Texas may start teaching against Evolution in high schools...

[Devek]

Ohio state university.

[Eratosthenes]

I think this should be standard curriculum.

[Devek]

Looks like that has been updated a lot since I last saw it, very nice.

The expansion interpretation was not noticed until after the expansion of the universe was well known through scientific observations. If Allah meant the Qur'an to indicate an expanding universe, the verse indicates that He was not competent to communicate clearly.

[Creeps]

Holy wtf at a phd in genetics saying that shit.

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b2...ns123/welp.gif

[MaachaQ]

Single religion countries are just asking for trouble, which is why America never selected a specific religion and tried to prevent religion from entering schools or government. Once you set up a country with one endorsed religion, you end up with people who think this kind of thing is ok:

http://nimg.nate.com/orgImg/ch/2009/...67418396_0.jpg

T-Shirts worn by some Israeli Army soldiers.

[Maxxthepenguin]

Single religion countries are just asking for trouble, which is why America never selected a specific religion and tried to prevent religion from entering schools or government. Once you set up a country with one endorsed religion, you end up with people who think this kind of thing is ok:

http://nimg.nate.com/orgImg/ch/2009/...67418396_0.jpg

T-Shirts worn by some Israeli Army soldiers.

Israel is not a theocracy, despite having laws rooted in Jewish tradition. Not all cities shut down for Shabbat. The supreme court declared it illegal to prohibit the sale of pork. Most Israeli Jews are more or less secular.

Don't fucking bring Israel into this. It being fucked up has little to do with religion. It's far less religious than the self-described Muslim nations that oppose it.

[Maxxthepenguin]

YouTube - Shermer & Purdom Interview at Creation Museum

This is Michael Shermer interviewing Georgia Purdom of the Creation Museum. She is Dr. Purdom... with a PhD in Molecular Genetics. I'm amazed at how calm Shermer can be and while I think Dawkins is right in terms of having atheists come out of the closet, I think Shermer (like Dennett) has a better approach with his calmness.

Video is kinda long, but essentially her argument consistently is, if the scientific evidence contradicts the Bible, it is wrong, because we know the Bible is right. All scientific theories are based on presuppositions of man and are incorrect. (The fact that she is presupposing the Bible to be true is irrelevant because it IS true, therefore not a presupposition.)

The other point she makes is that while through history people have "interpreted" the Bible, she is not interpreting it, but rather reading what is true. When called on this as being her interpretation, she adamantly sticks to the opinion that her interpretation isn't interpretation. It's just true.

So 25 minutes summed up....
Rule 1: Bible = true
Rule 2: Disagrees with Bible = false
Rule 3: Evidence is irrelevant (refer to rule 2)

The bible disagrees with the bible. The first two chapters tell two different creation stories for fuck's sake.

God damn it.

[Kiro]

I bought one of those Israeli shirts. :<

[Rockstaru]

I passed an electronic sign earlier this afternoon that said "You can lead an atheist to knowledge, but you can't make him think."

God this country is fucking backwards.

[Quattre]

I passed an electronic sign earlier this afternoon that said "You can lead an atheist to knowledge, but you can't make him think."

God this country is fucking backwards.

Lol I bet God agrees with you about this country being backwards...

[Altariel]

[B]There are certain aspects of your own human body that are far from optimal - for instance, it is extremely 'dumb' to put food and air down the same tube - it obviously can lead to choking. It's hardly intelligent to do it that way.

Another funny case is an enzyme in your body called RNA Polymerase (it makes RNA from your DNA and eventually leads to making proteins). Think of it as a biological machine. It fails to work 99% of the time - it's like batting 0.010 in baseball - it does the first 10 of 500+ in the DNA sequence they fails - it then takes about 5-10 extra enzymes to consume energy to save it and restart. Repeat this an average of 100x and RNA Polymerase will hopefully work.

Sounds to me like the designer wasn't all that intelligent. If life was created by a 3rd party what's with making such shitty inefficient organisms? Could it be instead that these are the results of random genetic mutations some of which conferred advantages. Good thing for us the gag reflex and the cough evolved in humans as well.

[Eratosthenes]

I passed an electronic sign earlier this afternoon that said "You can lead an atheist to knowledge, but you can't make him think."

God this country is fucking backwards.

Something I've learned from watching fundies is that they're REALLY good at projection.

[Zosi]

Lol I bet God agrees with you about this country being backwards...

Do explain, because I get the impression that I'm going to find your explanation hilariously funny.

[Quattre]

Do explain, because I get the impression that I'm going to find your explanation hilariously funny.

Explain what? That I think God would agree that our country is pretty messed up? I dont think He'd even approve of that sign.

[Kaeko]

Sounds to me like the designer wasn't all that intelligent. If life was created by a 3rd party what's with making such shitty inefficient organisms? Could it be instead that these are the results of random genetic mutations some of which conferred advantages. Good thing for us the gag reflex and the cough evolved in humans as well.

In the grand scheme of things organisms are extremely efficient - beyond anything a person can conceivably make. For instant, getting that RNA polymerase to work period is pretty damn impressive on a human scale.

As to your question, I wouldn't feel qualified to even try to answer that. I can tell you that many times things we think are disadvantages really aren't given the right environment. For instance, Africans suffer a much higher incidence of the disease Sickle Cell Anemia than other races. There is an evolutionary reason for this, though, since being a carrier for the disease gives you Malaria resistance - so in Africa, being a carrier is ideal because you won't die from Malaria, even though you may give your offspring Sickle Cell. I don't think an Intelligent Design backer would even question that though since it's more a case of natural selection.

As far as the idea that there is a controversy among scientists about evolution... it's really more a media thing. The average person has a hard time telling the difference between science and pseudoscience. It's not easy sometimes. Reading this topic reminds me of this guy -

Natural Cures Home | NaturalCures.com

who claims things like you can cure Cancer by making your blood more basic and stuff like that. I actually read his book just to see how bad it was. My favorite quote from it is this:

"In an ideal world you would make your own food from scratch. It tastes better; you don't feel bad after eating it, your energy levels stay high, and you don't get depressed or constipated or have gas and bloating. Making food from scratch will have healthier ingredients, but it also will be made with more love, and the electrons spin a different way when love is put into the food."

If you have taken middle school science you will see what is wrong with this. Pseudoscience at its best, or perhaps worst, since it gives desperate people false hopes. Intelligent Design is really no different. Throw in some legit science terms or principles used the wrong way (e.g. entropy argument to ID) and you can fool people.

[thatwasnifty]

YouTube - Shermer & Purdom Interview at Creation Museum

This is Michael Shermer interviewing Georgia Purdom of the Creation Museum. She is Dr. Purdom... with a PhD in Molecular Genetics. I'm amazed at how calm Shermer can be and while I think Dawkins is right in terms of having atheists come out of the closet, I think Shermer (like Dennett) has a better approach with his calmness.

Video is kinda long, but essentially her argument consistently is, if the scientific evidence contradicts the Bible, it is wrong, because we know the Bible is right. All scientific theories are based on presuppositions of man and are incorrect. (The fact that she is presupposing the Bible to be true is irrelevant because it IS true, therefore not a presupposition.)

The other point she makes is that while through history people have "interpreted" the Bible, she is not interpreting it, but rather reading what is true. When called on this as being her interpretation, she adamantly sticks to the opinion that her interpretation isn't interpretation. It's just true.

So 25 minutes summed up....
Rule 1: Bible = true
Rule 2: Disagrees with Bible = false
Rule 3: Evidence is irrelevant (refer to rule 2)

Shermer is a really good writer. I highly recommend Amazon.com: Why People Believe Weird Things: Pseudoscience, Superstition, and Other Confusions of Our Time: Michael Shermer, Stephen Jay Gould: Books

[0ni0n]

Explain what? That I think God would agree that our country is pretty messed up? I dont think He'd even approve of that sign.

You mean like God wants America to be backward so he refuses to intervene?

[Devek]

I can relate to God on that level, fighting stupidity is pointless(even for God). It is best to just have fun with it, whee

[thatwasnifty]

You mean like God wants America to be backward so he refuses to intervene?

I think he was saying that God agree with the statement that America is screwed up, not that God would necessarily approve.

[Kuya]

"I'm smart, everyone else is stupid"

Why is it that almost every thread has some sort of comment approximating that? Some guy who always, always, says how people/the world/humans whatever, are really stupid, and yet somehow manages to exclude himself from that group. It's the most fascinating thing.