View Poll Results: Which should be taught in school science classes?

102. You may not vote on this poll
  • Evolution

    80 78.43%
  • Intelligent Design

    1 0.98%
  • Creationism

    0 0%
  • Every theory in this area

    11 10.78%
  • Only these 3 or 2 of these three

    3 2.94%
  • None of these

    4 3.92%
  • Other

    3 2.94%
Page 32 of 32 FirstFirst ... 22303132
Results 311 to 314 of 314

Thread: Which should be taught in school science classes?

  1. #311
    Global Moderator
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:32 AM

    Re: Which should be taught in school science classes?

    Quote Originally Posted by ricksfolly View Post
    The one percent are in their own exclusive zone, and can only honestly relate with things in their own zone. Of course they can adapt to people with lesser intelligence just to get along, but sooner or later honesty will trip them up, and so-called friends out of their zone will gradually disappear.

    That's why they always show the wise guru sitting on a mountain top all alone.

    How many real friends do you think the idiot savant has, who can do figures in his head faster than a calculator?

    Myself, I only have two friends I can honestly relate with, definitely not my wife or children... How about you?

    I have very few friends at all. My best friend I will share emotional issues with, but never talk about the technicaly aspects of my job or probably even most political issues because I feel that it would hurt her feelings that she probably wouldn't understand most of it or she simply wouldn't be very interested in it. This is actually how I feel about a lot of the people I consider friends or acquaintances. My husband I can relate to in almost anything because we are at the same basic intelligence level and have a lot of the same interests and beliefs. He understands the science and math of my work and the more technical aspects of my political views (even if he doesn't always agree with me). Some of the guys I worked with while active Navy I got along with great and could talk to about many things, especially technical, because they were pretty much all very intelligent. But I still didn't always "fit in", not necessarily because of my intelligence level, but because of many interests that I have that are considered "weird". And I actually enjoy being alone sometimes.

    I also knew a chief who was so intelligent that he figured out how to cheat on the advancement exams by figuring out the pattern the computer used in the answers. He was a millionaire Navy chief. He told us he spent every leave he took alone, reading in his cottage he owned in the-middle-of-nowhere Montana. He would definitely fit into that 1% you were talking about, but he still performed in his job quite well and even helped the Navy improve in other areas.

    There is a huge difference between being so intelligent that a person is crazy and can't actually accept the real world and being so intelligent that a person just doesn't fit in well with the real world. I think your 1% estimate is those that just don't fit in well. The number of those who can't actually live in and interact with the real world is probably closer to less than .0001% of the population.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  2. #312
    Count Smackula
    rathi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    10-31-15 @ 08:29 PM

    Re: Which should be taught in school science classes?

    That sure sounds like a falsifiable theory to me.
    With all due respect, you wouldn't know a falsifiable theory if if bit you on the ass. Throwing out a wild guess that completely contradicts most known physics without a shred of evidence to explain a phenomenon that has an alternative explanation which extremely well documented does not a falsifiable theory make.

    What is hypocritical about it? Why is impossible about the solution?
    Some kind of intelligent being capable of creating life is much more complicated than the first life forms found on earth. It is therefore hypocritical to claim that single-celled life is too complex to form spontaneously, but then posit a hypothesis which requires a far more complicated creator being to form spontaneously. In addition, there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that any such intelligent creators exist, nor any method of how them came into existence.

    The aliens have to come from somewhere. If you think abiogenesis it too unlikely to happen on earth, it is also equally unlikely abiogenesis could happen on another planet and then somehow make its way here.

  3. #313
    Tavern Bartender
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:15 AM

    Re: Which should be taught in school science classes?

    Wow, I guess Intelligent Design wins.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)

  4. #314
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 10:36 PM

    Re: Which should be taught in school science classes?

    Should we teach "Don't know = Godiddit?"


    Should we teach "God is a big fat liar?"


    Therefore, only evolution.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

Page 32 of 32 FirstFirst ... 22303132

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts