- #316
Math Is Hard
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
- 4,652
- 37
LowlyPion said:
Wheels also said that it should be left to the states to decide.
LowlyPion said:That's perfectly acceptable for Sunday School. But unfortunately for your point we are talking about publicly funded education.
With no responsible scientific basis for such creationist nonsense, Palin's even suggesting that it might be discussed within the context of science is irresponsible.
Math Is Hard said:Wheels also said that it should be left to the states to decide.
Both sides of what? The line separating sense from nonsense?WheelsRCool said:It can be healthy debate to listen to both sides
That only allows a different person to be responsible for admitting crackpottery into school., but again, that's why I'd leave it to the states personally.
turbo-1 said:Well, Palin's DOT has spent $25M of Federal tax money to build a 3.2 mile long gravel road to "nowhere". The "bridge to nowhere" project is still alive, despite Palin's claims to have stopped it, with 5 different bridges and 3 alternate ferry routes under consideration. We have some pretty severe weather extremes in Maine and we have to build to some pretty stringent standards, but if it cost us almost $8M/mile to build gravel roads, this state would be uninhabited. Palin LOVES pork.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080921/ap_on_re_us/road_to_nowhere;_ylt=Aktw407ppfCa_vu9S1sCTQGs0NUE
LowlyPion said:Surely you appreciate the flaw in this logic.
Telling someone they have no choice is imposing belief. Telling someone they have a choice leaves them with a personal decision and not a mandate that they may choose only one way.
How do you harmonize your beliefs about letting states determine minimum wages for themselves and not force one on them and enforcing anti-abortion on someone?
Ivan Seeking said:The Federal government only has a say about Federally funded schools. If the States want to support their own education system, then they would be free to choose the curriculum [provided that it met minimum standards].
wildman said:The baby has no choice. I am sure the baby would want to live. That certainly is imposing ones belief on someone.
Well, to be fair, coastal southern Alaska (Where Ketchikan is located.) has less severe winters than much of Maine, and there is no permafrost there, as shown in this map. The permafrost-free areas are white.wildman said:She may love pork, but to be fair Maine doesn't have permafrost. That makes road building much more expensive than in the lower 48.
No that's exactly what it is. Don't even pretend otherwise. It's specious and irresponsible to suggest that there is any progression to state sponsored genocide or genetic purification as a consequence of giving a woman a choice.
Palin is apparently just such a dangerous kind of person in this regard as evidenced by her requirement that rape victims in Wasilla would have to pay for any rape kit work-ups. The State of Alaska disagreed with Palin's choice and mandated all districts must pay. An example of religious activism masquerading as a fiscal conservative.
That's perfectly acceptable for Sunday School. But unfortunately for your point we are talking about publicly funded education.
With no responsible scientific basis for such creationist nonsense, Palin's even suggesting that it might be discussed within the context of science is irresponsible.
Science education isn't a matter of States Rights. Imposing faith based curriculum as science is crossing the line set forth in the Establishment clause which is a Right that inures to all people individually.
Recall that the Constitution is established generally to protect the many from the tyranny of the few as well as the few from the tyranny of the many.
Both sides of what? The line separating sense from nonsense?
Being that we place great value on the separation of church and State, it would be inappropriate for public schools to get into the business of teaching a faith based explanation for life. We have churches for that, but apparently this isn't good enough for some people.
Saying that the state allowing abortion might be a gateway to eugenics is indeed a huge slippery slope fallacy - the two are not related at all.
One decides what to do with embryos, or when humans are in their mothers' bodies, the other decides what to do with them when they are OUTSIDE Of it. By that logic someone who was against masturbation - and there are religious fundamentalists who are against it - could make the leap between allowing that and eugenics.
It's a huge slippery slope fallacy, as even more evidenced to someone who's actually read Mein Kampf - Hitler was PRO-LIFE, so by the same logic he's using, we could say pro-life leads to eugenics - because you believe the state gets to determine when a certain person is OR is NOT life, because, when the state is pro-life, it is also determining the value of life.
What baby? Cells that are a part of the mother? Does State intrusion take dominion over ovums and sperm as well? Is this to be Palin's position if she ever attains the power to impose life decisions on others?
The problem with the whole discussion about anti-abortion is that for the most part it is inexorably intertwined within the roles that men and women play in the reproductive cycle. Given the travails of gestating and nursing and raising a child, I'm not sure that men should have any say in the matter at all up until birth. It's not their bodies they are talking about.
Palin LOVES pork.
The actual documented facts are against you. She rallied for the bridge to nowhere and insisted that the project be stepped up while AK's congressional delegation was senior enough and powerful enough to demand the earmarks. It was ONLY after federal support for the diamond-encrusted platinum bridge started tightening up and AK's percentage of the project got unsupportable that she dropped her support. Now, you should note that she did NOT kill the project, as she claims over and over again. She stopped cheerleading for it, but left it alive, and it is STILL alive, with many bridges and alternate ferry lines still in active planning. I can supply links from AK DOT documents (and have in other posts) if you are dead-set on pushing Palin's lies in this thread.WheelsRCool said:If she loved pork, I don't think she would have vetoed so much. Remember, Sarah Palin was resisted on this "Bridge to Nowhere"; others in her state wanted it built.
That is not the purpose of high school/elementary. At that age children do not have enough knowledge to debate scientific topics. The purpose of high school science class is to give children a broad basis in the accepted scientific theories. Once they have earned a university degree (or two, or three) in biology, then they will be qualified to ``debate things with each other''.WheelsRCool said:but let children just debate things with each other. We should not tell children what and how to think, instead of letting them learn to think critically on their own, it seems.
Seems to me it was proven conclusively in a court in Dover, Pennsylvania...WheelsRCool said:How do we know what things are totally "faith-based" though?
If it's `totally faith based', as opposed to `evidence based', it doesn't belong in a publicly funded science classroom (as far as I'm concerned, it doesn't belong in any science classroom, but if parents are willing to pay to handicap their children, I won't try to stop them).WheelsRCool said:What about if something does seem to be totally faith-based, but its alternative explanation also has flaws...?
Care to provide some examples or references to back up this claim?WheelsRCool said:Evolution is still a theory, just the most widely-accepted theory; there are alternative explanations as well, albeit lesser-known, that are not creationist.
At a university level.WheelsRCool said:I say debate/discuss them all.
WheelsRCool said:You are allowing the state to determine the instrinsic value of human life, which isn't a good thing.
WheelsRCool said:According to the current mayor, there is no evidence that anyone was ever charged for a rape kit in Wasilla during Palin's administration or that Governor Palin ever supported this policy:
http://www.cityofwasilla.com/index.aspx?page=136
LowlyPion said:Not entirely true. The Constitution (Article VI, Clause 2) supersedes state and local authority in respect to such things as the Establishment clause.
In this regards the States or Counties are not free to introduce Faith Based Science into ANY public school. On the other side of things Private Schools are exempted and protected in such syllabi by the Free Exercise Clause.
WheelsRCool said:... how do we regard things like global warming alarmism, for example...do we also need to completely ban any and all talk of environmental catastrophe from global warming as many children are being taught in the schools today... (for example some schools showing children Al Gore's film).
I'm not saying environmentalism or global warming are not scientific, but much of the climate change fearmongering I would say is akin to the "End Times" fearmongering certain folks on the Right engage in.
Also, even though one may disagree with creationism, what about discussing the flaws of the theory of evolution, and the alternatives, and what is wrong with them all...? This I understand is different than actually "teaching" creationism itself though.
Now, you should note that she did NOT kill the project, as she claims over and over again. She stopped cheerleading for it, but left it alive, and it is STILL alive, with many bridges and alternate ferry lines still in active planning. I can supply links from AK DOT documents (and have in other posts) if you are dead-set on pushing Palin's lies in this thread.
Palin never gave back any of the money for the bridge that she claims to have said "no thanks" to, but kept it all, and kept the project alive and running. Politicians lie - some just lie bigger and better than others.
That is not the purpose of high school/elementary. At that age children do not have enough knowledge to debate scientific topics. The purpose of high school science class is to give children a broad basis in the accepted scientific theories. Once they have earned a university degree (or two, or three) in biology, then they will be qualified to ``debate things with each other''.
Care to provide some examples or references to back up this claim?
This is a totally false statement ipso facto, if it is a woman's choice.
To prohibit the choice is the imposition of the determination of intrinsic value. It is not your choice to impose on a woman.
It's a rather inconsistent notion compared to your desire for state's rights over Federal Authority.
Please provide an actual link to the specific assertion that none was ever charged. Linking generally to Wasilla documents is not considered good form.
LowlyPion said:You careen recklessly between things that are not related. There is nothing faith based about examining global climatological data and refining models that attempt to anticipate trends in evidence we have before us.
Unfortunately for your point, creationism and its attempted resurrection under the guise of "Intelligent design" don't offer any scientific insight into evolution and natural selection.
Discuss it all you want at a Bible College.
The big concern here is that Palin would stand to permit such unscientific discussion and impose upon those that don't share your faith based beliefs a discussion of non-science under the guise of science in public school settings - which as it turns out is a violation of the Establishment Clause.
WheelsRCool said:According to the current mayor, there is no evidence that anyone was ever charged for a rape kit in Wasilla during Palin's administration or that Governor Palin ever supported this policy:
http://www.cityofwasilla.com/index.aspx?page=136
Your citation is at best disingenuous.Frontiersman said:According to Fannon, the new law will cost the Wasilla Police Department approximately $5,000 to $14,000 a year to collect evidence for sexual assault cases.
No one is stifling free speech, nor are they interfering in the practice of anyone's Religion. The proscribed activity is mixing faith based pseudo-science within the context of Science. I see no advantage that accrues to a free society if Faith based fallible Ignorance is encouraged in schools as a matter of public policy.WheelsRCool said:It is this mindset that can lead to some of the most horrendous blunders in knowledge throughout history. No matter how ludicrous an alternative explanation may sound, you should always allow discussion of both views so people can think critically about them.
With her stretching of the Truth in so many other areas, I choose not to believe that in the slightest. The fact that she expresses satisfaction with it being discussed, exhibits Ignorance of the Constitution and an apparent readiness to cast it aside to suit her faith based beliefs.Governor Palin has shown that she will not push for creationist teachings in the educational system though.
The bridge to nowhere project is still alive and I have linked official statements to AK DOT officials. You have done nothing except flail around and proffer unsubstantiated GOP blather. Please start offering real substantive references to back up your claims.WheelsRCool said:How is the bridge still "alive?" Killing the "Bridge to Nowhere" I wouldn't think means ending all infrastructure projects. She also enacted the second largest cut to the construction budget in the state's history.
That's proof of nothing but compliance with Alaska Statutes Title18, Chapter68, Section 40. The statistics cited are for only the last 2 years she was Mayor, not the first 4.
Since you are interested in spading over Palin's record of instituting Right Wing Faith Agendas, are you suggesting that Wasilla Police Chief Charlie Fannon whom Palin installed in office on her becoming Mayor is lying, when he said: "In the past we’ve charged the cost of exams to the victims insurance company when possible. I just don't want to see any more burden put on the taxpayer" ?
No one is stifling free speech, nor are they interfering in the practice of anyone's Religion. The proscribed activity is mixing faith based pseudo-science within the context of Science. I see no advantage that accrues to a free society if Faith based fallible Ignorance is encouraged in schools as a matter of public policy.
With her stretching of the Truth in so many other areas, I choose not to believe that in the slightest. The fact that she expresses satisfaction with it being discussed, exhibits Ignorance of the Constitution and an apparent readiness to cast it aside to suit her faith based beliefs.
The bridge to nowhere project is still alive and I have linked official statements to AK DOT officials. You have done nothing except flail around and proffer unsubstantiated GOP blather. Please start offering real substantive references to back up your claims.
The Bridge project is still alive and well, and the original bridge is still one of the bridges under consideration in the $97M planning project. Just look at the AK DOT map that I linked - again, look at the date on that map - that map is only a few months old. The bridge is not dead. The DOT just finished the gravel road to the Ketchikan end of that bridge - at the cost of $8M per mile, or did you miss that?WheelsRCool said:According to your link, the Bridge to Nowhere project itself is dead. What is alive is the push to link Ketchikan to its airport via an alternative means, which was what Governor Palin said she supported upon ending the Bridge to Nowhere project:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20908207/
Also ironic is it seems the Alaska Democratic Party credited her for ending the bridge as well: http://www.retireted.com/category/real-estate/gravina-bridge/
This article talks about her vetoing a lot: http://online.wsj.com/public/article_print/SB122100927525717663.html
I agree though that the wording she used regarding the bridge could have been better. The way she worded it, the answer to the question "Did Governor Palin kill the Bridge to Nowhere project?" would have been a solid yes, whereas really it's more a, "Weelllll, yes, but..."
I think it is incorrect to say that she "loves pork" though.
WheelsRCool said:But it says that they did a PD review too and came up empty:
I do not think Palin was aware of this; it was 100% the call of the Chief. He needed to cut some budget items so he cut funding for rape kits roughly in half, but they were still paid out from what I can see.
You've provided no compelling reason to believe the Christian Creation Myth or its more recent makeover as Intelligent Design deserves any place outside the study of Religion. Your interest in pretending that it represents some alternate scientific theory is simply antithetical to scientific thought. If you want critical minds to consider what such Faith Based concepts might hold for Science, then by all means ply those wares in a Bible College, without confusing younger minds with such fake science, at a time they are grappling still with understanding Mendel's genetics experiments. No teaching Santa Claus in Science class.There was a previous thread here where it was mentioned that evolution is like gravity, we know it exists, it's just "how" it functions that is questioned. But sometimes there are pieces of knowledge that will "seem" to be pure common sense, even to the brightest minds, that later turn out to be wrong.
The Bridge project is still alive and well, and the original bridge is still one of the bridges under consideration in the $97M planning project. Just look at the AK DOT map that I linked - again, look at the date on that map - that map is only a few months old. The bridge is not dead. The DOT just finished the gravel road to the Ketchikan end of that bridge - at the cost of $8M per mile, or did you miss that?
Palin loves to say that she got rid of the governor's cook, which angered her kids.
She never tells the truth, which is that she decided to move back to her own house in Wasilla, so the cook in the governor's mansion was not needed. Also, the "cost-cutting" Palin charged Alaska per-diems while she lived in her own house, as well as travel expenses that arose from that personal decision to live in Wasilla.
That's a disingenuous argument given that they say their records only go back 6 years as mandated, and conveniently now apparently would not include the Palin years.
When it suits you then she is not quite the executive in charge that you would want to paint in your pretense that she has adequate executive experience.
As I said before there's no other way to take it but that it's pushing the Right Wing Faith Based Agenda under the guise of Fiscal Frugality. It's sad how budget cuts can be used in mean-spirited public policy isn't it. That hardly gives any comfort in thinking these other Faith Based beliefs won't as well be pushed as policy.
You've provided no compelling reason to believe the Christian Creation Myth or its more recent makeover as Intelligent Design deserves any place outside the study of Religion. Your interest in pretending that it represents some alternate scientific theory is simply antithetical to scientific thought.
If you want critical minds to consider what such Faith Based concepts might hold for Science, then by all means ply those wares in a Bible College, without confusing younger minds with such fake science, at a time they are grappling still with understanding Mendel's genetics experiments. No teaching Santa Claus in Science class.
I'm still waiting for some examples (with references) of ``alternative explanations [to evolution] as well, albeit lesser-known, that are not creationist.''
You make a lot of claims that you never back up.
WheelsRCool said:As it stands right now, there is no record that anyone paid for a rape kit from the time Fallon became Chief of Police to the time the legislature made it law that rape kits are paid for by the state.
WheelsRCool said:What "right-wing faith-based agenda" is she pushing?
WheelsRCool said:My point is just to always be critical.
WheelsRCool, you need to provide information when asked.NeoDevin said:WheelsRCool,
I'm still waiting for some examples (with references) of ``alternative explanations [to evolution] as well, albeit lesser-known, that are not creationist.''
You make a lot of claims that you never back up.
This continues to be your disingenuous assertion based on incomplete records and against the statement of Chief Fallon as reported. It makes me wonder what your motivation is to be making unsupported assertions against evidence to the contrary.
Anti-abortion
Creationist
Anti-gay union
anti-stemcell research
LowlyPion said:Apparently this applies to Federalism as it relates to protecting ALL the people from the Establishment of state sponsored religion.
WheelsRCool, you need to provide information when asked.