It is encouraging to see that there is still some sanity in this world.
As I recall, the stickers in question said more than just "evolution is a theory not a fact" that made it even clearer what the bias of the board of education was when they placed them in the textbooks. The parents in that district should take it a step further and protest the waste of their tax money to print those stickers and put them in textbooks, not to mention the legal costs the board of ed probably absorbed for this case! Make the board of ed reimburse the district out of their own pockets for this. Makes me mad that there are school districts that can't afford to even buy current textbooks for their students, or even replace the books that are falling apart, and there's a district throwing away money on stupid stickers for books.
I would be perfectly happy with such stickers on biology texts if there were stickers on Bibles saying "Creation is a myth, not a fact".
When I saw this in the news, a couple of days ago, I didn't know whether to be happy or sad.
Isn't it sad that it takes a Federal Judge (rather than the local schoool board) to have to determine what needs to go into textbooks ?
I think it's quite pathetic that things have come to a stage where there is such a large disconnect between people and science. Education is just not able to keep pace with research, and the population is being left in the dust. Or is there something else to blame - perhaps a resistance to change that is being encouraged ?
Hey maybe they should put a sticker on all of the schools saying:
Beat me too it. Dang it.
Actually i was gonna say they had to have another sticker: "God is jsut a theoru" if they wanted that one.
Have i mentioned how much i can't stand fundamentalists yet today? Well now i ahve.
I would be content with that as well.
Calling evolution a theory is an attempt to discredit it (a means that has been used since Darwin's time). The fact is evolution is not a theory but an observable natural phenomenon like gravity or any such thing. The neo-Darwinian synthesis is the scientific theory that best describes the natural, observable, and phenomenon evolution. If data were to show, tomorrow for instance, that the neo-Darwinian synthesis is incorrect (something that will not happen... the synthesis is probably the most tested and most confirmed scientific explanation we have), evolution would not stop (just as gravity did not cease when Newtonian gravitational theory gave way to Einsteinian theory). Evolution, unbeknownst to most Americans... including our President, is not at issue; the issue is how evolution takes place (via: natural selection, mutation, genetic drift, chance, and meiotic drive with natural selection being the only creative force of the five). By banning the teaching of evolution in schools, we might as well ban the teaching of sciences in general. Finally, does evolution have anything to say about the possible existence of God or gods? The answer is of course not. It does indicate, however, that those who take religious texts literally are incorrect.
This demographic constitutes a shockingly large chunk of the population in this country.
I'd be fine with the sticker if it was applied to all theories. If they have one for special relativity, quantum theory, chemical kinetics, etc. If they have one for every theory. Showing that it is only for evolution is obvious what intent they have.
I believe in separation of church and state.
The church can teach creationism and school teaches evolution, period.
It is a good thing (very positive) that progressives want to keep schools a neutral ground, and allow for individuals to pursue their faiths in churches, temples and synagogues.
That is the only way religion should be pursued. But that's just me. It has no place in the public sphere (school, government, etc.).
You can't discount 4.6 million years of evolutionary proof.
And who, in their right mind would believe God created Adam and Eve only six thousand years ago, when the entire Asian and African cultures can be traced back to ten to fifteen thousand years and more? And let's face it; men do NOT have one fewer ribs than women.
I believe there's some sort of "Higher Power" at work, somewhere. Where do our souls come from? How is everything given its life?
But as science has proven, everything that grows, lives, and breathes, can be traced back with scientific proof. Can the same be said of Creationism?
It's the soul of us animals that get one wondering about higher powers. What force causes each animal, whatever the species, to have individual feelings, thoughts, and actions? Something is breathing that uniqueness into all of us.
Kinda gets your mind working overtime, doesn't it?
There is no proof that "souls" exist. It's another myth. I was brought up to believe in all this, I no longer do since there is not one shred of evidence to support any of it, just the opposite.
Is there evidence to prove that souls do NOT exist?
Doesn't matter. It is the burden of those making a claim to provide evidence and proof.
In actuality the word "soul," in respect to the Bible, is synonymise with "body" or "being," not some glowing essences that gives life to something.
The rib was taken from Adam, not from every man.
Proof of what? There are no fossiles of an animal inbetween a human-like ape and a human or any fossiles that show the progression of one species into another for that matter.
How exactly have we observed all species originating from a common ancestor? Natural selection is observable, not evolution. There is a big difference.
What? Traced back to..? Also it's good to remember that all "proofs" are really just assumptions or are based on assumptions.
I disagree. People need to learn that tolerating other beliefs and ideals is part of life and stop complaining about it all the time. It's obvious that schools on "neutral grounds" aren't that neutral because they're offending a hell of a lot of people. Just accept the fact that you can't sadisfy everyone and teach what the majority wants to be taught. When you try to sadisfy everyone you end up sadisfying no one.
Well, I thought when Evo said "there is not one shred of evidence to support any of it, just the opposite" that she was making a claim that souls DON'T exist. And she called souls a 'myth'. I'm just saying, if there is no evidence to PROVE that they do not exist, the soul should not be called a 'myth'. While there may be no evidence to prove that souls do exist, it is my understanding that there is also no proof that they do NOT. While some may decide to NOT believe something because of lack of proof, I thoroughly enjoy the 'mystery' of life and am willing to believe that anything - and I mean ABSOLUTELY ANYTHING - is possible.
What evidence is there to PROVE that a great big pink unicorn is not residing in the center of the Sun at this very moment ?
How is natural selection observable and not evolution ? The former is the accepted mechanism for bringing about the latter.
I observe bacteria evolving in the lab everyday. Acquired antibiotic resistance would not exist without evolution.
The school is a place for teaching maths, science, language and other academic subjects, not to ply religious dogma. Noone is saying "do away with Sunday school". Imagine if I went to Sunday school and insisted on teaching evolution !
Absolutely NONE. (Do you think there is one there? )
No, but *I* don't think we have immaterial "souls" either. :tongue2:
There is no evidence to prove that zeus does not run around boning every mortal woman in sight either. But we call that a myth.
Again, the burden of proof is on the one making the claim. You cannot prove nonexistence. You can prove imposibility, under given conditions, but you cannot prove nonexistence. Nonexistence is assumed until existence is proven. Its basic scientific method.
I think that is way to considerate. It should be: "God is not even a theory".
"Is man one of God's blunders? Or is God one of man's blunders?"
Separate names with a comma.