All of those books and more sit side by side with my copies of “Origin of Species”, “Panda’s Thumb” “Naturalist” and “Blueprints” etc. Now if I could just get them all on my Kindle!

      All I have asked is a simple question, not an argument (Think of it as a Zen Koan). What is the purpose of the human eye? A critical thinker like you should have had no problem answering the question. That you cannot shows that you either can’t comprehend the question or do not know the answer. Your mind is so narrow and walled that you can’t even open it enough to realize how simple the answer is. In that answer, is the explanation for the multiple evolutions of the eye including it’s evolution among humans. The truly sad part is that you are so narrow minded that if I simply told you the answer you still wouldn’t understand it.

      Even more to the point, why should I help you if you are not willing to help yourself? Oh wait, I did, by suggesting all of those books to you. I guess that means the real question for you to answer is, do you want to learn something new or continue living behind your wall?

      I don’t ridicule you because you’re ignorant; I ridicule you because you choose to stay that way.

      • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

        So many words, for such inept ad hominem.

        You claimed to have a point about eyeballs…which would devastate my Creationist position…we are still waiting.

        However, its likely your brain has suddenly realized what your mouth was saying…and to your horror….there is no point…no argument…

        So you tried to change the subject to me, a humble high school drop out, who evidently is intellectually beating you to a pulp.

        That’s sad… for you.

        • So what says:

          Actually it was series of observations based upon your previous and other historic comments. When I stated that you redefined stupidity, that was an attack,

  25. So what says:

    By the way, what is the purpose of the human eye?

    • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

      Its not my purpose to embarrass or even make fun of you…I really wanted to hear your “great anti Creationism via purpose of eyeball” argument.

      But you left me with little else to discuss.

      Go for it, state your argument….there is nothing left for you to lose.

      • So what says:

        Remember I never said it was an argument, as a matter of fact what I said was…”All I have asked is a simple question, not an argument (Think of it as a Zen Koan). What is the purpose of the human eye?”

        It is rather cute (in a naive way)that you thought we were debating.

        I will tell you what I will do. I will recommend one single book. That would be Blueprints by Edey and Johansen, you can find it on Amazon for the paltry sum of six dollars plus shipping if you can’t find a copy at the library. Today is the 19th that would give you two weeks to order it and/or read it. If you cannot supply the answer to the question, What is the purpose of the human eye? by the 2nd of September I will post the answer for you.

        • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

          Just as I thought, upon learning what you wrote about the eye, you immediately saw no chance in hell of winning an argument.

          The Bible is the Word of God, best selling book every year since the printing press was invented.

          Its that book I study, and it never fails to educate, and make wise:

          Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. (Psa 119:105 KJV)

          I recommend it highly.

  26. Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

    As Zev in LEXX said to Robot Head while on the planet water….”you have a tiny robot head chance…”

  27. bobbo, atheists in charge could not make the church look any worse says:

    What is the purpose of the human eye?

    Zen Koan: the identification of opposites?

    Well, I’ve bookmarked this thread to check back in 2-3 weeks to see how many more bible passages Alfie can throw against the wall, but I’ll play:

    A. Obviously, to see.
    B. There is no purpose, only a function.

    Both fit depending on the underlying philosophical base.

    I also am enthralled by water resource issues.

    Small world ain’t it? In only a Koan sort of way.

    • So what says:

      Bobbo you are half right. I won’t tell you which half, as I want to see if alfie is as well read as he claims to be.

  28. So what says:

    Well, its been two weeks and a day. So alfie did you do your homework? Did you ascertain the purpose of the human eye?

    I will check back in a day or two when I have time. Right now I need take a shower. Took a bit of time to cut up a hundred pounds or so of catfish and wash down the boat.

  29. bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

    I’ll bet Alfie didn’t bookmare/favorites this thread. I’m cleaning up mine, so this is my last visit.