babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » right brain babble   » humanities & science   » CBC story on creationism in Kansas

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: CBC story on creationism in Kansas
Snuckles
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2764

posted 06 April 2005 09:53 PM      Profile for Snuckles   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The other weekend the CBC's Neil MacDonald did a report from Kansas, about attempts by religious conservatives there to inject creationism into the public school science curriculum.

After searching high and low on the CBC's website for MacDonald's story I finally found it. You may view it here. (RealPlayer required)

[ 06 April 2005: Message edited by: Snuckles ]


From: Hell | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Surferosad
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4791

posted 06 April 2005 10:14 PM      Profile for Surferosad   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
These wackos don't know what the word "theory" means in a scientific context... They keep saying "evolution is a theory" as if it meant that it isn't a fact. There are no significant scientific differences of opinion regarding the reality of evolution.

And of course organisms look "designed", you pinheads: natural selection designed them. Ignorant idiots.

This kind of shit enrages me.

[ 06 April 2005: Message edited by: Surferosad ]


From: Montreal | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
gabong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8663

posted 06 April 2005 10:18 PM      Profile for gabong     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Hey! The cat on your web site looks just like mine!

Anyway, as to the topic of creationism, I share your frustration. But, I have come to accept the reality that the majority is usually wrong on the majority of things.

thus, i have become a misanthropic cat-lover!


From: Newfoundland | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged
gabong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8663

posted 06 April 2005 10:23 PM      Profile for gabong     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Surferosad:

And of course organisms look "designed", you pinheads: natural selection designed them. Ignorant idiots.

[]


I find it quite odd that the general public cannot grasp evolution.

I heard a critique recently that went like this:

It would take billions and billions permutations to finnally arrive at the modern human form. Even over an infinity of time, it is almost impossible that humans could come out of evolution.

Anybody that knows anything about evolution will immediately spot the flaw in this argument. Evolution does not aim at anything. Humanity is an accident. If the universe were to start again tomorrow, we might end up with jumping blobs with wings who wonder at how amazing it is that eveloution could have designed such perfect creatures.


From: Newfoundland | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged
Ron Webb
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2256

posted 06 April 2005 11:11 PM      Profile for Ron Webb     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Creationists (or maybe anti-evolutionists is a better term) like to talk about how incredibly unlikely it is that certain enzymes, structures, etc., could come together by pure chance. But I've never seen them actually attempt to calculate just how incredibly many chances they had: how many carbon, hydrogen and oxygen atoms exist in the trillions of gallons of ocean water (for instance), and how many billions of times each of them has collided every year over a billion or so years. The odds are indeed small, but the game has been played a truly uncountable number of times.

I read "Darwin's Black Box", by Michael Behe, a few years ago. What struck me about Behe's description of various biological processes was quite the opposite of his intention -- not how skillfully designed they were, but how utterly convoluted and stupid they were. His description of the blood clotting mechanism was typical. First you've got substance A, which clots the blood. But protein B regulates the action of A. Then enzyme C reduces the effect of B; and D controls the action of C; and on and on. Rube Goldberg would have been impressed.


From: Winnipeg | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
TemporalHominid
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6535

posted 10 April 2005 09:12 PM      Profile for TemporalHominid   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Scientific American throws in the towel

SciAm


From: Under a bridge, in Foot Muck | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 10 April 2005 09:48 PM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TemporalHominid:
Scientific American throws in the towel

SciAm


"This magazine will be dedicated purely to science, fair and balanced science, and not just the science that scientists say is science. And it will start on April Fools' Day."

(I just recently let my subscription to SciAm lapse after 20+ years; reading this article tempts me to renew)


From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Hephaestion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4795

posted 11 April 2005 12:24 AM      Profile for Hephaestion   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Boom Boom:
(I just recently let my subscription to SciAm lapse after 20+ years; reading this article tempts me to renew)

Phhhfffttt! Don't waste your money on THAT, BB. Feast your eyes on THIS instead!


From: goodbye... :-( | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Anchoress
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4650

posted 11 April 2005 12:37 AM      Profile for Anchoress     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 

[ 11 April 2005: Message edited by: Anchoress ]


From: Vancouver babblers' meetup July 9 @ Cafe Deux Soleil! | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca