Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #330523

Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere

Show all headers | View raw

Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> On 11/2/15, 4:03 PM, in article fshdnvu40.au@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>> On 11/2/15, 3:35 PM, in article srhjfsa8.3a@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
>>> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 11/2/15, 2:44 PM, in article n18lfh$cl1$8@dont-email.me, "ronb"
>>>>> <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Mon, 02 Nov 2015 11:09:05 -0600, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Yes it did.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>    Heresy is a necessary element of personal freedom vital to democracy.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>    If religion is strong enough to suppress dissent then it can stifle
>>>>>>> all progress. This is the Fundie/Islam problem in a nutshell.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> And now we have global warmists
>>>>> 
>>>>> Do you mean scientists? What the heck are you talking about?
>>>> 
>>>> Frauds of course.
>>> 
>>> Ah, science is all fraudulent. That is why religion has brought us so many
>>> cures for disease and helped us make bridges which last so long.
>>> 
>>> Oh. 
>>> 
>>> No.
>>> 
>>> Religion HAS tied to art and beauty and I think that is great, but it is
>>> science that brings us knowledge and evidence. And you shun it.
>>> 
>>> Fine. 
>>> 
>>> There is no middle ground here. And no reason for you to pick and choose one
>>> are of science to deny other than politics. Do you run around denying
>>> relativity? The idea that gravity is tied to the square of the distance from
>>> a mass? No. You just pick this one area because it does not fit your
>>> politics.
>>> 
>>> And what are those politics? To make sure the wealthy have their risks and
>>> costs spread out to the society - socialize the costs and risks of the
>>> wealthy.
>>> 
>>> I am against that. I am for personal responsibility instead.
>> 
>> Nice list of lies.  Take a breath.
> 
> If you REALLY thought I was lying you would show where... instead you went
> to meta-debate land. Not interested.
> 
> ... 
>>>> Funny, but I went to public schools in the sixties and seventies and never
>>>> once heard a word about religion in any science class.  Is that happening
>>>> somewhere today?
>>> 
>>> Of course. They push the idea of intelligent design and creationism into
>>> American schools. And who does this? Muslims? No... Christians. They work
>>> against science.
>> 
>> Bullshit.  Is intelligent design being taught in public schools now?
> 
> Here is a map for creationism:
> <http://io9.com/a-map-showing-which-u-s-public-schools-teach-creationi-15157
> 17148> OR <http://goo.gl/GbKFSh>
> 
> 

That page lies:
<quote>
A Map Showing Which U.S. Public Schools Teach Creationism to Kids
</quote>

That is a lie.  The data comes from slate.com and shows where the wording of
the law allows for *discussion* of questionable "science."

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2014/01/creationism_in_public_schools_mapped_where_tax_money_supports_alternatives.html

<quote>
Louisiana: The Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008 allows teachers to
use ???supplemental textbooks and other instructional materials to help
students understand, analyze, critique, and review scientific theories
in an objective manner,??? specifically theories regarding ???evolution,
the origins of life, global warming, and human cloning???
</quote>

What's wrong with that?

<quote>
Tennessee: A 2012 state law, like Louisiana's, permits public school
teachers to teach the ???scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses???
of theories that can ???cause controversy,??? specifically citing
evolution, global warming, and cloning, thereby providing legal cover
for teachers who want to forward creationist pseudoscience.
</quote>

What's wrong with that?

Is it scientific not to allow discussion?  Evolution is a theory, not
a fact.  Discussing how well it works as a model vs alternative explanations
would seem to me to be the essence of education.  Are you afraid that the
theory will not hold up under scrutiny?  Is this what Neil de grass was
whining about?  If so, he needs to stick to his area of expertise which
I believe has something to do with astrophysics, not biology.
 

>>> Tyson is exactly right here:
>>> 
>>> <http://goo.gl/6zc7cJ>
>>  
>> He gives *no* examples of where this is happening.
>> Do you have any?
> 
> Less so now because the courts have struck it down, but I still see stories
> on it.
> 
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design>
>     -----
>     Though the phrase "intelligent design" had featured previously in
>     theological discussions of the design argument,[13] the first
>     publication of the term intelligent design in its present use as
>     an alternative term for creationism was in Of Pandas and
>     People,[14][15] a 1989 textbook intended for high school biology
>     classes. The term was substituted into drafts of the book after
>     the 1987 United States Supreme Court's Edwards v. Aguillard
>     decision, which barred the teaching of creation science in public
>     schools on constitutional grounds.[16] From the mid-1990s, the
>     intelligent design movement (IDM), supported by the Discovery
>     Institute,[17] advocated inclusion of intelligent design in public
>     school biology curricula.[4] This led to the 2005 Kitzmiller v.
>     Dover Area School District trial in which U.S. District Judge John
>     E. Jones III ruled that intelligent design is not science, that it
>     "cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious,
>     antecedents," and that the school district's promotion of it
>     therefore violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment
>     to the United States Constitution,[18] often described as the
>     "wall of separation between church and state".
>     -----
> 
> I can do more research to find specifics for you later but really surprises
> me you seem to have no knowledge of this. The debates often make the news.
> 

The problem with disallowing certain discussions in schools is that
kids are going to ask questions that science cannot answer because
proper science does not address them.  Those among scientists who
declare that there is no god and that the laws of physics just sprang
into being are *not* making a scientific argument; if there's no
experiment to address a pariticular question, then there cannot be
a scientific answer.  Period.
 

Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-02 07:56 -0600
  Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-02 14:18 +0000
    Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-02 09:35 -0700
      Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-11-02 17:52 +0100
        Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-02 10:22 -0700
    Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-11-02 17:59 +0100
      Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-02 21:48 +0000
    Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-02 11:09 -0600
      Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-02 11:15 -0700
      Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-11-02 21:44 +0000
        Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-02 14:51 -0700
          Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-02 22:35 +0000
            Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-02 23:03 +0000
              Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-02 23:36 +0000
                Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-03 00:14 +0000
                Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-03 00:47 +0000
                Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-03 01:00 +0000
                Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-03 01:13 +0000
                Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-03 01:39 +0000
                Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-03 02:16 +0000
                Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-03 02:50 +0000
                Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-03 03:25 +0000
                Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-03 04:41 +0000
                Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-11-03 09:29 -0800
                Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-03 17:44 +0000
        Re: Meta: Take your bigotry elsewhere Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-02 17:53 -0500

csiph-web