jallman

Again, taking into account the entirety of her statements listed in the citation, you find that she has no agenda to instigate the teaching of both, which is what every implication has been WRT this issue.

__________________
http://i226.photobucket.com/albums/d...amaSigcopy.jpg

Simon W. Moon

That's how you're defining 'support,' then? You're using 'support' to mean having an agenda to instigate instead of the more general being in favor of?

If you had clarified at the beginning when I was asking about your definitions that you were using a special, specific definition...

__________________
"That is the problem... [we] fell in love with the idea that politicians-- even the slickest and brightest presidential candidates-- were real heroes and truly exciting people. That is wrong on its face. They are mainly dull people with corrupt instincts and criminal children. -H.S.T"

jallman

You're the one that's zeroing in on that particular definition of that particular word to build whatever case it is you're building. I simply pointed everyone to the entirety of her stance.

You can do whatever verbal and linguistic somersaults you want, Simon. In the end, you're only shadow boxing and mentally fellating yourself for your own amusement.

obvious Child

Perhaps but you run into serious problems with other science. For instance, a 6,000 year old belief runs smack dab in conflicts with chemistry and physics. A hydroplate theory is not supported by geology. The heat problems of producing sufficent water to flood the Earth are enormous. The Fossil Record does not support sorting by fluid mechanics. I fully realize that Creation is nothing more then religion and has no factual evidence, but for people like Palin and other Creationists who want or at least are open to teaching both in the science room, what the hell would they teach? As you said, you could make a creationist alternative, but it would clash rather harshly with the rest of science.

I went to a private school. Cost a pretty penny. But the bacterial vectors was just one of many experiments. We made bioluminescent bacteria from normal bacteria. The main university in my state is known for its genetic programs. Glowing Mice. Now that's your only clue where I'm from.

__________________
"Maybe God doesn't care how you say your prayers, just as long as you say them" - Jeffery Sinclair

Simon W. Moon

In jallmanese, is Palin 'proponent' of teaching creationism in schools?
lol. Words mean things.
I don't think I am having quite as much fun as you have decided to imagine me having. There was a brief moment where I was morbidly curious as to why you chose to imagine me this way - but it passed. Please don't explain why you conjured up this image. It's kind of ... um ... well ... let's just let it go

jallman

Whatever it takes to get ya through it dude.

Okay, whatever. I don't feel like discussing your finite opinions about specific words in little snippets that support whatever it is your stance on the issue is. I am stating that her support of teaching creationism alongside evolution goes only so far that she wouldn't oppose the idea very vehemently but it's not an agenda she is even remotely interested in pushing. Whatever it is you want argue about with finite word meanings and how many ways you can diagram the one small sentence that builds your whole case, feel free but do it without me from here on. I'm not interested.

Let's just say it was a perfect image to capture how ridiculous and embarassing it is that you keep going on this way, stimulating no one but yourself with this argument you keep trying to have with me.

Tucker Case

I'm OK with William Paley's concepts (intelligent design) being taught as an elective philosophy course.

In that class, like all philosophy classes the concepts behind the philosophy are taught to the students and they are able to understand the concepts, but they aren't taught that the concepts are fact.

ID is not a science, so it shouldn't be taught in science. Teaching it as philosophy (and more creation theories from all different cultures could be taught in that class to fill it out) is perfectly reasonable to me.

jallman

Now that, I can agree with. We already teach creation mythology in literature classes when we teach classical mythology. Hell, my 10th grade english class taught norse, babylonian, chinese, egyptian, oshun, greek, and roman mythologies. After all that, I really don't see any problem including Judeo Christian creation mythology either. And there is definitely enough to flesh out a class from several platforms...literary, philosophical, and collective psychology.

obvious Child

So much for creation science's teaching plan. The next time I hear anyone claim that we should teach both in science class, I'm going to demand on the spot a teaching plan.

Bodhisattva

I guess that it would be a "theory" section. I can't imagine that they would bust out Bibles as evidence.

That being said, I have a huge issue with that, and would not send my kids to a school system that promoted religion as a mandate, but I would demand that my kids take an elective for theology, if one were introduced, so go figure...

I don't think that, regardless of how hard anyone might try to get a bill passed that mandated that Creationism be taught, that it would ever happen. Ever

__________________